(A4c4c) Bill C-250 - protecting sodomy and other sexual perversions in Canada

As of this date, 07-02-24, this folder contains 9 items. ******* item 1 "GAY" RIGHTS VERSUS FREE SPEECH ******* item 2 FINAL DEBATE BEGINS ON BILL C-250 ******* item 3 FREE SPEECH UNDER ATTACK BY C-250 ******* item 4 SVEND ROBINSON IS NOT MY LEADER ******* item 5 HAS CANADA LOST IT'S MIND? ******* item 6 ECP NEWS RELEASE ******* item 7 CRIMINALIZING WORDS TOO CLOSE TO THOUGHT CONTROL ******* item 8 OH, CANADA, WE HARDLY KNEW YE.... ******* item 9 LETTER TO "TEMISKAMING SPEAKER" ********************************************************************************************************************* item 1 "GAY" RIGHTS VERSUS FREE SPEECH ******* National Post ******* Saturday, June 07, 2003 ******* On Friday, the House of Commons held the first of two hours of debate on Bill C-250, a private member's bill moved by B.C. New Democrat Svend Robinson. A vote on the bill could take place as early as June 18. Mr. Robinson and his supporters claim the legislation is nothing but a harmless amendment to the hate-crime provisions of the Criminal Code. They insist it merely extends to gays and lesbians the same protection against genocide already afforded to visible and religious minorities. Were that the case, we would have no trouble endorsing Mr. Robinson's bill. Who would? ******* But C-250 is hardly so benign. In truth, it is a potential threat to Canadians' freedom of speech, one that could silence critics of gay rights -- including priests, rabbis and imams who cite the Bible, the Koran and other traditional religious texts that proscribe homosexuality. ******* Mr. Robinson is, as he demurs, technically only seeking to amend s. 318 of the Criminal Code, to add "sexual orientation" to the list of categories protected against those who would "advocate or promote genocide." Fair enough. But the definition of "identifiable groups" so protected also pertains to s. 319, which makes it a criminal offence to utter public statements that "willfully promote hatred against any identifiable group." ******* Section 319 carries an explicit exemption from prosecution for statements made in "good faith" stemming from one's religious convictions. That would seem to protect sermonizing against homosexuality as a sin. But recall that last December, a federal court in Saskatchewan equated Bible passages condemning homosexuality with hate literature, because those passage made gays and lesbians "suffer in respect of their feelings and self-respect." Saskatchewan's human rights legislation outlawing hate speech carries an explicit exemption for religious beliefs, just as the Criminal Code does. Yet the judge in the Saskatchewan case ruled that such an exemption did not extend to "hateful" remarks made in the name of Christianity. It is hardly "far-fetched" and "fear mongering," as Mr. Robinson has charged, to think that a crusading judge, armed with C-250, might similarly shred protection for religious speech against homosexuality at the national level, too. ******* Pro-family groups, evangelical Christians and no less august a body than the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops have warned against the hidden agenda of Bill C-250. In April, the CCCB told Martin Cauchon, the federal justice minister that "what troubles us is the possibility that someone who finds the expression of the beliefs of the Catholic Church on the sexual conduct of homosexual persons too blunt or too harsh will invoke the Criminal Code to silence the teaching. We are aware that the supporters of this Bill suggest that this concern is without legal foundation but ... we are not willing to rely on these assurances." ******* Neither are we. Bill C-250 is too much of a threat to free speech to be permitted to pass the Commons. ******* � Copyright 2003 National Post ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 2 FINAL DEBATE BEGINS ON BILL C-250 ******* June 4 -5, 2003 ******* Members of Parliament today began the final debate on a private member�s bill that a broad cross-section of family advocacy groups and faith-based organizations, including Focus on the Family Canada, are concerned has the potential to muzzle free speech for all Canadians. Three amendments were proposed during the debate that would potentially lessen the impact of C-250. Liberal MP Derek Lee introduced an amendment that would offer a defense if an opinion based on a religious text was expressed �in good faith�. Canadian Alliance MP Vic Toews introduced two amendments� one that would require the consent of the attorney general to prosecute and a second that limits the definition of �hate propaganda�. ******* Yet Derek Rogusky, Focus Canada�s vice-president for family policy, doubts that the bill will be adequately amended to protect Charter rights. �The difficulty is the way that the courts have interpreted freedom of religion. I�m not sure that you could pass any amendment that would constrain the courts from potentially interpreting hatred in a very wide manner,� he says. �We�ve seen that when sexual orientation and religious rights collide, sexual orientation more often than not is favored by the courts.