Kennedy, LIBERAL REPUBLICANS, Urge Protection for Homosexuals

Any law seeking to punish criminals seperately for their MOTIVE is stupid, and WRONG!

And yet that's exactly what we do when we prosecute crimes by "degrees."

Not even one source where a priest or a minister was barred from saying that homosexuality is a sin.

Try again.

CHRISTIAN COUPLE FORCED TO SHUT DOWN B&B FOR REFUSING HOMOSEXUAL COUPLE
STRATFORD, PEI, May 23, 2001 (LSN.ca) - A Christian couple from Prince Edward Island who run a bed-and-breakfast out of their family home has been forced to close down their operation and pay a fee to two male homosexuals for refusing to comply with a Human Rights Commission (HRC) order. The Charlottetown Guardian reports that Dagmar and Arnost Cepica, owners of Beach View Bed and Breakfast, must shut down their two-room bed and breakfast and pay $1,000 in damages or else submit to a pro-homosexuality seminar by the Human Rights Commission and allow practicing homosexuals to take rooms in their home.

Last August, Jean Bedard and Simon Corneau, two homosexual men from Montreal filed a complaint with the Prince Edward Island HRC claiming discrimination against their sexual orientation. At the time the Cepicas explained to reporters, "That's the custom that we are used to, and the bed is shared by people, by married people of opposite sex."

The Guardian reported that the settlement came before a final ruling from the HRC. The settlement says in part that the Christian couple "agreed to cease operating a bed and breakfast or any other tourist accommodation and pay the complainants a sum of general damages. Furthermore, if the respondent commenced to operate a tourist facility in the future, they would provide to the commission assurance of compliance with the Human Rights Act."

Greg Howard, executive director of the Human Rights Commission, expressed satisfaction with the settlement. "It was an interesting case because it was a real clash of cultures," said Howard. "The people who operated the bed and breakfast had very strong opinions about the matters that were covered in the complaint but misguided. They honestly didn't believe that they were in non-compliance with the human rights legislation in the province by enforcing the policy that they did."

(The Guardian May 23, 2001)

See link today only:
http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/topstories.htm

PRO-FAMILY GROUP CITES HOMOSEXUALIST 'HARDBALL TACTICS'
WASHINGTON, August 23, 2002 (LSN.ca) - Pro-life activists are seeing an increase in dirty trick tactics by homosexual activists out to deprive pro-family groups of their rights. Sandy Rios, president of Concerned Women for America, cites a systematic pattern by homosexuals who "will stop at nothing to win," including:

* Caving in to homosexual activists, Miami police came to Anthony Verdugo's house on August 16 at 6:00 a.m. -- as if he were a drug criminal - and arrested and handcuffed him on a single count of "falsely certifying a petition," even though Verdugo maintains he certified thousands of signatures legitimately;

* Homosexualist militants in Massachusetts took training sessions on how to harass pro-marriage petitioners by stalking, blocking and creating a scene;

* Homosexualists in Michigan, Florida and Maryland also pretended voters were somehow "duped" into signing pro-family petitions, thus rendering them "fraudulent" and "invalid" when they are legitimate;

* Militants in Maryland routinely harass pro-family petitioners, using "hardball legal tactics" to have a ballot measure cancelled, after state election officials had already certified it.

Rios commented: "Even as they claim to be fighting for civil rights, homosexual militants have shown that they are all too willing to trample over the civil rights of others. Their tactics of harassing and intimidating voters who are simply exercising their citizen's right to petition undermine Americans' freedom and the rule of law."

To read more details see:
http://cwfa.org/library/family/2002-08-20_pr_hs-tactics.shtml

BIG PENALTIES FOR "DISCRIMINATION" AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS
WINNIPEG, Nov 24 (LSN) - Winnipeg Mayor Sue Thompson has refused to proclaim "pink tri-angle" (sic) and "homosexual pride" days. In order to avoid controversy around proclaiming these shameful celebrations, she has stopped issuing civic proclamations altogether as of November 1.

