
Issues Area Home
|
|






Albrecht, Katherine : RFID Spychips Annett, Kevin: Child Trafficking in Beautiful BC Asher, Jeffrey Baskerville, Stephen: "Taken .. Custody Baxter, Dorian: Canada Courtwatch BC Conservatives Beck, Glenn Beck: World Government Bennett, Richard: Purpose Driven & Catholicism Blick, Edward: Global Warming & Marxism Blumner,Court Ordered Sexism Boys of St. Vincent <Mount Cashel>, NL Burrows, Lynette: Homo Adoption Carley, Dr. Rebecca: Vaccinations Carr, William Guy: Pawns in the Game Christie, Doug: Freedom of Speech, Assembly Chopra, Dr. Shiv: Health Canada Coulter, Ann: Free Speech Cools, Senator Anne: Lying Lawyers Coffman, Dr. Michael: Global Warming Coleman, John: Global Warming Fraud Conspiracy of Silence, Boystown Pedophiles Cromwell, Oliver: Supremacy / Parliament Cuddy, Dennis L. Cumbey, Constance : New Age Nazism Dodd, Norman: NWO Fabian Socialists Dutton, Don: RADAR, "Rethinking DV" EP-Australia Federer, Bill: Endang'd Speeches, Quran Farrell, Warren: Why Men Earn More Fischer, Greg: Family Preservation Festival Fogal, Connie: No NAU Forseth, MP Paul: FTSOTC Panelist Fromm, Paul: Free Speech, CAFE FTSOTC 48 Recom's Gage, Richard: Architects & Engineers 9/11 Gairdner William Galloway, Roger: FTSOTC Panelist Geldof, Sir Bob: The Love.. Gerrish, Brian: EU's "Common Purpose" Griffin, G. Edward: Fed Reserve Grignon, Paul: "Money As Debt" Gunderson, Ted: FBI Haeck, Lisa: Sexual Abuse Haines, Bruce, QC: Justice Review Hiebert, MP Russ: Human Rights Commission Hill, MP Jay: EP Legislation Hinton , Betty: Status of Women's "Hit List" Howse, Torm "In a Small Town" Pedophile Boy Scouts Iserbyt, Charlotte: Dumbing Down Jones, Alex Kay, Barbara, National Post Kennedy, John F: targeted, Assassination 1963 Kernberg, Dr. Otto: Personality Disorder Keyes, Alan : Kruk, Edward: Child Custody Leslie, Sarah: "Pied Pipers of Purpose" LInde, Carey: Statutory Ammendments Lively, Scott: "Pink Swastika" Luther, Martin: "Sola Scriptura" Martin, Malachi: Globalization, Occult McManus, John: Stopping NAU McKay, Dr. Marty McLean, Candis MacKenzie, Rob: "Paul Revere Ride", EP Trek 2006 McQuaid, Robert: Fix Children's Aide Society, CAS Millar, David Mills, Dennis: Former MP Targetted by Homsexuals Monckton, Lord Christopher Monarchy, David Starkey Monteith, Dr. Stanley: Tax Exempt Foundations Murtari, John: Hunger Striker for Time with Son Nash, Dave: Cross Canada Run Nazanin: Persian Beauty for a Free Iran Neufeld, Gordon: Hold - Kids Nicolosi, Joseph: Treatment of Homosexuality O'Connor, Matt: Original F4J-UK PAFE = Planetary Alliance for Fathers in Exile Palin, Sarah Paul, Dr. Ron: Sound Money Peck, Dr. Scott: "People of the Lie" Pedersen, Rob: EP Bike Trek US, 2007 Pellman, Adrian, LLB: Judicial Activism Perloff, James: Shadows of Power Phenomenon: The Lost Archives Pizzey, Erin: Women's Shelter Scam Plywood Man, NWT Quigley, Carroll: Banking, Globalization Rhodes, Carol: Friend.Court = Enemy. Family Riplinger, Gail: Luciferian Bibles Roberts, Carey Roberts, Elise Roscoe, Peter: Judicial Bigotry Russo, Aaron: NAU, CFR, Rockefellers Ruppert, Michael C Saburido, Jacqueline: Don't Drink Sacks. Glenn Secret Files