In fact the law is that Catholic education enjoys protection in English Canada and Protestant Education enjoys protection within French Canada.
This is built into the British North America Act 1867 which is the founding statute that created Canada and it was carried forth into the Constitution Acts 1867-1982. As such it is part of the Constitution of Canada.
A protected religious right is meaningless if the courts can supplant their own moral standards for the standards of the church whose rights are ostensibly protected.
There is no statute in Ontario that governs who must be allowed to attend a high school prom.
It is not Holy Mother Church that is breaking the law, it is this judge who is breaking a solemn covenant which was one of the conditions precedent to the colonies agreeing to join in a Confederation.
The School Board will, of course, appeal and this case is probbly on the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, where I would fully expect Quebec to join as amicus curiæ to protect the several rights and prerogatives that were a condition precedent to it joining Confederation.
The same sort of sophistry that is used in your argument is the sort that has been used in the United States to gut the right of citizens to keep and carry arms under the United States Constitution.
Everything within the State! Nothing outside the State! Seig Heil!
Yet at the Nuremberg trials, people were held responsible for their own actions, even if under color of law.
Ahem.. So what exactly does "the funway" mean anyhow??