Canadian Pastor Sentenced because of Free Speech.

[Ghostrider]

Government to pastor: Renounce your faith!
Now banned from expressing moral opposition to homosexuality
Posted: June 09, 2008
10:00 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily


A Canadian human rights tribunal ordered a Christian pastor to renounce his faith and never again express moral opposition to homosexuality, according to a new report.

In a decision dated May 30 in the penalty phase of the quasi-judicial proceedings run by the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal, evangelical pastor Stephen Boisson was banned from expressing his biblical perspective of homosexuality and ordered to pay $5,000 for "damages for pain and suffering" as well as apologize to the activist who complained of being hurt.

According to a report from Pete Vere at the Catholic Exchange, the penalty could foreshadow the possible fate of the Rev. Alphonse de Valk, who also cited the biblical perspective on homosexuality in the nation's debate over same-sex "marriage" and now faces HRC charges.

Boisson wrote a letter to the editor of his local Red Deer, Alberta, newspaper in 2002 denouncing the advance of homosexual activism as "wicked" and stating: "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."

The activist, local teacher Darren Lund, filed a complaint, and the guilty verdict from Lori G. Andreachuk, a lawyer, was handed down Nov. 30, 2007. The latest decision involved the penalty phase of the trial.

"While agreeing that Boisson's letter was not a criminal act, the government tribunal nevertheless ordered the Christian pastor to [stop expressing his opinion]," Vere reported.

Andreachuk noted that Lund, who brought the complaint, wasn't, in fact, injured.

"In this case there is no specific individual who can be compensated as there is no direct victim who has come forward," she wrote.

However, that did not stop her from ordering the payment anyway.

And as for the future, she wrote:

"Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc. shall cease publishing in newspapers, by e-mail, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the Internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals. Further, they shall not and are prohibited from making disparaging remarks in the future about … Lund or … Lund's witnesses relating to their involvement in this complaint. Further, all disparaging remarks versus homosexuals are directed to be removed from current Web sites and publications of Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc.," the lawyer opined.

Andreachuk also ordered Boissoin to apologize for the original letter in the Red Deer Advocate and told the two "offenders" to pay $5,000.

The apology letter, Vere said, "threatens civil liberties in Canada, according to Ezra Levant, an author and lawyer who himself was targeted by an HRC attack."

"[The] government now believes that if it can't convince a Christian pastor that he's wrong, it will just order him to condemn himself?" Levant wrote on his blog. "Other than tribunals in Stalin's Soviet Union and Mao's China, where is this Orwellian 'order' considered to be justice?"

"This is like a Third World jail-house confession – where accused criminals are forced to sign false statements of guilt," Levant wrote. "We don’t even 'order' murderers to apologize to their victims' families. Because we know that a forced apology is meaningless. But not if your point is to degrade Christian pastors."

"In essence, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal is ordering to the minister to renounce his Christian faith, since his opposition to homosexuality is based upon the Judeo-Christian Bible," Vere wrote.

WND reported recently about de Valk, the target of a Human Rights Commission case over his biblical references regarding homosexuality.

"Father [de Valk] defended the [Catholic] Church's teaching on marriage during Canada's same-sex 'marriage' debate, quoting extensively from the Bible, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and Pope John Paul II's encyclicals. Each of these documents contains official Catholic teaching. And like millions of other people throughout the world and the ages – many of whom are non-Catholics and non-Christians — Father believes that marriage is an exclusive union between a man and a woman," Vere wrote.

Vere raised the question that Canada now considers morality a "hate crime."

"If one, because of one's sincerely held moral beliefs, whether it be Jew, Muslim, Christian, Catholic, opposes the idea of same-sex marriage in Canada, is that considered 'hate'?" he asked.

Vere wrote that the response he got from Mark van Dusen, a spokesman for the federal human rights prosecution office, shocked him.

The government agent confirmed the agency investigates complaints but doesn't set public policy or moral standards. He said the agency job is to look at the circumstances and decide whether to advance it or dismiss it.

What is shocking about that, Vere wrote, is the admission that unjustified complaints can be dismissed, yet the case against de Valk has continued now for more than six months.

An extended audio recording between Vere and van Dusen is posted on YouTube

Link

<frustration>
A nice display of civil liberties being "defended". Go activist judges..
</frustration>

~xghost();

[Tirak]

It's got to be a joke, or the equivilent of FOX News, I'm torn between howling laughter, a one raised eyebrow expression and irritated sighing.

[Begbie]

Good job Canada.

[[R-MOD]Saobh]

Moved to "News from the Frontlines & Political Debate"

Even tho this thread has a very good chance on crossing the "Religion" line, I'll let it open for now, hoping people will not stay stuck on the religious aspect.
As this is primarily based on the "hate speech" which does not equate to "free speech".