of the Inquisition Schlafly, Phyllis: Global Governance Simons, Frank: Courts From Hell Schafer, Nancy: Child Trafficking at CPS Simpson, Kari: Road Kill Radio Smith, Ron: DC Rally, Drugging of Children Soever, Alar Sodhi, Eeva Somerville, Margaret:“Same-Sex Marriage” Still, Bill: "Money Masters", "The Mystery of Oz" Stopps, Gordon Vs Just Ladies, BCHRT Stormer, John: Betrayed .. Bench Story, Christopher: "Perestroika Dec. Sutton, Anhony: Wall Street & Hitler Taylor, Captain Tony: F4J-US "Fatherless Day" Trociuk Darrell, BC Birth Registration Tyndale, William, "God's Outlaw", RIP 1536 V for Vendetta / Guy Fawkes the Hero Vellacott, MP Maurice Ventura, Jesse: Conspiracy Theory Vieira, Dr. Edwin: Fiat Empire Wagener, William Warren, Elizabeth: Collapse Middle Class Watson, Paul: EU's Nazi Origins William III & Mary II: "Bill of Rights" 1689 Wooldridge, Nancy: Canadian Grans Zepezauer, Frank: Feminist Crusades |
|
Let Ex Husbands Be Fathers Perception vs Reality Some Facts... Both Parents Vital Broken Homes, Bleak Future Justice Review Fatherneed Rights of fathers Ignored? |
|
Support one of over 50 class-actions against
unconstitutional 'sole custody' by Indiana Civl Rights
Council
thetruthandjusticefoundation.org
BC Statutory Amendments |
McKenzie & Pedersen, the "Two Robs",
Equal Parenting Bike Trek US 2006, 2007...

Robb MacKenzie Equal Parenting Bike Trek - Google Search;
Robb MacKenzie Equal Parenting Bike Trek - Google Video

Rob Pederson, Equal Parenting - Google Search;
Robert Pederson, Equal Parenting - Google Video

Cycling4Children.com
Equal Parenting Bike Trek's photostream
More:
Issues:
McKenzie & Pedersen, the "Two Robs", Equal Parenting Bike
Trek US 2006, 2007...;
Issues: Smith,
Ron: DC Family Preservation Rally, Compulsory Drugging
of Children;
Issues:
Compulsory Drugging of Children, Thymerisol; |
Beware of the "Parental Rights" IMPOSTER!!!!

"Natural Parent's Rights" Vs "Parent's Rights"
Be on the lookout for the "Parent's
Rights" IMPOSTER. Insist on "Natural Parents Only",
please!
It comes as a big surprise to us that
many groups that present themselves as
"Parents Rights" groups REFUSE to defend the
NATURAL PARENT, and
and to demand RESTORATION
of
Natural Parents Rights taken from Canadians in the
Homosexual Marriage
legislation.

Instead their position to promote the
"rights" of a "Parent" in the widest sense of the
word, making NO distinction between
NATURAL PARENTS and
wannaabe
Legal Parents. They have bowed to
University of
Victoria's assertion that the SCC's
Trociuk
Decision
"endorses a Heterosexual View of the Family and must be
ignored", legitimizing the ongoing
Child
Trafficking by the State which views
Canadian
children as State Property and merchandise for sale in
the lucrative Child
Adoption Market They refuse to be hampered by prior
obligations to that pesky Natural Parent who thinks they can
Veto an Adoption.


It appears that many
"Fathers Rights" groups commonly fall in with the United
Nations and Liberal
Irwin Cotler's assertion that the
Child's Right is to be protected, but the Natural Parent
has "NO RIGHTS",
making the State, not the Natural
Parents the Protector of the Child..
