Alright, here we go.
First off, Margaret Wente writes, for the Globe and Mail: Something’s wrong with this rights case:
Ten years ago, Ali Tahmourpour, an Iranian-born Canadian, was accepted into the RCMP’s training program for cadets. He flunked out after 12 weeks and has been fighting the decision ever since. He believes he was a victim of discrimination based on his background and religion (he is Muslim) and deserves another chance. The RCMP maintains he was dismissed because of poor performance. Last year, in a high-profile decision, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal declared victory for the would-be Mountie. It ordered the RCMP to give him another shot and to pay him at least half a million dollars – an amount that was meant to cover several years of back pay, plus promotions. The force was also ordered to develop a cultural-sensitivity program.
Rights groups hailed the decision, which drew sympathetic coverage across the country. “People come to Canada to escape oppression, and you hope not to have to deal with that oppression again,” Mr. Tahmourpour was quoted as saying. “I just hope that after this, the RCMP can again become a national icon that we can be proud of.”
Second, via BigCityLib: Rumor: Father Of Speechy Warrior Has Property Vandalized:
I am informed that when vandals hit the Calgary Jewish Community Center and the Congregation House of Jacob Mikveh Israel last week with Swastikas and other anti-Semitic graffiti, they also got the house of one Marvin Levant, father of Ezra Levant, Canada’s premier Free Speech warrior and an opponent of legislation intended to crack down on Neo Nazi’s on-line activity.
Read the rest here.
Third, via GMANews.tv: Court hears FilCan boy’s discrimination case:
CHICAGO, Illinois – The Filipino-Canadian boy who became a victim of racial discrimination in Canada for using spoon and fork while eating in school will finally have his day in court.
The Quebec Human Rights Tribunal will hear the case of Luc Cagadoc on Nov. 23 and 24 against the Marguerite Bougeoys School Board and two other school staff members, according to Fo Niemi, executive director of the Center for Research-Action on Race Relations, a Montreal-based human rights advocate group.
The hearing, which is open to the public, will be heard at the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal at the Montreal courthouse (Palais de Justice) at 1 Notre Dame East, Montreal.
Read the rest here.
Fourth, Steve Edwards writes, for Policy journal: The Trouble with Religious Hatred Laws:
Freedom of speech and conscience are invaluable and timeless principles. Thomas Paine summarised them crisply in the eighteenth century, in the introduction to The Age of Reason:
I have always strenuously supported the Right of every Man to his own opinion, however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies to another this right, makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes himself the right of changing it.
Governments should play very little or no role in determining what people are allowed to say and hear, regardless of whether this may be ‘offensive’ to the traditional enemies of liberty—primarily religious fanatics—or to those of a weaker ‘moderate’ disposition who would passively give up ‘their’ freedom (and ours too) to buy a little peace and quiet. Yet today there are few legal or moral principles that have come under greater sustained attack.
In another cartoon-related controversy, Ezra Levant, the publisher of former print magazine the Western Standard (now online-only), was brought before the Alberta Human Rights Commission and Citizenship Commission on a hate-incitement complaint following the magazine’s decision to republish, in February 2006, the controversial Muhammad cartoons that first appeared in Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten on 30 September 2005.(6) One of the two complainants, Islamic Supreme Council of Canada president Syed Soharwardy, eventually withdrew his case having paid no legal fees whatsoever. Levant must still answer to a virtually identical proceeding initiated by the Edmonton Council of Muslim Communities, which accuses the Western Standard of ‘clearly (promoting) hatred against all Muslims by demonizing our Prophet and therefore, our religion.’(7) Once again, this will come at no cost to the Council. As the Calgary Herald notes, ‘human rights complaints are free to the complainant, but defendants are obliged to fund their own counsel.’(8)
More recently, the conservative Canadian writer Mark Steyn and Maclean’s magazine, a major newsweekly, were the joint target of an ‘anti-hate’ case filed in the Canadian, British Columbian, and Ontarian human rights commissions. The last of these refused to hear the complaint, citing a lack of jurisdiction, while the first ultimately dismissed it following weeks of bad press. The complainants were members of the Canadian Islamic Congress, which took offence over a series of articles published in the magazine on topics relating to Islam and Muslims.(9) One article by Steyn, titled ‘The Future Belongs to Islam’ (actually an excerpt from his book America Alone), was the object of particular ‘offense’ on the part of the aggrieved Muslims.
Fifth, via Scaramouche: Do as we say, not as we do:
I’m sure you’ll be relieved to know that, as of today, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has an official policy on drug testing in the workplace. I haven’t had a chance to read it–nor, for that matter, do I really care to. What’s key here is to know that the CHRC is a lot like an oil slick, or a load of gelatinous ooze: if you don’t take steps to contain it, it will spread into every nook and cranny and bollocks up the entire works.
[…]Remedial, not punitive, eh? That’s rich coming from Inquisitors whose M.O. is quintessentially punitive (the possibility of years of hounding, possibly followed by “adjudication” before a Star Chamber).The CHRC telling others to eschew the punitive is like Colonel Sanders telling people to skip the fried chicken.
Read it all here.