First: Section 13 is dead. At least as far as Parliament is concerned. Brian Storseth’s Bill C-304 was debated in the House for the last time, and subsequently passed third and final reading. Now all that remains is for the Senate to get off their duffs and get this thing through their Chamber forthwith.
The Chronicle-Herald editorializes in favour…
The Toronto Star gives a hip-hip-hurrah…
The Edmonton Sun puts Storseth on their shoulders…
And a big shout out to Liberal MP Scott Simms who supported this bill from day 1.
Second: The BCHRT continues its assault on reason and the presumption of innocence:
Tribunal member Robert B. Blasina found the reasons insufficient to explain why a visually impaired person should not be considered for the job.
He found discrimination based on a physical disability and awarded $3,000 in damages for injury to Khalil’s dignity and feelings.
Third: You’re only allowed to discriminate if you have been certified as an Official Discriminator by the government
The Gabriel Dumont Institute has permission from the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission to hire affirmatively (EX93-15).
Please self-identify as a person of Metis Ancestry in your application.
Fourth: Even the lawyers who stand to gain are noting that human rights awards for “injury to dignity” are continuously escalating.
Fifth: Regardless of your beliefs on this matter, I’d like you to note that there has never been a substantiated human rights complaint over pro-lifers being routinely arrested for displaying symbols of their cause within a certain distance of an abortion facility. Barabara Hall has never issued a scathing pronouncement in support of Linda Gibbons. The BCHRT has never found that anti-abortionists have a right to urinate and wear hiking boots while demonstrating near an abortion facility. So why is it then a human rights violation for demonstrators – who have vowed to disrupt the Montreal Grand Prix – to be stopped and questioned by Quebec police when wearing the political symbol of their cause?