Hey Canada? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!
Mark Hemingway on Canadian Human Rights Tribunal & Mark Steyn on National Review Online
...the general interpretation by the human-rights commissions is that they now have free rein to regulate the media. The slippery slope has been a toboggan ride to hell ever since.Maybe there is hope:
What this means is that everyone in Canada now has fundamental freedoms, provided they’re not in conflict with whatever specious definition of “human rights” the CHRC chooses to apply. The threshold for conviction set by the Human Rights Act is incredibly low, because its highly subjective language means that “likely to cause contempt” is as good as a preponderance of evidence establishing guilt.
As a result, the Canadian Human Rights Commission is stunningly effective: In its 31 years of existence, not a single complaint brought before it has been dismissed. That's right: Everyone is guilty before God and the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
In 1999, a Christian printer was fined $5,000 for refusing to print a series of pro-pedophilia essays. He spent $40,000 in legal fees trying to defend himself.
In 2005, the Knights of Columbus of Port Coquitlam, B.C., were fined for refusing to rent their hall for a lesbian wedding.
There’s simply no point in naming all of the clergy that have been brought up on charges for preaching against homosexuality. Suffice to say it’s more than a few.
In 2002, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ordered the Saskatoon StarPhoenix and Hugh Owens each to pay $1,500 to three complainants for running an ad that quoted Bible verses condemning homosexuality. The decision was overturned by an appeal court . . . four years later.
In January of this year, Ezra Levant, publisher of Canadian conservative magazine The Western Standard, was brought up on charges for publishing the infamous Danish Muhammad cartoons as a matter of informing his readers what all the fuss was about.
This kind of nonsense on stilts is now the accepted norm in human-rights tribunals. With Steyn and Maclean’s involved, supposedly enlightened liberal Canadians — who needs free speech when we have socialized medicine?! — may not be able to dismiss the victims of the injustice this time around as merely neo-Nazis or those backward Christians. Steyn’s fame precedes him, and Maclean’s is a beloved national institution in Canada, with ample resources.
In fact, according to Andrew Coyne of Maclean’s they’re hoping to lose the case in Vancouver this week so they can bring it to a real court of law, and possibly set a precedent that could be the beginning of the end of Canadian “human rights” tribunals. Here’s hoping.