HOUSE APPROVES “ANTI-HATE” BILL

Cool. I'm not sure how I forced your hand, but I hope to learn something new.

 

"That little sentance you have so much confidence in will not stop the gov. of canada from persecuting christians for simply espousing christian beliefs publicly"

Maybe true. But neither will your Constitution...

 

Yes, I understand precedent. I think we should want persecution. It is a way to glorify God. When there is persecution, the Church is strong. Yes, Jesus asked for the cup to be taken away but He accepted that it wasn't. Whereas, us humans, ask for it to be taken away and want to use guns, etc. to make sure it's taken away.

 

----"But neither will your Constitution... "-----------------------------------------------------

Well, I already made that point. But that is only because our surpreme court took power not given them in the constitution and declaired themselves the final athority on the constitution. They interpret the laws any way they wish. They have become an oligarcy.

But about wanting persecution. It is very presumptious of you to insist that God send it. He will decide when and how. Have you read your church history? Read about Joshua Gainvil and the Waldensis or about Detrich Bonhoeffer. When you are a Father you will understand better. Persecution may not just effect you. It may cost your wife and Children torture and painful death. Again read a book called Rora and find out what happened to one Christian's family.

So you are saying something like, if the rapist breaks into your house and comes after your children, you will kill him. But if the rapist just happens to be a gov emplyee under the auspices of a tyranical gov. you will offer them as lambs?

 

Here are a few, There are more, Gold Dragon. How come you are not aware of these things? Are you sure that one little sentence will allow people to exercise their religious convictions?

Let's take a look at some of the people who have been targeted by homosexual activists.


Mr. Hugh Owen is an evangelical Christian employed as a prison guard. He placed an ad in the Saskatchewan Star Phoenix. The ad was a picture of two stick men holding hands, with a red circle with a bar across, superimposed on them. Below were four scripture references, but not the actual Bible verses. In 2001 he was convicted of a hate crime by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal and forced to pay his three accusers $1500 each. The judge in the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench suggested that using Bible verses in a newspaper ad like this, could be construed as hate literature. So there is now legal precedent in Canada that the Holy Bible is hate literature.

Dagmar and Arnost Cepica, a Christian couple in Prince Edward Island who operated a bed and breakfast in their own home, refused to rent their bedroom to two homosexual men. In 2001, they were charged and convicted of discrimination, and rather than fight the matter in court, they closed their business down.

Then there was the 1996 high profile case of professional printer Scott Brockie, who refused to print material for the Canadian Gay and Lesbian Archives, because he felt doing so would violate his religious beliefs. He was fined $5000 on February 24, 2000, and ordered to print the material anyway. Mr. Brockie took his case to the Ontario Supreme Court, then to the Ontario Court of Appeal and lost both times. The court has ordered Mr. Brockie to pay his opponents legal costs of $40,000. His total legal bills surpass $170,000. Like myself, he has set up a trust fund to help him with this burden, as he cannot afford it himself.

A few years ago, Evangelist Rev. Ken Campbell of Hamilton, placed ads in a Toronto newspaper objecting to the promotion of homosexuality by governments and public schools. He had two complaints laid against him in the Ontario and BC Human Rights Tribunals by homosexual activists. He went to the tribunals, without any legal representation, and basically preached the gospel, outlining in detail what the Bible says about homosexuality. He was acquitted by both tribunals, one of the few victories Christians have had in disputes with homosexual activists.

Stephen Boissoin of Calgary, is an evangelical pastor who wrote a letter to the editor questioning the promotion of homosexuality in the public school system. A University of Calgary professor has charged him with discrimination under the Alberta Human Rights act. Last May, at a fund-raising dinner for him held in a Calgary hotel, masked homosexual thugs burst into the dining room and disrupted the meeting, chanting "Right wing bigots go away, Gay Militia is here to stay". They carried a banner saying "Liberation: Queer Invasion". Their tactics remind me of the Nazi Brownshirts of the 1930's.

