Sunday, September 4, 2005

Activist flouts law, faces consequences, whines

Sometimes I fear for law and order in this country. It looks like Marc Emery might be part of a greater trend of disregard here in Canada for the legal system:

(Alberta pastor Reverend Stephen) Boissoin is being hauled before the Human Rights Commission to answer to a complaint filed by Darren Lund, an assistant professor at the University of Calgary. Lund made his complaint after Boissoin published a letter to the editor in the Red Deer Advocate, in which he denounced homosexuality as immoral and dangerous, and called into question new gay-rights curriculums permeating the province’s educational system.
The rights listed in the Charter are clear. Human rights law, the supreme law of the land, prescribes the penalty for disobeying those rights. Boissoin brought this upon himself and has no business complaining about his legal bills or blaming someone else.

Human rights law is so crucial to Canadian society that its proceedings are not required to operate under traditional rules of evidence -- so obviously the people who enforce and adjudicate it are no fools. Did Boissoin think his violation would go unnoticed and unpunished? If so, what an insult to the commission and to the citizens who serve as its eyes and ears.

Do Boissoin and his supporters think he only has to obey the laws he happens to like? What if Boissoin shouted "fire" in a crowded theatre to try to change that law? Hundreds of people could die in the ensuing chaos, all because one man didn't know when to keep his mouth shut. I wonder what his supporters would say then.

In a democratic society we have ways of gradually modifying and augmenting legislation that we don't like so that it favours our own interests more equitably. But instead of voting for the candidate that wishes to implement his views, Boissoin had to write his letter, raising the black flag of anarchy over himself and his church.

The rhetoric of this lawbreaker's supporters gets pretty extreme. Some might say their talk verges on trivializing the evils of the Nazi regime. The author of the following quote was himself busted for writing unlawful letters to the editor:
"Stephen Boissoin of Calgary, is an evangelical pastor who wrote a letter to the editor questioning the promotion of homosexuality in the public school system. A University of Calgary professor has charged him with discrimination under the Alberta Human Rights act. Last May, at a fund-raising dinner for him held in a Calgary hotel, masked homosexual thugs burst into the dining room and disrupted the meeting, chanting 'Right wing bigots go away, Gay Militia is here to stay'. They carried a banner saying 'Liberation: Queer Invasion.' Their tactics remind me of the Nazi Brownshirts of the 1930's."
You can tell the kind of crowd our enforcers are facing, a gang of rights-mockers hooked on the illegal habit of over-the-top rhetoric that got them in hot water in the first place. (HT: Relapsed Catholic.)

You would think one or both would have learned a little respect for the law by now, but, birds of a feather...


Pietr said...

By laws you mean things written in a book of rules somewhere?
By lawmakers do you mean peculiar old men sitting on a bench?
Anyway,talking of laws,the law of quid-pro-quo has finally asserted itself to my blog.
I now have a roll.

DazzlinDino said...

Since when is a letter to the editor grounds for a human rights trial, if that is the case, they would have a hayday at the any newspaper in Canada, what a rediculous concept. Sure I may not agree with the guy, but are we now a country where opinions are to be silenced, if so then the blogging world is in big trouble....

Anonymous said...

I happened to see the video of the "protest" at the fundraising dinner, and apparently this is acceptable behaviour as long as you are pro-gay. But writing letters to the editor criticizing the introduction of pro-gay political propaganda is now a crime.

Boissoin, who has seen the effects on youth who are coerced and manipulated into the gay sex scene, didn't crash anyone's private meeting.

BTW, how exactly was Darren Lund affected by Boission's letter, and why is he entitled to Boission's money?