U of Calgary "totalitarian regime"?

CALGARY, Alberta, November 19, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The U of C is again attempting to censor student members of the campus pro-life club by threatening them with arrest and sanctions for non-academic misconduct (including the possibility of suspension and expulsion) if they do not comply with an order to turn Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) displays inward. GAP is a graphic exhibit which includes photographs of unborn babies who have been aborted.

U of C lawyer Paul Beke addressed a letter to pro-life club members which said, "The university has the right to control what people do on its private property," and stated that the university wants the display set up so "passersby could avoid the displays if they were to wish."

.... Stephanie Gray of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, commenting on the university's attempt to censor the pro-life club said, "There is an important principle of free expression on campus at stake here. Universities should not be allowed to censor controversial, unpopular or minority viewpoints. If the University of Calgary can censor GAP (on the basis of anonymous complaints from people claiming to be offended), this will have direct implications and consequences for all persons on university campuses throughout Canada (not to mention the state of free expression off-campus)."

"Can you imagine them making this demand (turning the displays inwards) of animal rights activists or those who protest the genocide in Darfur?" Gray asked.

Read entire...

Related:

Calgary Herald - "No good reason to squelch this debate"

World Net Daily "College threatens pro-life students with arrest"

Calgary Campus Pro-Life Club from where you can download pdfs of the threatening letter sent to the club and the club's response.

Center for Bio-Ethical Reform which sponsors the GAP Project.

View the 24 signs which make up a GAP display.

Quotes from people who have viewed the display.


Is there anything the layperson can do about this? Since education is a provincial responsibility, you might want to contact your MLA (if you live in Alberta):


- Search for your Alberta MLA by postal code

- Write the appropriate government minister

If you'd like to write your member of parliament (federal) find out who your MP is and the contact information here.

hrc's* - canadian freedom's no.1 enemy

*hrc's: Human Rights Commissions

ONTARIO

From an August 18/08 National Post article.

"If the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) gets its way, Ontario's doctors will soon be stripped of their right to follow their moral convictions or religious beliefs when treating patients. In other words, doctors will risk losing their licenses if they run afoul of Ontario's human rights police.

If, out of moral conviction, they refuse to perform abortions, refer patients for abortions or prescribe morning-after and birth control pills, or if they refuse to help same-sex couples conceive children, their own governing body will take away their right to practice medicine.

- read entire Forcing our doctors' hands.

From an August 23/08 National Post article:

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario recently released a draft document on a potential new code of conduct for physicians.

Among other things, it states physicians will have to set aside personal beliefs "to ensure that patients or potential patients are provided with the medical services they require." It also said doctors who restrict medical service based on moral or religious beliefs may contravene the Human Rights Code and could be committing professional misconduct....

Don Hutchinson, legal counsel for the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, said he believes the proposed document was heavily influenced by a letter sent in February this year to the college from the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

In it, the commission said it has concerns that the "religious or moral beliefs of health-care providers can have a discriminatory impacts on [Human Rights] Code rights relating to sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status and disability, among others."

It goes on to advise the college that the protection of one right cannot "be based on the total disregard of another."

"While the expression of their religious beliefs is essential for religious officials in the performance of their duties, secular service providers cannot claim that the performance of their job function is an expression of their deeply held religious beliefs."

- read entire OMA fears intrusion into MD's beliefs.

From a September 2/08 National Post article:

Will Ontario doctors be forced to ignore personal beliefs just to please a pompous human rights commission?

The sheer arrogance of human rights commissions will be their downfall (let's hope - and may they fall soon!!): their conviction that they have a superior understanding of rights compared to anyone else and that once they have pronounced how rights shall be interpreted, the rest of us should fall in lockstep with smiles on our faces and cheery tunes on our tongues, content that our intellectual betters have shown us the error of our ways and revealed the path to true enlightenment.

- read entire A handmaid's tale.

SASKATCHEWAN

From a September 2/08 National Post article:

Should a man be forced to pay $17,500 to four individuals who felt offended by the flyers he distributed?

[...] Like the human rights complaints against Maclean's magazine for having published excerpts from Mark Steyn's book America Alone, this case pits Canadians' historic right to freedom of expression against human rights legislation that attempts to prevent hurt feelings.

- read entire There's no monopoly on truth.

Welcome to Canada where political correctness is the greatest virtue - no, it's the only virtue.

silencing christians

Janet Parshall (U.S. Christian broadcaster) is doing an interesting new TV series called "Speechless: Silencing the Christians." The premiere episode launched Saturday night on the INSP channel and was webcast simultaneously on AFA.net.