Without Cause or
Consent, no Child shall be removed from a Natural Parent!!!
More:
About:
Beware of the IMPOSTER!!!! "Natural Parent's Rights"
Vs "Parent's Rights";
News: Lessard, Hester - Heterosexual view of
Parenthood must be ignored
News: Smith,
Judge Daphne, BCSC, for Child Trafficking;
Issues: Trociuk,
Darrell;
Issues:
Child Trafficking, Canadian;
Testimonials: Rick Fredrickson of Saskatoon |
Bill Graham, Pedophile Parliamentarian & Defense
Minister


Bill Graham, mp - Google Search;
Bill Graham, mp - Google Video
Lawrence Metherel - Google Search
2007-06-19 Liberal MP Bill Graham announces
resignation
"In spite of credible revelations
dating back to April 2002 about Bill Graham, a sex addicted
bi-sexual sodomizing a 15 year old male prostitute named
Lawrence Metherel,
Paul Martin allowed Graham to remain
Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister - and eventually named
him to the portfolio of Minister of Defense.
"On Sept. 28/2005 a vote was held in Parliament to raise the
age of consent from 14 (one of the lowest age of consents in
the world) to 16 (an age which many still consider too low).
"Bill Graham, Paul Martin, and Anne
McLellan, on Sept. 28th, voted against raising the age of
consent to 16


More:
News: Graham,
Bill: Pedophile Parliamentarian, Defense Minister |


















 |
|
We apologize that the
following figures have not been developed for the Province of BC
specifically. We hope to do this over time. We do know,
however that women often move to BC from Alberta and the rest of Canada
to have their divorces done here in BC where the
misandry of the Family Courts will
maximize their powers to destroy their husbands.
Children from fatherless homes account
for:
-
63% of youth suicides. (Source: US Dept.
of Health & Human Services, Bureau of the Census).
-
71% of pregnant teenagers. (Source: US
Dept. of Health & Human Services)
-
90% of all homeless and runaway
children.
-
70% of juveniles in state-operated
institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of
Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
-
85% of all children that exhibit
behavioral disorders. (Source: Center for Disease Control).
-
80% of rapists motivated with displaced
anger. (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol. 14, p. 403-26,
1978).
-
71% of all high school dropouts.
(Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High
Schools).
-
75% of all adolescent patients in
chemical abuse centers. (Source: Rainbows for all God's Children).
-
85% of all youths sitting in prisons.
(Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of
Corrections 1992).
Children from fatherless
homes are:
-
11 times more likely to exhibit violent
behavior than children from intact "married" homes.
-
5 times more likely to commit suicide.
-
32 times more likely to runaway.
-
20 times more likely to have behavioral
disorders.
-
14 times more likely to commit rape.
-
9 times more likely to drop out of high
school.
-
10 times more likely to abuse chemical
substances.
-
9 times more likely to end up in
state-operated institutions.
-
20 times more likely to end up in
prison.
"37.9% of
fathers have no access/visitation rights."
(Source: p.6, col.II, para. 6, lines 4 & 5, Census Bureau
P-60, #173, Sept 1991.)
"40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the
non-custodial father's visitation on at least one occasion, to punish
the ex-spouse." (Source: p. 449, col. II, lines 3-6, (citing
Fulton) Frequency of visitation by Divorced Fathers; Differences in
Reports by Fathers and Mothers. Sanford Braver et al, Am. J. of
Orthopsychiatry, 1991.)
"Overall,
approximately 50% of mothers "see no value in the father's continued
contact with his children...."
(Source: Surviving the Breakup, Joan Kelly & Judith
Wallerstein, p. 125) Only 11% of mothers value their husband's input
when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors
rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated %16.(Source: EDK
Associates survey of 500 women for Redbook Magazine. Redbook, November
1994, p. 36)
"The former
spouse (mother) was the greatest obstacle to having more frequent
contact with the children." (Source:
Increasing our understanding of fathers who have infrequent contact with
their children, James Dudley, Family Relations, Vol. 4, p. 281, July
1991.)