� ******* Sponsored by New Democrat MP Svend Robinson, Bill C-250 seeks to expand the hate propaganda provisions in the Criminal Code � sections 318 (�advocates or promotes genocide�) and 319 (�incites hatred against any identifiable group�) � to include sexual orientation. Opponents of the bill worry that gay rights activists would use it against anyone who questions their lifestyle � even to the point of trying to have the courts ban as �hate literature� passages in the Bible and other sacred texts that condemn homosexuality. �Gay groups are constantly seeking through the courts and human rights commissions to punish and silence their critics,� wrote Edmonton Journal columnist Lorne Gunter earlier this week. �Bill C-250 will give them one more very powerful club with which to beat down those who dare oppose them.� ******* Although private member�s bills rarely get passed into law, this bill could prove the exception. In May 2002, it passed second reading or approval in principle with only about 15 MPs on hand for the vote. At the Justice Committee, an attempt by Toews to effectively kill C-250 was met with a filibuster by Robinson. As a result, the bill was sent back to the House of Commons on May 27 with no amendments � and also with almost no substantive debate having taken place. ******* Still, Rogusky remains confident that C-250 can be defeated � for two reasons. First, he points out that MPs have had no real opportunity until now to debate this bill. �And I think when they begin to do that, they�ll see just how poorly written this bill is, and how it�s based on a law that is itself poorly written,� he says. Second, says Rogusky, �There have been a lot of calls, letters, emails to MPs in opposition to this bill � and not just from the Christian community, but from those in other faith communities and even those who are not necessarily tied to any faith community. I think that�s causing a lot of MPs to sit up and take notice.� ******* It is important that Canadians continue to contact their MPs to request that Parliament defeat Bill C-250. As this matter is urgent, you should call your MP today to register your concerns. Telephone contact numbers for MPs are available on the internet or you can find your MP�s local constituency office information in the blue pages of your telephone directory. Check out Focus on the Family Canada�s action guide on Bill C-250 for more help on this very important legislation. ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 3 FREE SPEECH UNDER ATTACK BY C-250 ******* From: "Roy Hamel" ******* To: Undisclosed-Recipient@, ******* Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2003 12:52:43 -0400 ******* Will Bill C-250 Shut Down Free Speech in Canada? ******* by Rev. Royal Hamel ******* Prime Minister Jean Chretien has called for national discussion among Canadians on same-sex marriage. But a little known bill under consideration in Parliament could ensure that such debate will be short lived indeed. ******* On June 6,2003 an obscure private member�s bill was debated in the House of Commons as part of third and final reading. If parliament passes this proposed legislation sponsored by Svend Robinson, NDP Member of Parliament for Burnaby-Douglas, freedom of speech will be diminished in Canada. The bill proposes to amend the Criminal Code of Canada by adding the category of �sexual orientation� to section 318, which deals with genocide and to section 319 that deals with hate crime. Sexual orientation would thus be added to the existing protected categories of color, race, religion, and ethnic origin. Persons convicted under one of these sections would be liable to five years in prison in the case of genocide and two years in prison in the case of hate crime. ******* The effect of Bill C-250 will be to make it very dangerous to publicly speak or publish anything that could be considered negative about homosexuality. Such comments could be considered as hate speech punishable by law. For example, to publicly argue that homosexuals should not be allowed to donate blood because of the risk of HIV/AIDS transmission might well be construed as a type of hate speech. ******* Most people think of genocide as something like the massacres that happened in Rwanda or Kosovo. But, Janet Epp Buckingham, legal counsel for Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, makes the point that genocide can be defined very broadly. So broadly, in fact, that to state that homosexuality is not a fixed state but is capable of being changed may well qualify as genocidal speech ******* The Bible itself in various places has such strong language on homosexuality that certain passages might be proscribed as homophobic literature. Some pastors who dare to speak on homosexual texts of scripture may even spend time in jail. However the more likely scenario is that few will even be charged, for the vast majority will be silenced by intimidation. In fact any religion that opposes homosexual behavior, whether Islam, Sikhism, Orthodox Judaism, or Christianity, faces the same danger of free speech restrictions. But many non-religious people also oppose the homosexual lifestyle on purely secular, social and medical grounds. Their voices too, will be silenced. ******* In the hate speech section (319, subsection 2) there are certain defenses listed, among them a religious defense that might shield one from charges and/or successful prosecution. However our activist courts to date have not at all taken religious exemption very seriously, and therefore the stated defenses are largely illusory. Furthermore, the very possibility of a crippling lawsuit as well as adverse publicity in