Episode 1 description:
Renowned author and commentator Janet Parshall takes you on a journey across the country to meet citizens who have been arrested for speaking out at a public rally, students who are being forced to attend classes that require them to recite verses from the Koran and to stage their own jihad and activists pushing social tolerance to such an extreme that the Bible itself is being labeled “hate speech.”

A series trailer and Episode 1 are available to watch on the Silencing Christians website as well as on AFA.net. (It looks like a sign-up is necessary; I hope it's not one of those shows that's blocked to Canada!)

Janet Epp Buckingham doesn't get it

In a recent column "Abolish human rights commission? Not so fast" Janet Epp Buckingham - a lawyer who frequently represents Christians in court - says:

Some people are using the mere fact that the commissions are considering the complaints to argue that they should be abolished. That is like saying that the courts should be shut down just because someone has sued me! Sure, it is a pain and can be costly if you hire a lawyer to defend you. But that is what happens in a country where you have laws and courts. You may have to defend yourself against someone whose claim has little merit. Everyone deserves their day in court.

She doesn't get it. Human Rights Commissions are not there to enforce the law. There are defamation, libel, slander laws and hate crime laws controlling criminal speech in Canada. Such cases are dealt with in courts of law. The complaints people bring to HRCs are about activities and speech which are entirely legal but which hurt feelings and are perceived as insults. The function of HRCs becomes one of controlling thought (and its expression) and making political incorrectness a punishable offense.

And punished you will be, whether you're found guilty or not. Because, on top of the fines levied by the HRC if found guilty, the defendant must pay all lawyer bills while the complainant gets his/hers paid by the government no matter how the case ends up.

And that's another dodgy thing -- predicting how the case will end up. These commissions are arbitrary. If you're dragged in front of one, even your lawyer can't guarantee which way your case will go. It's up to the commission, made up of bureaucrats and lay people and who knows who else to decide if the complaint is worthy. And on the basis of what? The depth your opponent's outrage? Your seeming lack of contrition? The color of your socks? It sure isn't on the basis of the law.

On the other hand the Canadian Association of Journalists does get it:

CAJ urges changes to human rights laws

OTTAWA, Feb. 22 /CNW/ - The Canadian Association of Journalists is calling on federal and provincial governments to amend human rights legislation to stop a pattern of disturbing attacks on freedom of speech.

Two recent cases spotlight the dangers of allowing state-backed agencies to censor speech based on subjective perceptions of offensiveness - MacLean's magazine, which is facing complaints in two provinces and nationally for an article by syndicated columnist Mark Steyn, and Ezra Levant, the former publisher of the Western Standard who is now before the Alberta Human Rights Commission for his decision to publish the Danish cartoons of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

"Human rights commissions were never intended to act as a form of thought police," said CAJ President Mary Agnes Welch. "But now they're being used to chill freedom of expression on matters that are well beyond accepted Criminal Code restrictions on free speech."

Read entire

Denyse O'Leary, author of By Design or by Chance? and The Spiritual Brain,gets it too.

So does Ray Wiseman.

ezra levant before kangaroo court

Human rights commissions are quasi-judicial government bodies that have taken it upon themselves to regulate Canadian freedom of speech and religion in ever more intrusive ways. Yesterday Ezra Levant appeared before such a commission in Calgary, Alberta. This was because of a complaint by an imam for Levant's decision to publish the Danish cartoons in the now-defunct-in-print Western Standard.

Before the interrogation began, he delivered an opening statement which lays bare many of the problems with these kangaroo courts and illustrates why every Canadian should be concerned. He may be bloody, but he is not bowed:

"When the Western Standard magazine printed the Danish cartoons of Mohammed two years ago, I was the publisher. It was the proudest moment of my public life. I would do it again today. In fact, I did do it again today. Though the Western Standard, sadly, no longer publishes a print edition, I posted the cartoons this morning on my website, ezralevant.com.

I am here at this government interrogation under protest. It is my position that the government has no legal or moral authority to interrogate me or anyone else for publishing these words and pictures. That is a violation of my ancient and inalienable freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and in this case, religious freedom and the separation of mosque and state.

It is especially perverted that a bureaucracy calling itself the Alberta human rights commission would be the government agency violating my human rights. So I will now call those bureaucrats “the commission” or “the hrc”, since to call the commission a “human rights commission” is to destroy the meaning of those words..."

Read his complete statement here.

Related:
-Bishop Henry calls for overhaul to human rights commissions
- Liberalism its own worst enemy