"A clear
majority (70%) of fathers felt that they had too little time with their
children." (Source: Visitation and the
Noncustodial Father, Mary Ann Kock & Carol Lowery, Journal of Divorce,
Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 54, Winter 1984.)
"Very few of
the children were satisfied with the amount of contact with their
fathers, after divorce." (Source:
Visitation and the Noncustodial Father, Koch & Lowery, Journal of
Divorce and Remarriage, Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 50, Winter 1984.)
"Feelings of anger towards their former spouses hindered effective
involvement on the part of fathers; angry mothers would sometimes
sabotage father's efforts to visit their children." (Source:
Ahrons and Miller, Am. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 63. p. 442, July
1993.)
"Mothers may
prevent visits to retaliate against fathers for problems in their
marital or post-marital relationship."
(Source: Seltzer, Shaeffer & Charing, Journal of Marriage & the Family,
Vol. 51, p. 1015, November 1989.)
In a study: "Visitational
Interference - A National Study" by Ms. J Annette Vanini, M.S.W. and
Edward Nichols, M.S.W., it was found that 77% of non-custodial fathers
are NOT able to "visit" their children, as ordered by the court, as a
result of "visitation interference" perpetuated by the custodial parent.
In other words, non-compliance with court ordered visitation is three
times the problem of non-compliance with court ordered child support and
impacts the children of divorce even more. Originally published Sept.
1992
Child Support
Information from multiple
sources show that only 10% of all non-custodial fathers fit the
"deadbeat dad" category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the
support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of
those with NO visitation rights still financially support their
children. (Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173).
Additionally, of those not paying support, 66% are not doing so because
they lack the financial resources to pay (Source: GAO report:
GAO/HRD-92-39 FS).
The following is sourced from: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security
Policy, Authors: Meyer and Garansky.
-
Custodial mothers who receive a support
award: 79.6%
-
Custodial fathers who receive a support
award: 29.9%
-
Non-custodial mothers who totally
default on support: 46.9%
-
Non-custodial fathers who totally
default on support: 26.9%
source:
http://njlaw924.com/id39.html |
|
Judges and their elite
Star
Chamber entrench their power and status to rule over Canadians with
impunity and unbridled
narcissism.
Feminist and Homosexual Activists as Judges effect
their political agenda without the consent of the Canadian demographic.
They with full knowledge and intent (scripted in the sixties & seventies
by their Activist writers) circumvent due democratic process and
knowingly contravene the founding legal constructs of Canada in the BNA
& in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Activist Judges happily
and routinely breach the Trust placed in them by their employer, the
Canadian Taxpayer.
Lawyers routinely Entice into self-destruction and
financial rape vast numbers of families entering their doors.
Because of the Statutory self-regulation of the BC Law Society, we know
of no limiting factor to cap the Activism of the Judiciary other than
prosecuting Judges and Lawyers who exceed the powers granted them by
Statute.
The BC Law Society pimps BC women, and use them as
their hookers. With others (also conspicuously funded by the
Taxpayer), Law Society members instruct women to hook fathers and
families into the Courts and the financial ruin a "Legal Marriage"
entails. Children NEED this threat to their security to be
EXTERMINATED.
