I will refrain from any (bad) turkey jokes today…
First: NaPo reporter Sarah Boesveld notes that there are many ads for rental accommodations that violate the letter and the spirit of the Ontario human rights code – by stating “non-Muslims need not apply.”
The OHRC’s response? They’re too busy going after the rednecks.
“We haven’t investigated any of these housing things because it’s kind of hard to do,” Ms. Bennett said. “We’re such a small organization with such a large number of possibilities for contravening the code…”
“We tend to usually see the reverse of that, such as ‘no blacks need apply, no people who are LGBT can live here, nobody who’s Chinese,’ so I think that tends to be the larger issue,” she said.
Second: Ezra comments on the Muslim-Only housing ads. Ezra, stop being so… right!
Now, a part of private property is the right to choose who gets to come on it — no matter what your reason is. Think of the middle-aged male who wants to move into a sorority house. But that right goes further — including the right to exclude people for any reason at all. If you don’t like their personality, their annoying laugh, the colour of their eyes. And even the colour of their skin. That’s the point about private property: You have the right to be wrong — you even have the right to be racist.
And he calls out the OHRC for the bias that they so transparently harbour:
There’s a word for people like those at the OHRC who have different standards for different religions: Bigots.
Third: Rob Breakenridge in the Calgary Herald on Storseth, Whatcott, and Redford’s “speechie” bona-fides (did he read Walker’s blog first?)
Fourth: Do you think it’s possible that someone’s advocacy for “human rights” within his or her own profession may compromise the performance and lead to a dismissal? Considering that “human rights” can mean many different things to different people, there are an infinite number of scenarios where an employer should terminate an employee who is campaigning for “human rights” in the workplace.
Not so, says Asfia Sultan, who believes her self-described status as a “human rights activist” is blanket immunity to any actions taken against her by her employer. No doubt the Tribunal, staffed as it is by “human rights activists” cut from the same cloth, will side with her, at taxpayers’ expense.
Fifth: “This redneck attitude has to go away” says a gay Albertan while launching a human rights complaint. The complainant was subject to a verbal tirade and some pushing and shoving in his small-town business. The police took care of things, charging the aggressor with assault and threats of bodily harm. For those of us without some group membership recognized by the HRCs, that would be the end of it, like it or not.
But the fact that Mr. Broyles is gay entitles him to a parallel system of (in)justice by which he can bankrupt his opponent. In addition, Broyles’ statement about “redneck attitudes” proves that he isn’t just out to defend himself from assault and threats, he wants the government to change peoples’ attitudes. Freedom of conscience is probably also an “American concept”.
Sixth: Alberta premier-designate Allison Redford has already signaled that she supports a repeal of the only part of Bill 44 that appeased the social conservatives in that province – the “prior notification” clause that forces teachers to inform parents when sexuality or religion are to be discussed in the classroom.
So, draconian and wrong-headed human rights legislation is only a problem when it pisses off the social liberals, Allison? Do the right thing and get rid of the whole enchilada.