Insulting gays SHOULD NOT BE a crime...
I hate what this pastor Stephen Boisson says, but so what? Why on earth can't he say these things???? Once again, Ezra Levant is right...
Rev. Boissoin wrote a letter to the editor of the Red Deer Advocate, in which he denounced homosexuality in no uncertain terms. A local teacher — who wasn’t gay — filed a complaint with Alberta’s human rights commission, claiming that Rev. Boissoin and the newspaper were “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt.” The newspaper accepted a plea bargain, but Rev. Boissoin didn’t. So, like everyone else charged with that vague offence, he was found guilty. His punishment was announced two weeks ago.Ezra Levant deserves an order of Canada for his work against the Human Rights Kangaroo Courts. Thank you Ezra!
It’s right out of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Lori Andreachuk, the human rights commissioner who issued the order, started off by acknowledging that “there is no specific individual who can be compensated as there is no direct victim who has come forward.”
The complainant was the town scold, an anti-Christian activist named Darren Lund with an axe to grind. Andreachuk’s first order was that “Dr. Lund, although not a direct victim, did expend considerable time and energy and suffered ridicule and harassment as a result of his complaint. The Panel finds therefore that he is entitled to some compensation.”
So a busybody with no standing spends his time filing complaints — and gets a tax-free reward for doing so. For his “suffering” — not at the hands of Rev. Boission, but “as a result of his complaint.” People in Red Deer ridiculed Lund for being a tattle-tale and a censor — as they should. But Rev. Boissoin must pay for that.
Her order continued: “Mr. Boissoin … shall cease publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the Internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals.”
Boissoin can never communicate anything “disparaging” about gays again. It’s a lifetime ban — and it applies to every conceivable medium, including his private e-mails and public sermons.
posted by GayandRight @ 10:21 AM
8 Comments:
Thanks for voicing your opinion on this.
This part is particularly disturbing:
Boissoin can never communicate anything “disparaging” about gays again. It’s a lifetime ban — and it applies to every conceivable medium, including his private e-mails
E-mails??? What the heck? How are they going to monitor that? And what does that tell the rest of us?
People have belief systems that we could never understand but they should have their right to express it. I'm a bit struck by the fact that they've told a minister that he can't make statements in a public sermon, which is essentially telling him how to do his job.
I wonder what would happen if Rev. Boissoin simply ignored the HRC ruling? What can the HRC do if he steps into his pulpit and preaches a sermon saying homosexuality activity is "wrong" according to the teachings of the church?
Are they going to throw him in jail? Close down the church? Execute him for following his religion?
Now, if this were China and he was Falun Gong... we know how that government works, but how would the Alberta "authorities" react to a member of a mainstream church ignoring a secular order that prohibits the teaching of a religious creed?
BTW, I'm neither religious nor homophobic. I don't care who does what to whom as long as both parties are agreeable. Exception being "kiddie sex", in which case the law isn't tough enough.
Ezra Levant deserves an order of Canada for his work against the Human Rights Kangaroo Courts.
======================
Yes! Yes! Yes!
One of the great liberation movements of our time, that of lesbians and gays, has enjoyed the tremendous success it has entirely without the aid of legislation against group vilification. Indeed, letting the bigots have their say has been one of the movement's noble tactics. Lesbians and gays ought to be doubly appalled by the ruling against Boissoin: first because, like all Canadians, they abhore government agencies telling us what we can and cannot say and think; second because the last thing they want is to be patronized and condescended to. Lesbians and gays, confident and self-respecting adults that they are, neither need nor want an officious nanny to protect or care for them.
You are deliberatly misleading your readers.
Communicating messages likely to expose vulnerable minorities to hatred or contempt is not a crime, it is a discriminatory practice which is proscribed by human rights legislation.
The issue is not whether the messages are "insulting", but whether the messages are likely to increase incidents of discrimination, violence and even murder.
Our multi-cultural society will not tolerate posting discriminatory signs such as "whites only", or "No Blacks Allowed". We also condemn any practice which sends the message thatno one should provide accommodation, employment or goods and services to a particular minority by suggesting that that group is a danger to children, a threat to society, or are dirty and diseased.
These types of hateful messages also lead to increased expressions of violence against vulnerable minorities.
Do you have to be gay-bashed to wake up to the reality of hate? I hope not!
That post above looks like Darren Lund was here.
My letter was directed at gay activim in school that does not ensure the protection of other opinions.
I do NOT hate gays. Actually I have never met one that I didn't like.
The previous poster is out to lunch. I do not hate gays...I hate present day gay activism. Enough is enough.....they are putting guys like me where they used to be. I don't want them to have to be there and I refuse to be forced into submission and silence.
Bless you all. If you ever want to talk to me direclty, you can email me at stephen@stephenboissoin.com
Blessings
Stephen Boissoin
http://stephenboissoin.com
This isn't just a simple case of someone saying "Homosexuality is an abomination" or even "God hates fags" though. The letter uses militant language, says that gays activists must be stopped "by any means necessary", and says that gay-friendly works in schools are causing psychological and physiological harm.
Now on that last one: if I were to say that any teacher was doing that to his students, I bet I'd be sued for defamation. Why should Boisson be allowed to say that every teacher is hurting his students, without proof, and then get away with not punishment?
Say we're immoral. That's fine, we can take it. And the law shouldn't judge morality anyway. But calling people to war and saying that we're hurting children is the sort of thing that isn't protected by free speech.
Oh, and the URL at the end will take you to a copy of the letter, so you can see I didn't exagerrate anything.
http://rootleweb.blogspot.com/2008/06/boissons-letter-to-red-deer-advocate.html
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home