Faced with the entrenched Father Hatred and
Affirmative Action of the burgeoning civil service, boys and young men
despair. Having no vision for a Future or a university education,
they become prone to fulfill the Father Hatred prophecies of BC
university's Women's Studies faculties and Feminist Activists. |
|
2005-xx-xx Third
National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect
"Children of single parents were at
higher risk of physical abuse and of all types of neglect and were
overrepresented among seriously injured, moderately injured, and
endangered children. Compared with their counterparts living with both
parents, children in single parent families had:
-
a 77% greater risk of being
harmed by physical abuse (using the stringent Harm Standard) and a
63% greater risk of experiencing any countable physical abuse (using
the Endangerment Standard);
-
an 87% greater risk of being
harmed by physical neglect and a 165% greater risk of experiencing
any countable physical neglect;
-
a 74% greater risk of being
harmed by emotional neglect and a 64% greater risk of experiencing
any countable emotional neglect;
-
a 220% (or more than three
times) greater risk of being educationally neglected;
-
an approximately 80% greater
risk of suffering serious injury or harm from abuse or neglect;
-
an approximately 90% greater
risk of receiving moderate injury or harm as a result of child
maltreatment; and
-
a 120% (or more than two times)
greater risk of being endangered by some type of child abuse or
neglect."
|
|
2006-11-10
Top judges rebuke Tories Federal plan would allow police to help
appoint judiciary - workopolis.com; "Beverley
McLachlin, Canada's Chief Justice, along with a powerful council of
the country's top judges issued an unprecedented rebuke yesterday to
Justice Minister Vic Toews for hatching a plan to arbitrarily change
the way judges are chosen. The Canadian Judicial Council
expressed dismay that Mr. Toews is planning to introduce
"significant
changes to the composition and functioning of the Judicial Advisory
Committees," secret groups which are set up in each region to vet
candidates for the 1,100 federal judgeships across the country.
Chief Justice McLachlin, who chairs the council, urged Mr. Toews to
include the judiciary and key legal bodies in any discussion of
changes to the committee vetting process."
We
need in the very least some kind of JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
which will look something like::
-
Divide the Law Society into two groups of
Judges and Practicing Lawyers to protect the Lawyers who would
make Cases against Judges. There would be some Law Society
Members who may practice as Barristers, and some as Solicitors,
but a Judge must RETIRE from the Practice of Law and
become unable to affect the Law Society while they act as a
Judge. On removal of a Judge for
Judicial Activism,
the Law Society may deny their return to Practice from
Retirement for specified cause, such as the case made during
an unsuccessful Criminal Charge of
Breach of Trust or Treason.
-
The Judges naturally divide into two bodies,
the Provincial and Federal Judicial Societies to parallel the
Provincial and Federal Courts. Membership in both Judicial
Societies must be precluded. Federal Judges would be tried
by Provincial Judges according to the
JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, and the Provincial Judges would
be tried by the Federal Judges. They could be tried both
in Tort and in Criminal Court for
Breach of Trust and for
Treason.
-
Make Judicial Appointments for a FIXED TERM
of no more than five years (Jimmy Pattison where are you when we
need you?)
-
Judicial Re-Appointment must meet a Test for
Judicial Re-Appointment which demonstrates the prescribed
Impartiality (that is an Activism Free record.) and Non-Infamy
with the Electorate.
-
Automatic Temporary Suspension Without Pay
for a Judge who is going to Trial in Tort or in Criminal
Court, pending its outcome.
-
Eradication
of
Freemasonry from the Judiciary and Law Societies. Both
are granted special privileges by Parliamentary Statute which
they receive In Trust.. Judicial Candidates and sitting
Judges must be vetted for
Occult
practices resulting in Public Safety concerns such as
Pedophilia.
Pedophilia is an established part of Occult worship
(See
Malachi Martin among others) and is reported to be a
tolerated practice of some high ranking Judges.
-
Trial by Jury of Judges before non-allied and
non-associated Judges, e.g.. Federal
Judges
tried before Provincial Judges, visa versa..
-
NO SPECIAL
PROSECUTORS for Judges or other Public Servants being
tried.
Under the "federal" division of powers in the BNA
(Constitution Act, 1867)) Education falls into the Provincial
domain. A parallel Provincial Statute to amend the licensing
and Suspension of
Teachers
would be necessary to stop the present use of our Schools for
Political Indoctrination by Activists. See also
Four Missions |
|
Do we have any such provision? Who executes
the required actions in the event a Judge has to be removed?
