Welcome Ezra Levant Readers! We support your man’s standing up to the Canadian thought police! But, don’t know that I’d call myself a “gay activist.” 🙂
In the update to my post on the politically correct investigation of an Irish politician’s wife for her intemperate remarks on homosexuality, I linked Mark Hemingway’s Corner piece on the result of a similar investigation in the Canadian province of Alberta.
An Alberta Human Rights (sic) Panel issued a ruling last month punishing the Reverend Stephen Boissoin for “causing to be published” in the Red Deer Advocate (a community newspaper in that Alberta town) in 2002 a letter which “was likely to expose homosexuals to hatred or contempt because of their sexual orientation.”
As a result of the allegedly hurtful contents of his letter, the Panel ordered Boissoin and his group, the Concerned Christian Coalition to:
. . . cease publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals. Further, they shall not and are prohibited from making disparaging remarks in the future about Dr. Lund [the anti-Christian activist who filed the complaint] or Dr. Lund’s witnesses relating to their involvement in this complaint. Further, all disparaging remarks versus homosexuals are directed to be removed from current web sites and publications of Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc.
Boissoin also had to publish an apology and pay a fine. He remains defiant, vowing not pay “unless failing to do so prevents my ability to appeal.”
Calling this, “the most revolting order I have ever seen in Canada,” Ezra Levant offers a more thorough dissection of this latest action of the Canadian kangaroo courts, officially known as Human Rights panels.
In this particular panel’s substantive ruling, Lori G. Andreachuk, the arbiter deciding the case, finds that “the publication’s exposure of homosexuals to hatred and contempt trumps the freedom of speech afforded in the Charter.” That charter is the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms. Seems a pretty flimsy charter if one bureaucrat can dismiss its protections with the flick of her wrist.
At least one Canadian gay activist joins yours truly in believing that Ms. Andreachuk got it backwards. Gilles Marchildon, executive director of Egale, an “organization that advances equality and justice for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans-identified people and their families across Canada,” writes:
While it is difficult to support Boissoin’s right to spew his misguided and vitriolic thoughts, support his right, we must.
If Boissoin was no longer able to share his views, then who might be next in also having their freedom of expression limited. Traditionally, the LGBT community’s freedom has been repressed by society and its laws.
Plus, it is far better that Boissoin expose his views than have them pushed underground. Under the glaring light of public scrutiny, his ideas will most likely wither and die.
I couldn’t have said it better myself. Nice to see a leader of a gay rights’ organization standing up for free speech even if that speech is as hateful and ignorant as that of Boission.
Let us hope that more gay leaders join Marchildon in criticizing those busybodies who seek to protect us from being offended. If governments prevent anti-gay ministers like Mr. Boissoin from publicly expressing their ideas, it will become increasingly difficult for gay advocates to develop arguments to challenge them.
We don’t win the battle of ideas by silencing our opponents, but by engaging them. And we can only engage them if we know what they are saying.
Could somebody ‘splain this to me? We’re supposed to believe that only Republicans/Conservatives take away people’s rights and freedoms.
Nevermind, of course, smoking bans, trans-fat bans, soda bans, foie gras bans etc. etc. etc. and now this.
I’m confrused.
We’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Liberal Fascism.
Show me someone who supports mandatory speech codes and/or political correctness, and I will show you an actual fascist – a worshipper of State power, whose true aim (whether admitted or not) is to destroy human freedom.
Thought Crime! Double Plus Good! Carry on comrades.
I have Ezra Levant’s masterpiece website in my bookmarks and I try to check in on him several times a day.
If you are not up to speed on the multiple Human Rights Commissions throughout Canada, you need to tune into their shenanigans. They are the love child of the rape of sanity that is known as political correctness.
We too often refer to 1984 and “Doublespeak” in a mildly concerned manner. Canada has put the most mindless and dictatorial censorship blocks in place and groups like CAIR are free to run amok.
When you trade common sense (guided by a healthy serving of skepticism) for a panel of moderators working from “feel good” loose guidelines, you get liberal chaos, which is called the “human Rights Commission.”
I would dearly love to hear anything in support of this type of free speech abortion.
“Prohibited from making disparaging remarks” ?
Hell, that’s my stock in trade – It’s usually my default mode, right along side angry, argumentative, misanthropic and bitchy.
Looks like Vera won’t be visiting Canada any time soon.
“The price good persons pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil.” —Plato
“Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too.” —Voltaire
“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” —Thomas Jefferson
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” —Voltaire
Apologies, but others have articulated these points with much more concision than I could ever hope to achieve.
Hats off to Ezra Levant for denormalizing the Canadian “human rights” commissions. The right person in the right place at the right time. Thanks for taking up the charge, Ezra. Intellectual honesty is rare, exceptional, priceless.
Canada is not a free country. Just ask Mark Steyn and Bugs Bunny.
This is absolutely repugnant to freedom of speech. You do NOT have a ‘right’ be offended and thereby punish someone else under the law because of their speech. Such a move in this country would be a flagrant violation of the First Amendment and a betrayal of the principles we fought for in the Revolution.
I’m an old-school liberal along the lines of Dr. Seuss (I don’t believe in treating people differently because of the stars on their bellies), and I think the Canadian government is in the wrong on this one.
It doesn’t feel good to stand up for the rights of someone who writes/says repugnant things, but standing up for the rights of those with whom one disagrees is, in practice, standing up for everyone’s rights.
A few key issues this raises:
1. Government-imposed speech codes are ridiculous, especially when they apply to people going about their everyday lives.
2. In addition to opposing “hate speech” codes, it’s useful to keep an eye on where libel/slander laws are headed. In particular, the concept that you cannot libel a class or vague group of individuals (that is, a group whose individuals are not specifically identified) is an important concept in American law, and not every country recognizes this reasonable limitation.
3. The best way to handle disagreeable or offensive speech is with more speech, not less. Point out what’s wrong with people who are wrong, instead of silencing them.