In Ontario, Mayor Dianne Haskett of London and Mayor Bob Morrow of Hamilton also refused to proclaim "gay pride" celebrations. Both were found guilty of "discrimination" by the Ontario Human Rights Commission and fined $10,000. Both were re-elected in the recent province-wide civic elections. In London, where the "gay pride" proclamation was the main issue in the campaign, Haskett received twice as many votes as her nearest rival.

Thanks for the post and links!

CONTINUED PERSECUTION OF THOSE OPPOSED TO HOMOSEXUALITY
FREDERICTON, NB, Jan 8 (LSN) - Fredericton Mayor Brad Woodside is about to join ranks with the mayors of Hamilton and London in being persecuted for refusing to proclaim Gay Pride Week in his city. Roly MacIntyre, the minister responsible for the New Brunswick Human Rights Commission, had threatened to order a board of inquiry to look into the situation if the two sides couldn't negotiate an agreement by Jan. 1, this deadline has been extended to January 23.

The NB Human Rights Commission has already investigated complaints against Woodside's objection to Gay Pride Week brought forward by homosexual activists. The commission found merit in the argument that he's discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. If the human rights inquiry rules against him, he could face a fine similar to the mayors of Hamilton and London who were fined $5,000 and $10,000 respectively for their refusal to submit to the radical demands of homosexual activists.

I've blown your pathetic argument outta the water, and this is your reply? Pathetic (but we expected as much.)

And thank God we have the First Amendment so this bs doesn't happen in the US! You're waxing gloom and doom, like all anti-homosexual um..."arguments."

I saw Fr. Groeschell in Cincinnatti a few years ago he said "you younger men may live to see the confiscation of Church property." I think he was right, and I think your right, we will suffer persecution for taking a Catholic stance. I heard someone say that we are already suffering a "dry-martyrdom" and I think there is truth to that.

Keep hitting them Doc, we have to stand up to these people.

bookmark bump

george wythe masquerades on F.R. as a functional illiterate.
Bible verses regarded as hate literature: Court rules Scripture exposed homosexuals to ridicule

Good work as usual P. I'll save this one for future reference.

Your tag line describes g.w. to a tee. He can't accept the facts without recognizing his own sin.

LOL, I see Senator Santorum is getting a lesson in the 1st ammendment.

The new legislation would strengthen the ability of federal, state and local governments to investigate and prosecute hate crimes based on race, ethnic background, religion, gender, sexual orientation and disability.

You know they're afraid to speak the truth when they use euphamisms like "sexual orientation." What is "sexual orientation" anyway? Is it, say, a man's preference for women with large breasts? Is it a preference for sex to be a little violent? Is it a preference for sex with girlfriends of football fullbacks?

Suppose someone with this latter orientation hits up on the girlfriend of a fullback for the Detroit Lions. If the fullback gets mad and punches this person through the wall into the next room would that be a violation of this law because the act had been motivated by hatred for his "sexual orientation?"

Shalom.

Owens was not allowed to use Bible citations plus an editorial cartoon:

Quoting Bible verses by Owens was allowed in Canada:

"In the 2001 ruling, Saskatchewan Human Rights Board of Inquiry commissioner Valerie Watson emphasized that the panel was not banning parts of the Bible. She wrote that the offense was the combination of the symbol and the biblical references. Owens, in fact, published an ad in 2001, without complaint, that quoted the full text of the passages he cited in the offending 1997 ad."

yes he is, he hasn't even been charged with a crime! Go figure.

Great point... it's not 'homosexuality', it's 'sexual orientation.' Just like it's not 'abortion', it's 'choice.'

Great tag line by the way.

Yeah, not yet, but who knows what's going to happen in a few years if we don't stand up to these deviants.

He certainly has been persectued for his stance.