Submit new info on Removal of Judges
Removal of judges from office, Oklahoma
Constitution
(a) In addition to other
methods and causes prescribed by the Constitution and laws,
the judges of any court, exercising judicial power under the
provisions of Article VII, or under any other provision, of
the Constitution of Oklahoma, shall be subject to removal
from office, or to compulsory retirement from office, for
causes herein specified, by proceedings in the Court on the
Judiciary.
(b) Cause for removal from
office shall be: Gross neglect of duty; corruption in
office; habitual drunkenness; commission while in office of
any offense involving moral turpitude;
gross partiality in office;
oppression in office; or other grounds as may be
specified hereafter by the legislature.
(c) Cause for compulsory
retirement from office, with or without compensation, shall
be mental or physical disability preventing the proper
performance of official duty, or incompetence to perform the
duties of the office" |
|
Habeas
Corpus : "literally, "you
may have the body". A Habeas
Corpus is a legal writ that protects an individual against arbitrary
imprisonment by requiring that any person arrested be brought before
a court for formal charge. If the charge is considered to be valid,
the person must submit to trial; if not, the person goes free. When
the law is suspended, then individuals can be imprisoned
indefinitely and without charge."
.....
More,
Glossary of
terms |
|
2006-03-10 The right to abandon your child by Mona Charen;
"This
is one of those moments when you want to grab liberals by the lapels
and demand, "Well, what did you expect?" ... A group called the
National Center for Men has filed a lawsuit they are calling "Roe v.
Wade for Men." ... More than three decades
ago Roe vs. Wade gave women control of their reproductive lives but
nothing in the law changed for men. Women can now have sexual
intimacy without sacrificing reproductive choice. Women now have the
freedom and security to enjoy lovemaking without the fear of forced
procreation. Women now have control of their lives after an
unplanned conception. But men are routinely forced to give up
control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women
are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice as
the price of intimacy."
COMMENT: Roe
V. Wade was a "Femi-Narcissistic" decision, looking after the
interests of the Mother only. The principal established there
established was extrapolated into a Mother's "murder rights"
expressed in minimal sentences when murdering their children.
Equal Parenting eliminates much of this. |
Father dealt difficult hand by the system
"Even last week, when the family court file of
Elaine and Leo Campione was released to the press -- in
significant measure because Mr. Campione didn't oppose the
media's bid to see it .. There is, to be frank, an
underlying perspective of feminist oppression from which all
else springs. .. Women are seen first as victims --
generally of male power and particularly of husband power -- and
presumed to be truth-tellers and good mothers until proven
otherwise. The starting point for men is that they are abusers
and deadbeat dads in the making unless they can prove the
contrary, and if it takes years for them to demonstrate that, oh
well."
|
| |
Freedom of Speech, Bill C250
Bill C250:
http://www.freedominion.ca/libertyday.htm
The End of Religious Liberty in Canada,
R. Albert Mohler
http://www.crosswalk.com/news/weblogs/mohler/?adate=5/24/2004#1264412
It's all over but the funeral. Free speech and religious liberty
are now effectively dead in Canada, and recent developments across
our northern border should awaken Americans to the peril of
political correctness and its restrictions on freedom.
On April 28, the Canadian Senate passed bill C-250 by a vote of 59
to 11. In passing this legislation, the Canadian Parliament added
"sexual orientation" to the nation's laws criminalizing "hate
speech." The end result is that the Bible may now be considered a
form of criminalized hate literature and Christians who teach that
homosexuality is sinful may face criminal charges.
