First: Amnesty International, which recently did a one-eighty and began to promote abortion access worldwide, has come out in opposition of Saskatchewan’s plan to send human rights cases to the courts. To hell with the rule of law, they state; “marginalized” groups should get special treatment:
But informality and accessibility of the adjudication process itself plays a crucial role in maximizing human rights protection, given the very nature of the complaints and the fact that they are often brought forward by individuals from marginalized groups and sectors in society.
Second: I know there is a proverb about stinky cheese and rats, but at this point I can’t quite recall how it went…
Dalep who spent time as the department’s school liaison officer, declined to speak publicly about the nature of his grievance. He is the only officer in the 25-member department who is a visible minority…
Dalep’s complaint follows another filed in October 2009 by Const. Jennifer Gibbs.
Fourth: Commentary in the Toronto Sun: Free Speech on Life Support
There you have it. In America, free speech is so sacred it applies to all. In Canada, you can’t say “amen” without a tribunal climbing up your tush. How dare we offend even one anal-retentive atheist?
and Eric Duhaime on the “silly” ruling:
This judgement confirms what many of us have being fearing for many years: Our country is slowly moving from being a democratic society where decisions are made by elected officials towards one ruled by a totalitarian government of judges.
We have a good track record as foster parents, but because we are Christians with mainstream views on sexual ethics, we are apparently unsuitable as foster parents. The judges have suggested that our views might harm children. We have been told by the Equality and Human Rights Commission that our moral views may ‘infect’ a child. We do not believe that this is so.
The court also suggested that the applicants seek “re-education” to eliminate their religious beliefs.