GAY COOL

GAY? COOL. CHRISTIAN? NOT SO MUCH  
Lorne Gunter      
National Post  Monday 11 Apr 2005  
Page: A16  Section: Editorials  
Byline: Lorne Gunter

Hugh Owen, Chris Kempling, Scott Brockie, Dagmar and Arnost Cepica, and Monsignor John Pereyma Catholic High School -- all of these people and institutions are proof that when religious freedom in Canada runs up against fashionable minority rights, religious freedom always loses.

Despite repeated assurances from politicians and learned experts that neither the Charter nor any other Canadian law threatens the right of Canadians to practice their faiths freely, the truth is far different.

Since the adoption of the Charter 20 years ago, courts -- and the well-financed activist groups that use them to advance their causes -- have established a hierarchy of rights. On this new totem pole, protection of religious belief is at the bottom (right next to property rights, but that's a topic for another day).

I can't say I'm surprised by the reaction my column of last week generated. In it, I defended Fred Henry, the Roman Catholic bishop of Calgary, who is being hauled before the Alberta Human Rights Commission for having the audacity to tell Calgary Catholics, in an open letter last January, that homosexual marriage is contrary to Catholic teaching, and that the government should act aggressively on that teaching.

I also mentioned the Knights of Columbus fraternal Catholic order in Port Coquitlam, B.C., which suffered its own human-rights deprivation of late for having the gall to stand up to the gay-rights juggernaut.

The reaction to my commentary -- letters to the editor, e-mails to me, telephone calls -- was split nearly two-to-one in favour. More tellingly, it was split nearly two-to-one between ordinary worshippers and local preachers, and the "expert" class -- academics, rights pleaders and even some "progressive" church leaders.

The experts insisted that what is obvious to anyone with eyes to see is, in fact, not actually happening at all -- that the freedom of Canadians to practice their creeds as they see fit is not under siege. To insist it is, the experts contend, is to betray a lack of intellectual sophistication.

Okay. I'm going to lay out a few more examples for you, and you tell me whether, as the experts maintain, I've missed something.

In 1997, Saskatchewan Christian Hugh Owens placed an ad in the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix. It cited only the chapter and verse numbers of four Biblical passages that declare active homosexuality a sin -- only the numbers; the passages themselves readers would have had to look up. Next to these were an equal sign and a drawing of two stickmen holding hands, on which was superimposed a circle with a line through it.

Both the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission and a federal judge agreed that gays might find such a depiction hateful -- particularly the Bible citations. Both decreed Mr. Owens had committed a breech of the provincial rights code, even though that code carries a well-defined protection for religious conscience. The court circumvented the code with a bit of logical sleight-of-hand: All major religions preach peace and love. Mr. Owens' ad was hateful. Therefore it couldn't be religious and didn't qualify for the code's protection.

Scott Brockie, a Toronto printer, refused to print material for a gay and lesbian advocacy group. In 2000, a board of inquiry established by the Ontario Human Rights Commission ruled that Mr. Brockie should have done the work. It ordered him to apologize to the gay group and to pay it $5,000.

It ruled, "Brockie remains free to hold his religious beliefs and to practise them in his home, and in his Christian community," but that he must not apply those beliefs to the practice of his business. In the real world, religious rights take a back seat.

Dagmar and Arnost Cepica owned the Beach View Bed and Breakfast in Stratford, PEI, until they shut it down in 2001 rather than adhere to a human rights ruling that they accept gay guests, contrary to their religious beliefs. Chris Kempling, a school counsellor in B.C., was suspended from his job last year, not because he attacked gay rights in the classroom, but because he wrote letters to the editor of his local paper outlining his views on the nature of homosexuality. Last week, he was suspended again for writing the same paper to oppose same-sex marriage.

In 2002, Pereyma Catholic High School tried to prevent Marc Hall, a 17-year-old senior, from bringing his boyfriend (who was not a student) to the graduation prom. An Ontario judge told them Mr. Hall's right not to be singled out for his orientation trumped Catholic schools' right to enforce church doctrine against the practice of homosexuality.

Now, you tell me, who is missing something here, me or our society's self-anointed experts?

And tell me something else. Advocates of same-sex marriage are currently reassuring Canadians their churches and priests will retain the right not to perform same-sex marriage once legislation is passed. How long do you think that assurance will last?  

Lorne Gunter
Columnist/Editorial Writer,
National Post Columnist, Edmonton Journal
Tele: (780) 916-0719
E-mail: lgunter@shaw.ca
Fax: (780) 481-4735
Address: 132 Quesnell Cres NW
Edmonton AB T5R 5P2