the media will inevitably cause a chill on free speech. Will the average citizen dare to write a letter to an editor criticizing some aspect of homosexuality while the sword of a lawsuit hangs over their head? ******* What about the Prime Minister�s recent call for a national discussion on the subject of same-sex marriage? It is highly questionable that debate will continue if Bill C-250 becomes law. Many are convinced that passage of this bill will shut down all criticism of homosexuality simply because it will be too dangerous to risk even the possibility of a lawsuit. ******* We take it for granted as Canadians that our parliamentarians will guard our freedom of _expression. How then was it even possible that a hugely important bill affecting freedom of speech passed second reading with only one hour of debate? How was it possible that no political party during debate rejected the basic principle of this restrictive bill? How is it possible that so many media watchdogs have overlooked such a dangerous piece of legislation? ******* Bill C-250 will very soon be back in the House of Commons for continuation of third reading and final vote. In fact this could happen as quickly as the coming week. Many people are convinced that this hate speech bill will become law. If so it will be one of the most egregious attacks on free speech this country has ever seen. And though this is an NDP Private Members bill, let no one doubt that without Liberal support it would never have made it this far. ******* Perhaps the best we can hope for are amendments that may preserve a measure of free _expression on the topic of homosexuality in Canada. But in the meantime the fight is not over and those who care about free speech in Canada should immediately contact their Member of Parliament on this dangerous bill. Let us not forget, � the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.�(Edmund Burke) ******* Royal M. Hamel, Guelph, Ontario ******* June 8, 03 ******* [email protected] ******* "When the principles that run against your deepest convictions begin to win the day, then the battle is your calling, and peace has become sin. You must at the price of dearest peace lay your convictions bare before friend and enemy with all the fire of your faith." Abraham Kuyper ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 4 SVEND ROBINSON IS NOT MY LEADER ******* by John McKeller ******* From: Robert A Jason ******* Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 10:29 PM ******* Dear Friends: ******* It is now past 10 PM Sunday and I have just read this breathtaking piece sent in to me by John McKeller, well-known homosexual and leader of HOPE (Homosexuals Opposed to Pride Extremism) who is thankfully on our side in fighting gay activism and the gay agenda. It is so powerful, so eye-popping that I must send it to you right away. ******* Please retain this revealing document in your file as a proof that not all homosexuals are extremists like Svend Robinson and ilk who shove their gay agenda down our collective throats. ******* ----- Original Message ----- ******* From: John McKellar ******* Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 9:17 PM ******* Subject: Svend Robinson is not my leader ******* file:///Macintosh%20HD/Netscape%20Communicator%AA%20Folder/REAL%20Women%20Address ******* Gay activists are pushing to get Hate Crime Legislation and Same-sex Marriage codified before summer recess and on time for Gay Pride celebrations. Most gays and lesbians neither need nor want this. Attached is an address I gave in Svend Robinson country which speaks to these issues. This will be followed by my brief to the Parliamentary Standing Committee which you are likely receiving for a second time, since it was sent to all MP's and MPP's in April. Please circulate and distribute. ******* John McKellar -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ******* There's HOPE for the World ******* Homosexuals Opposed to Pride Extremism ******* [email protected] ******* REAL Women Address ******* March 2003 ******* First of all, thank you for inviting me to Svend Robinson country. Now I'm sure some of you are thinking that this poor lad from Ontario is geographically challenged and doesn't realize that Vancouver is a few hundred kilometers down the road. But, alas, we're all one big happy province and I wouldn't need to address you today if Svend's gay activism didn't impact this beautiful valley. In fact, he may have sent a clandestine observer to monitor my speech for hate and intolerance. Goodness me! Perhaps I should engage in "safe-talk" by putting a giant condom over my head. Well, isn't that they teach in school these days? Condoms protect you from everything...so why not hate, intolerance, bigotry, homophobia and heterosexism? ******* Let me assure you, even as a young, radical college student, I had no time for the clubby, leftist lemmings who comprised the early gay activists. They were dull, they were depressing, they always looked and acted as if they were born to be offended and victimized, they could never discourse for more than 5 minutes without hitting some tiresome barrier of resentment or ideology. So basically, I just avoided and ignored them because they had nothing to say to me or for me. Neither I, nor those I gravitate towards as friends or associates, wear the mantle of victimhood particularly well. If I'm harassed or discriminated against, I get