Several mayors of Canadian cities have been taken to Human Rights Tribunals for refusing to declare Gay Pride Days in their cities. The most prominent one was Diane Haskett, mayor of London, Ontario. She was found guilty of discrimination in 1997 and fined $10,000. Her sentence was issued during her re-election campaign, and she stopped campaigning. She won re-election by an overwhelming margin anyway. Also targeted were the mayors of Fredricton, New Brunswick, Hamilton, Ontario,(Brad Woodard and Bob Morrow), Kelowna, BC and Oliver, BC, as well as Ernie Reine, the Chief of Police of Regina, Saskatchewan. In the year 2000 every city in British Columbia was threatened with a Human Rights Tribunal lawsuit if they did not proclaim a Gay Pride Day by a group called the Rainbow Coalition. Many cities did, but some cities stopped making proclamations of any kind just to avoid the whole controversy. The Mayor of my town, who is a devout Catholic, refused to sign the proclamation after the city council passed the Gay Pride Day resolution over his objection.

Another concern by religious Canadians who belong to unions is their inability to prevent the unions from using their union dues to support homosexual or abortion causes. Although some labour laws allow union dues to be redirected to a charity for reasons of conscience, the process is difficult and expensive, and some people chose to quit their jobs rather than hire a lawyer to make sure they don't have to support causes they find morally offensive. My own union, the BC Teachers Federation, is an active supporter of the gay rights movement and has published their materials. One of the materials they published states that King David and Jonathan were gay lovers, and that all those who are morally opposed to homosexuality are homophobic and require re-education. Just last month the Ontario Elementary School Teachers Association publicly endorsed same sex marriage, even though many of their members are personally opposed to the concept.



Trinity Western University is a private Christian University in British Columbia which had permission to train elementary school teachers for the first four years of a five year program. As a Christian institution, they require all students to sign a pledge that they will not engage in immoral sexual conduct including homosexual behaviour, while on campus. In 1995, Trinity applied for permission to have their fifth year certified. The College of Teachers sent two committees to investigate, and both of them recommended approval of the program. But the College of Teachers overruled their own committees, and denied approval of the University's fifth year education program, arguing that the University's morality clause would produce discriminatory teachers. They presented no evidence of that position and lost all three court cases. Trinity had to spend $1.5 million on the case and only was able to recoup $168,000 from the College of Teachers. Trinity still has to prove to the College that they provide "anti-oppression pedagogy" courses to maintain certification of their education program.

From a speech given at the un by Dr. Chris Kempling

Well we can keep our convictions I quess as long as we are willing to lay them down when the tribunals come knocking or as long as we dare not speak them out loud.

 

"So you are saying something like, if the rapist breaks into your house and comes after your children, you will kill him. But if the rapist just happens to be a gov emplyee under the auspices of a tyranical gov. you will offer them as lambs?"

Nope. And I may not say much of anything anymore. I don't care.

 

Thanks for this information! I did not realize that it was this bad. The Canadians that I know on other boards are sweeping this under the rug. This is really oppressive.

I have been to London, Ontario, two or three times in years past for the Shakespeare Festival. It used to be nice in Canada before the Viet Nam war. I would not set foot in Canada nowadays.

 

"I have been to London, Ontario, two or three times in years past for the Shakespeare Festival. It used to be nice in Canada before the Viet Nam war. I would not set foot in Canada nowadays."
All this while ignoring what's wrong with your own nation. With that attitude...we wouldn't want you here. Does it make you feel good to say you won't step foot in Canada again because you think you're too high and mighty to do so? Hey, I step foot in your country...to go to baseball games, etc. I guess I'm just using you.

A "professional printer"? Not if he ain't doing the job he's paid to do.

"From a speech given at the un by Dr. Chris Kempling"...highly informative reference there. Kind of like when I said "From a book" as a reference back when I was in school.


"Well we can keep our convictions I quess as long as we are willing to lay them down when the tribunals come knocking or as long as we dare not speak them out loud."...mere opinion...and hyperbole.

 

Thanks Bunyon! Some good cutting and pasting there. Seriously this post was very informative to me.

Two immediate notes:
1) None of these cases were after the addition of sexual orientation to the hate propoganda clause in the code which was passed Sept 2003.

2) In all of these cases, my faith in our justice system was renewed because the government either did the right thing or was not involved.

I'll spend some time going through each one.

 

We've gone through this one before but the court is right. Using the bible in an ad like that can be construed as hate literature and the man was rightly fined.

 

While private companies have a right to refuse customers and do not have an obligation to provide service to anyone, the basis of that refusal can be discrimination which was the case in these two situations and is rightly illegal.