Even before the passage of C-250, Canadian legislators had been
moving to restrict free speech and religious liberty. The concept of
"hate speech" implies that certain forms of speech are to be
criminalized for being out of step with the government's ideological
positions. Canada's extensive hate speech laws already criminalized
any statements considered to be disparaging to ethnic and minority
groups. By adding sexual orientation to the list of protected
classes, the Canadian Parliament has not only shut down free speech;
it has opened a legal can of worms that will be most difficult to
handle. Since "sexual
orientation" is undefined in the law, lesbians and homosexual men
are unlikely to be the only persons demanding coverage under the
law. As the statute now stands, criticism of pedophilia or
polygamy--or any sexual act or relationship for that matter--could
well be cause for criminal action.
The law was promoted by Svend Robinson, the Member of
Parliament [MP] for Burnaby-Douglas. Robinson is a
notoriously liberal and flamboyant legislator, who also promotes
himself as something of a symbolic leader for Canada's gay
community. Robinson's animus toward Christianity has been evident
for some time, and he has described Christian leaders as
"ecclesiastical dictators." Responding to one critic, Robinson
showed his true colors: "You people are sick. God should strike you
dead."
In a bizarre twist to this tale, Robinson missed the critical vote
in favor of his bill, because he had just taken an extensive medical
leave from his political responsibilities after admitting to the
theft of a ring he had intended to give to his male partner. His
theft was caught on camera and, in the aftermath of the scandal,
Robinson released a statement which may or may not have constituted
a resignation from office. No one seems to be exactly sure about
exactly what Robinson meant by what one Canadian newspaper called
his "non-resignation resignation letter."
Robinson aside, the Senate's passage of this bill represents an
immediate threat to free speech and Christian conviction in the
nation of Canada.
Editorial opinion in Canadian newspapers has been mixed, but the
threat to religious liberty is immediately clear when one listens to
the arguments made by C-250's proponents. Writing in The Toronto
Star, Carol Lowes explained that C-250 is necessary because, "Some
Christian charities, priests and pastors attempt to convince people
of their wrongs and cultivate guilt or shame about perceived sins in
their target audiences." Really? The obvious implication of Ms.
Lowes' argument is that pastors must never tell anyone that they are
sinners. How convenient.
A challenge to Christian publications was offered by Lois Sweet, a
journalism professor at Carleton University in Ottawa. "Ways in
which gays and lesbians have been portrayed in the religious media
can lead people to believe that they are not human and [are] totally
defined by their sexuality," she said. "To present them as people
who threaten society in some way is hate mongering."
Marianne Meed Ward, writing in The Toronto Sun, warned preachers
that they will have to be careful in addressing any issue of
sexuality. "Expressing views on alternative expressions of sex is
not a crime," she said. Nevertheless, she presented a blatant
warning about "expressing" such views: "But preachers (and everybody
else) will have to exercise caution in how they express their views.
And that's not a bad thing. We don't need ads showing a slash
through a gay couple. We don't need placards saying 'God hates
fags.' We don't need people quoting Leviticus out of context...."
So, preachers in Canada have now been warned that their
interpretation of Leviticus could now become a matter of hate
speech. Ms. Ward gets to decide what Leviticus means in its context?
Hermeneutics is now translated into a potential crime.
When preachers are told that they will "have to exercise caution in
how they express their views," religious liberty is effectively
dead. This is especially clear when comments made by the bill's
proponents identify any criticism of homosexuality--whatever its
motivation and form--as criminalized hate speech.
Christian groups in Canada have responded with understandable alarm.
"Today the Senate sounded the final death knell in legislation that
will severely limit free speech and freedom of religion and even
freedom of the press in Canada," said Brian Rushfeldt, executive
director of the Canada Family Action Coalition. Rushfeldt described
C-250 as "a draconian piece of legislation that will criminalize
people who express an opinion contrary to homosexual behavior,
including views based on religion, conscience, morality, and even
medical or humanitarian concerns." He continued: "Given the
undefined, ambiguous wording in this severely flawed piece of
legislation, Christians and other faith groups are worried that
expressing their religious or moral views, or even quoting from the
Bible or another religious text, may become a criminal act."
