Posted on 12/20/2013 6:48:05 AM PST by doug from upland
‘Open season on Christians now’: Biblical views on homosexuality proscribed in Whatcott ruling
by Peter Baklinski
Thu Mar 14, 2013 16:24 EST
OTTAWA, Ontario, March 14, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – While some Christian groups around the country have interpreted the recent Supreme Court decision in the Whatcott case as having cast the Bible in a friendly light, one of Canada’s most seasoned freedom fighters begs to differ.
Ezra Levant, known for his prolonged battle with the Human Rights Commissions, slammed the ruling saying that it “now makes the Bible hate speech”. Calling the ruling “100 plus pages of dangerous mush,” Levant said that the country’s lawyers and Human Rights Commissions are “rejoicing” since it means “open season on Christians now.”
Bill Whatcott
“Judge Rothstein [...] just wrote a judgement saying that hating gay sex is tantamount to hating gays, so the Bible, it must follow, is hate speech,” said the lawyer, political activist, and broadcaster for Sun News.
The Supreme Court made it clear in its ruling that Bill Whatcott’s use of the Bible to reach out to homosexuals was problematic.
In one flyer, Whatcott called homosexual acts taught to children “filthy,” contending that children were more interested in playing Ken and Barbie than “learning how wonderful it is for two men to sodomize each other.” The judges took issue with his use of the biblical word “sodomy” since they said it singled out “two men” and was therefore a direct target against a specific group of people. (The flyers can be viewed at the end of the Supreme Court decision).
In the ruling, the Court first agreed with a lower court that found that “a human rights tribunal or court should exercise care in dealing with arguments to the effect that foundational religious writings violate the Code."
But then the judges stated, quoting the lower court: “While the courts cannot be drawn into the business of attempting to authoritatively interpret sacred texts such as the Bible, those texts will typically have characteristics which cannot be ignored if they are to be properly assessed in relation to s. 14(1)(b) [the hate-speech section] of the Code.”
The judges make it clear that some Bible passages contain “characteristics” that a competent judge will not “ignore” when that passage is viewed in light of the hate speech section of the Code.
"While use of the Bible as a credible authority for a hateful proposition has been considered a hallmark of hatred,” the judges stated, “it would only be unusual circumstances and context that could transform a simple reading or publication of a religion’s holy text into what could objectively be viewed as hate speech.”
Christians who use the Bible as a springboard to promote a Christian vision of sexuality, which includes, among other things, teaching that homosexual acts are sinful, could be accused of promoting hate speech, according to the judges.
And Christians like Whatcott who say that they love homosexuals with a Christian love while at the same time hating what they do, no longer have a defense. With regards to hate speech, the distinction between ‘sin and sinner’ no longer applies, ruled the Court.
“Courts have recognized a strong connection between sexual orientation and sexual conduct and where the conduct targeted by speech is a crucial aspect of the identity of a vulnerable group, attacks on this conduct stand as proxy for attacks on the group itself,” the Court stated.
Michael Plaxton, law professor at the University of Saskatchewan, did not miss the implications of this statement for Christians.
“The court goes to great pains to argue that its ruling in Whatcott does not bar religious persons and groups from expressing their views about sexual morality in the public sphere. That may be true in principle, but in practice, I am not so sure,” he wrote in a commentary that appeared in the Globe and Mail.
“For many Christians, the fact that a sexual practice is engaged in by members of the same sex is spiritually and morally significant. Requiring them to frame their arguments against certain sexual practices as though the gender of the participants is irrelevant will tend to distort their views.”
“We should not kid ourselves, either, that this ruling won’t affect the expressive freedom of those too unsophisticated or inarticulate to construct an argument addressing the merits of sexual practices without disparaging those who engage in them,” Plaxton wrote.
Commentator Jonathan Kay, while being pro-gay, saw the ruling as a blatant case of “anti-Christian censorship”.
“Whatcott can’t be considered a win for free-speech champions — especially religious conservatives,” he wrote in a commentary for the National Post.
“And there is no sugar-coating the fact that — despite its claim to be ‘balancing’ the rights of all concerned — the Court effectively has privileged the protection of gay Canadians over the right of religious Christians to promote what they view as the established, Biblical take on homosexuality.”
As Gwen Landolt of REAL Women of Canada pointed out, the Supreme Court has “picked up ‘sexual orientation’ and slammed ‘religious freedom’ with it, and given it a big wallop as with a baseball bat.”
Levant sees the ruling as the beginning of the end of religious rights for Canadians of every faith tradition.
“I think that in the future, this law will be used not just to go after Christians, but [to go after] Muslim radicals [and] to censor Jews,” said Levant on his show.
“Look, this ruling is un-Canadian, it’s unfree, it’s incoherent, it’s contrary to the court’s good trend towards freedom till now. It’s anti-Christian. It’s going to cause nuisance lawsuits to bloom. But perhaps, most of all, it’s just pitiful,” he said.
Prominent journalist Andrew Coyne agreed: “If we accept the bedrock premise of a free society, that government is its servant and not its master, then it is up to the state, always, to ask the citizens’ permission before it intrudes on their liberty, and to prove its necessity: it is never the citizen’s obligation to show why he may remain unmolested. That spirit is lamentably absent from the Court’s reasoning,” he wrote in a commentary for the National Post.
From the viewpoint of Christians, it is people who identify themselves as ‘homosexual’ have lost the most. Many Christians, chilled by the fear of legal action, may no longer preach against, or offer counsel to help people out of the homosexual lifestyle, which has been well documented to lead to substantial physical, emotional, and spiritual harm.