 

Wow, I can't believe that you said that that ad was hate literature. That definitely places you in the religious left... Canada is repressive. Not only are they stopping free expression of religion but they are also stopping free expression of speech. If that ad is hate literature, then saying that only Christians go to Heaven would also be hate literature and the entire Christian church could be closed and probably will be. Sorry to say, but this reminds me of how Germany once made Christmas illegal.

 

In both these cases, the Canadian justice system did the right thing in allowing non-hateful disagreement with homosexuality in our education system and overturning the unjust decision by the college of teachers.

 

Left-wing terrorism is just as atrocious as right-wing terrorism. I hope they were able to find and punish these folks who trespassed on a private function and threatened folks.

While I do not attend or support Gay Pride Days, the court was correct that it is discriminatory to refuse allowing such an event.

This is politics. The Canadian justice system is not involved here.

 

Look for the Canadian justice system to rule that Christmas is hateful and discrimatory.

 

Unions are always difficult, especially when you don't have a choice but to be in a union. My wife is in the Ontario Teachers Union and I'm sure our union dues are going to things we don't wish to support. Whether you are on any side of any issue, that will always be the case. That is how unions work. The only way to impact that would be to work within the union to impact change and building up mass support within unions. A whole mess of politics in itself.

Nothing about the Candian justice system here either.

 

"A "professional printer"? Not if he ain't doing the job he's paid to do.

"From a speech given at the un by Dr. Chris Kempling"...highly informative reference there. Kind of like when I said "From a book" as a reference back when I was in school."

Well, King James, I did not think you would impune my integrity. I'll give you the web site if you need it. It was from a catholic site. But you should be able to independantly verify these things with ease, that is if you want to take you blinders off.

So you do not allow for a person who simply refused to perform a certain action because he honestly thought he would be promoting an offense to his God. If the Satanic Church asked him to print papers saying Satan was the savior, would you expect him to do that also? This is were your reasoning leads.

Gold Dragon, I understand your points about some of that not being from the gov.. I just pasted the whole section though. But keep in mind. You are not allowing private religous organizations to stick with their morality. In this you and the govenment are wrong. You and they are saying we respect your right to keep your sacred belief just so long as it does not interfere with our view and practice of morality.

Also, Why should a Christian Bed and Breakfast Tolerate Sodomy in their own home. You ask to much. And even in the one case where the Tribunal ruled in favor of the Christian, he still had to invest substanitial time and money. That is still penalizing him for his belief.

You are wrong about the mayors refusal to declair gay pride day to be discrimination. It did not say they refused to allow a march or an activity, but simply refused to use their office to announce pride in the gay lifestyle. And it was not politics unless you are saying the Tribunal attacked them for pure political reasons. If a mayor refused to declare Pedophile pride day should they be fined?

But I agree, the jury is still out on how all this will finally solidify in Canada. I hope you are right. I hope things improve. But I don't see it happening anytime soon.

And you missed the point on the unions. Why aren't the folks who said, "that all of those who are opposed to the homosexuality are homophopic and require re-education" being brought on hate crimes. To say some one needed to be phychologically manipulated to make them see homosexuality as ok is threatening and hateful.

Its surprising, but you are actually saying that any Christian who expresses his moral opposition to homosexuality publicly is hateful.

 

---" Trinity had to spend $1.5 million on the case and only was able to recoup $168,000 from the College of Teachers. "------------------------

You call this the right thing, Gold Dragon. I can't afford to be charged, even if the tribunal agrees with me."

----"While I do not attend or support Gay Pride Days, the court was correct that it is discriminatory to refuse allowing such an event."--------------------------------------------

Just wanted to reiterate, you missed on this one. They mayor did not stop or prevent a gay event, she just refused to declair a day of pride for homosexuality. This was a miscarrage of justice! Do you go so far as to tell someone that they must express pride in homosexuality?

 

Please do not put words into my mouth. I made my expression of moral opposition to homosexuality clear when I publically marched in the streets of Toronto to express my desire that God ordained marriage to be between a man an a woman.

There are hateful ways to do it, and unhateful ways to do it. Those who agree with my position but do so in an illegal manner should rightly be punished.

 

I don't think I put words in your mouth. At least I did not mean to. How was the newspaper add any different than marching in the street? The man just used a common form of mass communication to express his view, and you would deniy him that. The operative word in my sentence was "publicly".

Based on the law you cited about companies not refusing people services. It says customers cannot be refused based on their religion. So technicaly the christian printers could not refuse to print Satanic Bibles, could they? These are dangerous laws!