Posted on 12/13/2007 4:28:00 PM PST by wagglebee
REGINA, Saskatchewan, December 13, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission's decision to impose a "lifetime" ban on a local Christian's freedom to publicly criticise homosexuality, was upheld this week in its entirety by Saskatchewan Court of Queens Bench.
Bill Whatcott, an evangelical Christian and a licensed practical nurse who lives in Saskatchewan, is a campaigner against the homosexual political movement that is sweeping the Canadian legal system. In 2006, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission (SHRC) ordered Whatcott to pay $17,500 Cn. to four complainants who complained that their "feelings" and "self-respect" were "injured" by Whatcott's pamphlets denouncing the "gay lifestyle" as immoral and dangerous.
Whatcott responded to the decision, "This fine is for telling the truth [that] homosexual sodomites can change their behaviour and be set free from their sin and depravity through the forgiveness of sins and shed blood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."
He added, "Shame on the Saskatchewan Court of Queens Bench for pandering to homosexual activism and ignoring the truth."
In its 2005-2006 Annual Report, the Commission noted that Whatcott was "ordered to discontinue distributing any materials that promote hatred against people because of their sexual orientation."
The tribunal held that "preventing the distribution of such materials was a reasonable limit on Whatcott's right to freedom of religion and expression as guaranteed by section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms".
Whatcott appealed the decision to the Court of Queen's Bench and received the news on Tuesday that the court would not overturn the HRC's ruling.
Whatcott himself says he was fined for his pamphlets that used "verbatim" a text from a classified personal advertisement in a local homosexual publication that ran, "Man seeking boys.... age not so relevant".
Canadians concerned about what they see as the erosion of basic democratic freedoms are calling for a stop to the extra-judicial powers of the Human Rights Commissions in which the usual rules for due process of law do not apply.
In connection to a similar Human Rights Commission case currently levelled by the Canadian Islamic Congress against the popular conservative political author Mark Steyn, Ottawa Citizen columnist David Warren wrote this week that freedom of speech is "the most fundamental right," and that the Human Rights Tribunals represent a significant threat to democratic freedoms.
Freedom of speech, he wrote, is "the queen bee in the hive, as it were. Every other freedom depends on this freedom. Take it away, and we no longer have a free country".
"Like so much in civil society, we put up with it because the alternative is worse, and we'd rather cope with free speech, than with the free intimidation that results from its suppression."
Warren voiced the concerns of many in Canada who believe the Human Rights Commissions' powers and zeal for the far left ideological position makes them an ideal vehicle for the suppression of basic democratic freedoms.
Warren blasted the Human Rights Tribunals, calling them "kangaroo courts" and "star chambers" with "quasi-legal powers that should be offensive to the citizens of any free country... in which the defendant's right to due process is withdrawn."
"They reach judgements on the basis of no fixed law. Moreover, 'the process is the punishment' in these star chambers -- for simply by agreeing to hear a case, they tie up the defendant in bureaucracy and paperwork, and bleed him for the cost of lawyers, while the person who brings the complaint, however frivolous, stands to lose nothing."
Conservatives in Canada are supporting a petition, addressed to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, to abolish or at least curtail the powers of the Human Rights Commissions.
Sign the petition to stop the Human Rights Commissions:
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/a-free-dominion-against-...
Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Sask. Judge Dismisses Appeal of Pro-Life Demonstrator
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jul/06072004.html
Oh, but that could never happen here!
Some pro-homo cheerleader told me so.
gaystapo ping
HOLY CRAP!!!! 22 POSTS AND NO ONE PICKED UP THE FACT THAT IT WAS UPHELD IN IT’S ENTIRETY BY SASKATCHEWAN “COURT OF QUEENS BENCH”??? ARE YA’LL SLIPPIN’?? LOL!!
What happens when you don’t have a Bill of Rights.
No, I saw it.
Was it Andrew Jackson that said “The judge can make any ruling he wants but, then he has to come down off the bench and enforce the ruling”? If you don’t like a ruling a judge makes you have the same option!!
We Americans are very gracious when it comes to observing a ruling made by a judge, it don’t always have to be like that. Insert Human Rights Commission where needed in lieu of judge
Actually, they do have the “Canadian charter of rights and freedoms” which fairly well mirrors the Bill of Rights and the freedom of religion, opinion, expression and press are clearly stated.
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/index.html
The meaning of HRC can be interchangable with the candidate whose name must not be stated.
You're probably right. If a judicial ruling came down here banning all speech criticizing homosexuality, they’d reject doing anything to overturn it. They’d argue that we should be proposing tax cuts and free trade rather than being bogged down on “divisive” social issues. We’d be compared to the Taliban for worrying about “what homosexuals do in the bedroom”.
The Saskatchewan Human rights Commission should, in accordance with this ruling, ban the Koran from being imported, printed, preached from, or distributed in any way, plus all hatefull, injurous derogatory sermons from being preached in mosks and order the Islamic community to pay every person- Jew, Christian, Bhuddist, Hindu-(all non- muslims) for hurt feelings.
This Christian activist should seek the Koran ban based on this ruling, and see if they don't end up tossing it out.
This of course would never happen, despite popular belief that every Canadian is entitled to his day in court, the Supreme court of Canada can and often does refuse to hear cases it doesn't want deal with. Justice be damned. The liberals from Trudeau on have gone a long way towards establishing a liberal dictatorship in Canada. A few more terms in office, and it will be completed.
L
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Canada does have a "bill of rights". It's called the charter of rights and freedoms.
What Canada doesn't have is court that MUST hear this persons case and the violation of his rights by this Saskatchewan human rights commision.
This person's only recourse now is to go to the UN human rights commission or whatever it's called and have Canada condemned, perhaps sent a strongly worded letter.
Thank God I was born in Saskatchewan and my parents moved us to the U.S.
Boy, it’s tough being an enthusiastic Canadian with $hit like this happening. Bad news. It’s a slow slide into totalitarianism. “Four legs bad, two legs better!”
Big Brother is watching you....
Otherwize you would have surely died of boredom by now. You can only stare at endless wheat fields for so long... :o)
Coming next to the good old US of A.
Yes they will.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.