Indeed, some Canadian legal experts argue that adding "sexual
behaviour" to the hate speech legislation now makes it a crime to
teach that sex outside of marriage--whatever its form--is wrong.
Anne Cools, a senator from Ontario, described the bill as
"an intent to create . . . a section which would be used to cleanse
many people of their moral opinions." Canada's first black
senator, Cools expressed concern that the law will be used to
criminalize churches opposed to homosexuality. "Once you put a power
before [authorities], and then try to rely on goodness for the power
not to be exercised, you're indeed naive."
"All sexual acts are not equal," Cools asserted. "I believe in
justice for all...but I also understand that the essential
requirement of life itself is that men mate with women." Better
watch it Senator Cools, you may have just committed a hate crime.
University of Western Ontario professor Robert Martin has described
Canada as "a totalitarian theocracy." He went on to argue that
Canada is "ruled today by what I would described as a secular state
religion (of political correctness). Anything that is regarded as
heresy or blasphemy is not tolerated."
Svend Robinson and other promoters of C-250 played a crude game of
doublespeak in arguing for the legislation. Their explanations are
reducible to the claim that C-250 will never be used to criminalize
Christian speech--except when such speech needs to be criminalized.
Some have described Christians as "paranoid" in responding to the
bill. That's not the way Jason Kenney, a Roman Catholic MP from
Calgary sees the situation. "This isn't at all a hysterical
reaction. It's a completely reasonable fear, given the trends in the
courts and human rights commissions. In Owens, a Saskatchewan judge
ruled that parts of the Bible can constitute hate speech against
gays. In the Surrey School Board case, they were ordered to put gay
material into a Grade 1 class."
Alan Borovoy, general counsel to the Canadian Civil Liberties
Association, once described Canada as "a pleasantly authoritarian
country." Columnist John Leo of U.S. News and World Report, agrees
with Borovoy's description.
As Leo explains, "Since
Canada has no First Amendment, anti-bias laws generally trump free
speech and freedom of religion. A recent flurry of cases has mostly
gone against free expression." Leo went on to suggest that
parents might be held legally liable for a child who says something
irritating about homosexuals to a classmate in school. Religious
groups could quickly get in trouble for teaching certain biblical
passages or defending historic church doctrines.
The pattern of criminalizing speech about homosexuals is spreading
across liberal societies. In Sweden, pastors are explicitly warned
that any sermons critical of homosexuality can lead to criminal
charges. The same logic is spreading through the courts and
legislatures of many European countries--and now has jumped the
Atlantic to Canada.
The truly threatening character of the Canadian legislation is
further demonstrated in the fact that police do not have to charge
persons with breaking a law. Any Canadian citizen can file a
complaint against any other citizen, resulting in charges. At that
point, the defendant is simply left to the dangerous whims of the
liberal judiciary and governmental human rights commissions. The
potential legal costs would alone intimidate some persons from
talking about homosexuality.
The most important part of the newly-revised criminal code reads:
"Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private
conversation, willfully promotes hatred against any identifiable
group is guilty of . . . an indictable offense and is liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years."
During a recent debate, the Canadian attorney general refused to
comment on whether or not the Bible is, in itself, hate speech. That
matter, we are now warned, will be left for the courts to
determined.
We are fooling ourselves if we believe this threat to religious
liberty will stay on the Canadian side of the border. This same
logic is already accepted by many law professors and judges in the
United States. The passage of C-250 is a warning to us all. When
free speech is denied and the preachers are told what they can and
cannot say, religious liberty is effectively dead.
___________________________
R. Albert Mohler, Jr. is president of The Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. For more articles and
resources by Dr. Mohler, and for information on The Albert Mohler
Program, a daily national radio program broadcast on the Salem Radio
Network, go to www.albertmohler.com. For information on The Southern
Baptist Theological Seminary, go to www.sbts.edu. Send feedback to
mail@albertmohler.com.
http://www.crosswalk.com/news/weblogs/mohler/?adate=5/24/2004#1264412
|
|
|
|