Others though will not be deterred, seeing it as their sacred duty to bring the Good News to others even when it is deemed illegal to do so, as it was in the early days of Christianity. For his part, Bill Whatcott has, since the ruling, continued to hand out flyers.
How did Canada get to this point, and how will it ever return to sanity?
The left will try to keep it under cover for as long as they have to, but they’re out to criminalize Christian beliefs.
I’m betting if you pointed this out as proof,
your average sheeperal would deny/defend it by saying
“that’s in Canada, not here”.
I have thought for a while that what would finally tip this against the homosexual lobby is when the polygamists begin to really come out from the woodwork and assert THEIR “rights.” We’ll see.
I wish conservatives would point out that both Islam and Judaism consider sodomy a sin too.
It’s not just the Christians.
I sometimes think the LGBT crowd are just pawns for leftists who want to criminalize religious belief using sensitivity to gays as a cover to get it accomplished.
It doesn;t matter...to them...if Phil Robertson stated that allah commanded him to shoot all sodomites, do you believe A&E would have fired him?
The same way we're getting there. Bit by bit...one piece at a time. The gay activists (and every other culture war activist)start out with what seems to most people a reasonable proposition. Gays shouldn't be denied jobs, for instance. That becomes the prevailing ideal but soon morphs into gays should be given preferance. And on and on and on.
I'm 55 years old. At no point in my first 35 years would I ever have believed that this country would even consider legitimizing such a deviant, evil, perverted concept as same sex marriage! But here we are!
It appears that you doubt your own senses and reasoning.
Probably because the leftists constantly use the tactic of ridiculing people as kooks when the truth is told about their agenda, and you don't want to be labeled.
Let me state it plainly, paraphrasing your post:
The LGBT crowd are just pawns for leftists who want to criminalize religious belief CHRISTIANITY using sensitivity to gays as a cover to get it accomplished.
Notice they don't condemn Islamists' anti-homosexual beliefs? There's a reason for that.
Some years ago, Canada specifically outlawed the reading of scriptures that condemn homosexual behavior, even by pastors in the pulpit, and prosecuted at least one pastor. Eventually that was overturned by Canada's high court. So what's up with this most recent assault by the anti-Christian brownshirts? Hopefully, the earlier precedent will provide grounds for appeal.
These "human rights commissions" in one place or another, stuffed with aggrieved minorities, have tried to take the place of legislatures. The Canadian one hounded Mark Steyn for "hate speech" critical of Islamist terrorists (eventually, after making his life a misery, they lost and Steyn won). Such a commission in Philadelphia hounded a sandwich vendor in his elder years who had a sign asking customers to speak English, even though his parents had immigrated to the U.S. and had to learn English when they got here (after making his old age a misery, they lost and the cheesesteak vendor won).
First it was PC run amok; now, when they attack free speech and religious freedom, its fascism.
Canadian Pastor Fined after Speaking Against Homosexuality
Posted By CitizenLink Staff On July 15, 2010Human-rights tribunal also orders him to stop sharing his Bible-based beliefs.
A Canadian human-rights tribunal has ordered a Christian pastor to renounce his faith and never again express moral opposition to homosexuality, WorldNetDaily reported.
The Alberta Human Rights Tribunal ordered the Rev. Stephen Boissoin to stop expressing his biblical perspective of homosexuality and to pay $7,000 in “damages for pain and suffering.”
The decision came after Boissoin wrote a letter to the editor of his local Red Deer, Alberta, newspaper in 2002 that included this statement: “Children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights.”
Darren Lund, a professor at the University of Calgary, complained about the letter. “Dr. Darren Lund does not believe my views are politically correct,” Boissoin told Family News in Focus. “He believes they are immoral, and he believes I need to be re-educated.”
Dave Quist, executive director of the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada, said the case has broad implications.
“(The commission is) being used and abused … making restrictions on people,” he said. “That should be a warning sign for not only in Canada, but across the U.S., as well.”
Scripture makes it crystal clear in these last days that this is all coming. Paul speaks clearly of it. Christians are going to be persecuted. Our Lord made it abundantly clear that in the Last Days these people would come out of the woodwork to hurl their hate, abuse, murder, and such on those who Believed In HIM!!! Hunker down. Put your total faith in the Lord. Be prepared to defend your beliefs at every turn. Do not deny Him. He is certainly NOT going to deny you, IF YOU BELIEVE IN HIM. In times like this, simply, LOOK TO THE CROSS. IT IS ALL ABOUT THE CROSS!!
I sincerely hope so. Let's get to where we are logically going directly, so we can start shooting while we still have significant numbers.
Putting a modifier before the word “rights” ought to be declared a crime against humanity.
Okay, so logically, then, hating heterosexual rape is tantamount to hating heterosexuals.
Right, homosexual marriage is the chink in the armor that all the other perverted anti-Biblical lifestyle have been waiting for and will exploit to push through their agendas.
Including NAMBLA lobbying for lowering the age of consent.
From a couple of years ago:
More at the LinkIf same-sex marriage, why not polygamy?
I cannot and will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God. Amen.
Martin Luther
So we see this again with Phil. Maybe we need to remember this verse more for use against other PC policies.
Yes, the homosexuals are all "gay" and gleeful about men/men and women/women being able to marry, which is just a ploy to legitimize one of the many perverted practices now being touted as "normal." (All the rest of the "lifestyles" are waiting in the wings cheering them on.)
So were the homosexuals in Hitler's SS until they had passed their "use by" date and he had them all killed.
The fairies and fags are all excited about how they are being accepted but, one way or another, it will bring their doom.
Of course Islam calls for the death of all "infidels."
As was pointed out on another thread the other day, Iran just kills homosexuals when they are found out. Which is why their leader says that there are no homosexuals in Iran. Well yeah LOL
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.