So behave people otherwise lock and WP

[[R-DEV]Masaq]

Removing my moderator's hat for a moment:

Sod him. We don't allow people to preach in support of terrorism or jihad, why should we allow bigots to preach hatred against gay people? Just because Christinity/Catholicism is one of the cornerstones of Western culture doesn't make this kind of thing acceptable, any more than Western culture ignoring fundemantalist Islamic preachings of a similar nature would be acceptable. To say otherwise is a massive double standard; either women have equal rights to men (such as owning property, being allowed to walk outside without a male escort etc etc, for example), or they don't. Either homosexuals have equal rights as hetrosexuals (such as marriage), or they don't.

Frankly, just like his right to swing his fist ends at my face, his right to free speech ends when he spouts out that rubbish.

[Garabaldi]

lol, nice unbiased source .

Regardless, I agree. We shouldn't be able to silence any opinion we don't particularily like - this isn't North Korea.

"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.

An ironic statement considering his profession.

[SiN|ScarFace]

Do you even have free speech in Canada?

[Garabaldi]

No. We don't have cable, either.

[Ghostrider]

Originally Posted by [R-MOD]Masaq

Removing my moderator's hat for a moment:

Sod him. We don't allow people to preach in support of terrorism or jihad, why should we allow bigots to preach hatred against gay people? Just because Christinity/Catholicism is one of the cornerstones of Western culture doesn't make this kind of thing acceptable, any more than Western culture ignoring fundemantalist Islamic preachings of a similar nature would be acceptable. To say otherwise is a massive double standard; either women have equal rights to men (such as owning property, being allowed to walk outside without a male escort etc etc, for example), or they don't. Either homosexuals have equal rights as hetrosexuals (such as marriage), or they don't.

Frankly, just like his right to swing his fist ends at my face, his right to free speech ends when he spouts out that rubbish.

I don't know if you (or others) have noticed, but there're a couple of points you should consider.

• The guy was prosecuted because of his faith. He could've had the same opinion and be an [insert other faith here] and no one would care.
  
  
• The guy preaches against a particular life-style not against a particular group or person. Its very different and you dont seem to notice the difference. He's not preaching against gay people, he's preaching against the gay lifestyle. See it? And why is that being 'a bigot'? Its nonesense.
  
  
• The fact that he disagrees with the lifestyle he speaks against is only an expression of his personal opinion with his faith as foundation. I've seen videos of Islamists preaching death and walking on top of Canadian/American flags in the middle of the streets (yeah, inside America and Canada) and the people stand to watch and dont do anything. They dont even get offended by the looks of it.
  
  
• You cannot compare what a terrorist preacher preaches against what a christian pastor preaches and say that there's a double standard, because they preach opposite things. An Islamist would preach death (and if given the chance) kill gay people. The pastor only speaks against the lifestyle.
  
  
• Regarding gay marriage, gay activists have even physically assaulted pastors because of their faith, whereas I still need to see a pastor doing the same to them. Of course, that's not considered hate-anything. No one censors/punishes gay activists for what they promote (they even hold entire clown fests --I mean parades--), so why should non-gays be censored? I'm not asking for gay people to be censored, as I would be against that, but I'm obviously against the pastor being ensored, punished, and sentenced.
  
  
• Furthermore, as you stated, christianity is one of the "cornerstones" of their (and american) society, and those societies are what they are today because of it. What bussiness do they (government and oppresive minorities) have in putting the weight of the "law" on a pastor?
  
  
• Its also interesting, if not ironic, to see so-called groups that promote "civil liberties" working on punishing a christian, in particular, for speaking against a lifestyle he disagrees with. Ever seen a muslim prosecuted (at least a complain?) for what they preach? Of course not...that would be an act of persecution against them and, likely, yet another call for jihad.

Yeah I almost forgot, where're the pro-separation-of-church-and-state dudes now? Yeah, we agree, there's a double standard.


On a note Masaq, I posted the thread because its focus is on free speech being censored, not to talk about religion..

Even if he wasnt a christian, why should anyone punish (or even complain about) a person that does not hold your views? It is not a crime to be offended by somebody else's opinion...although Canada has now become an exception when people of a particular non-jihadist faith disagree.

It's beyond ridiculous imho..

Originally Posted by Garabaldi

lol, nice unbiased source

Yeah, I forgot the main stream media has everything I need to know..

Lol Garabaldi, hope you enjoyed your vacations, welcome back and stay on track


~xghost();

[SiN|ScarFace]

Well if you don't have free speech then he can't say what he wants. I looked it up and it says they added the discrimination speech part in 2004, which is what I assume they used to convict him. You should be able to say whatever you want, I even support the crazies at the Westboro Baptist Church to be able to spew their hate speech. If it is merely taking trash, no one forces you to listen just like no one forces you to read crap on an internet thread if you don't like it.