We're seeing this happen in Canada, where pastors and other people cannot say that homosexuality is a sin. That is now considered a hate crime, and that is exactly what's going to happen here in the United States," she said.

An inflammatory statement not supported by facts.

Sorry, read the original statement.

Here's one more for you, as if I hadn't already disproven your insupportable statement:

LifeSite Daily News

Monday August 20, 2001

CHRISTIAN GROUPS DEFEND PRINTER FINED FOR REFUSING HOMOSEXUAL PRINT JOB

Alliance cites the need for recognition of freedom of religion and conscience in human rights code

TORONTO, Aug 20, 2001 (LSN.ca) - The Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance (CRFA), comprised of the Catholic Civil Rights League, Christian Legal Fellowship and the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada has filed a factum in defense of Christian printer Scott Brockie of Toronto. In February 2000, the Ontario Human Rights Commission found Brockie guilty of discrimination and fined him $5,000 for refusing a printing job from a homosexual activist organization. Brockie appealed the case and it is currently before the Ontario Divisional Court.

The case was originally brought by Ray Brillinger, of The Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives, who filed a human rights complaint under the Ontario Human Rights Code alleging that Brockie discriminated against him on the basis of his sexual orientation. Brockie appealed to the Ontario Divisional Court on the basis that the decision infringes his freedom of religion and conscience. At the time of the decision Brockie, who owns Imaging Excellence, said he had also refused the business of a pro-abortion group. "I'm not prepared to compromise my beliefs for the sake of a printing job," he said.

The CRFA is intervening in the case to argue the "need for recognition of the right to freedom of religion and conscience in the Ontario Human Rights Code." The CRFA gave examples of other situations where a right of conscience could be argued:

(i) a Jewish printer is approached by a person of Palestinian background who, on behalf of a Palestinian cultural group in Canada, asks the Jewish printer to print pamphlets which call for the expulsion of all Jews from Palestine and a return of all occupied territory. The Jewish printer refuses, citing his religious belief that Holy Scripture states that God promised those lands to the Hebrews;

(ii) a Muslim lawyer is approached by EGALE, the prominent gay rights advocacy group, and is asked to act for them in bringing a constitutional challenge to some legislation which denies a benefit to same-sex couples. The lawyer refuses, citing his religious belief that the Koran states that same-sex relationships are contrary to the law of Allah;

(iii) a gay man who runs a printing shop is approached by a religious group that is known for its advocacy for the repeal of legislation, which has granted same-sex couples benefits previously enjoyed only by opposite-sex couples. The group asks the printer to print its annual report. For reasons of conscience, the gay printer refuses to accept the order.

"There can and should be accommodation for conscientious or religious beliefs in human rights legislation," says the CRFA. The CRFA points out that "the Ontario Human Rights Code protects individuals from discrimination on a number of grounds, including sexual orientation. It does not protect causes from such discrimination." The CRFA therefore argues that the Board of Inquiry should have decided that Scott Brockie was within his rights to refuse to do work for a cause that offended his religious beliefs."

The CRFA noted that Brockie has previously done work for gay and lesbian clients. It was not that Brillinger was gay that was the issue. Rather, it was the fact that the Archives is identified as promoting the gay and lesbian cause.

The hearing of this case is scheduled for December 5, 2001.

The factum is posted at:
http://www.christianlegalfellowship.org/Interventions/brockiefactum.html

(c) Copyright: LifeSite Daily News is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).

NEWS TIPS to lsn@lifesite.net or call 1-866-787-9947 or (416) 204-1687 ext. 444

Please help us to continue this service. Mail contributions to: Interim Publishing, Att'n LifeSite, 104 Bond St. E., Toronto, ON M5B 1X9 or contribute on line at http://www.lifesite.net/contribute/lifesite/

Yeah, not yet, but who knows what's going to happen in a few years if we don't stand up to these deviants.

The repeal of the 1st Amendment, maybe? That is a scary thought.