more satisfaction from dealing directly with the problem myself. That's what builds character and prepares one for the roadblocks of life that everybody faces - not just gays and lesbians - everybody. ******* Occasionally, someone will try to tweak me by saying, 'come on John, if it weren't for the activists, you couldn't write or speak as you do'. Well, alleluia baby! And if it weren't for the Suffragettes, I probably wouldn't be here today either. Any successful movement must have a beginning and an end, and must focus on worthwhile goals. In 1967, Pierre Trudeau supposedly liberated us when he said "the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation". Subsequently, matters of privacy and discrimination were laudably and necessarily dealt with in the early 1970's. But today, the bedrooms of the nation are in everybody's faces. Today, it's all about benefits, privileges, social engineering, nihilism and redefining normalcy. Today, it's all about blurring every distinction between personal and political issues and vigorously stifling any attempts at discussion or debate. Believe me, my life would be much simpler if I didn't have to contend with all of this. But how can I sit still when my public image is embarrassingly represented by a small but vociferous clique of radicals bent on making the whole world their closet? How can I sit still when the mainsteam media constantly gives unequivocal support to the lies, myths, distortions and propaganda of modern gay activism? How can I sit still when my freedoms are being threatened and the traditions and institutions of my country are being compromised? ******* So I formed HOPE (Homosexuals Opposed to Pride Extremism) to give a voice to gays and lesbians who choose to live with dignity and discretion, who don't wake up every day looking for discrimination under the bed, and who don't go running to the governments, the courts or the human rights commissions for a lifetime of therapeutic preferences. ******* The 19th century writer, Oscar Wilde, is revered by many in the gay and lesbian community but, believe me, if he were alive now, he'd be totally exasperated with the whining, hysterical malcontents who dominate todays gay lobby. The unhappy truth is that homosexuality will never be fully accepted by the heterosexual majority who are obeying the dictates not of 'bigoted' society or religion, but of procreative nature. Whatever society teaches or doesn't teach about homosexuality, no gay or lesbian, surrounded overwhelmingly by heterosexuals, will feel at home in his or her sexual and emotional world, even in the most tolerant of cultures. At a young age we learn the rituals of deceit, impersonation and appearance, and anyone who believes political, social or even cultural revolution will change this fundamentally is denying reality. Yet, this alienation and desperation deepens our artistic insight and allows us to create civilization. Look at such historical icons as Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Tchaikovsky, Somerset Maugham, Gore Vidal - who were homosexual and who undoubtedly experienced hardship and repression. But look what they gave to the world. Look how they advanced the cultural heritage. They were too creative, cultivated and cosmopolitan to be concerned with the trivialities of sexual pride, queer studies, diversity and whatever other pop-culture banality dominates our modern landscape. ******* Now compare those cultural giants with the likes of Svend Robinson - who fancies himself as a leading pioneer and revolutionary - but whose self-inflicted martyrdom and incessant demands are so unrepresentative of, and so demeaning to the civilized majority of gays and lesbians. To my radical brothers and sisters, sexual orientation is not only a lifestyle, but a religion and a career. It's their whole identity. How absurd and how sad. From the exalted creativity of the Renaissance, to the vulgarity of Gay Pride, we've managed to dumb ourselves down to the level of barnyard animals. We've also managed to overpoliticize and polarize viewpoints, labelling people pro-gay or anti-gay with little room between. ******* As an openly gay male, I have no problem conceding that heterosexuality is and always will be the great human norm. But I'm sick and tired of a media culture that faciley equates homosexuality with heterosexuality and asks no deep questions about human psychology beyond the superficial liberal-vs-conservative, freedom-vs-oppression dichotomy. And I'm sick and tired of the sentimental, feel-good, liberal propaganda that conceals and denies the blatant Roman Empire decadence and compulsive, tunnel-vision promiscuity of so many gay men's lives. ******* Before the Stonewall rebellion - which was the genesis of modern gay liberation - gays and lesbians mixed quite freely, socially, and in the bars. But in the 1970's, gay men, feeling ebullient from their newfound freedom and confidence, segregated themselves and rapidly descended into a bacchanalia of narcissism and promiscuity which eventually collapsed into the hell of AIDS. Then midway through the AIDS epidemic, the media, having ignored homosexuality or treated it in a lurid manner, did a quick flip-flop under activist pressure, and now continues it's unthinking policy of parroting the gay establishment party-line on every occasion. But it's not a media conspiracy. We need to be careful and avoid using the 'C' word, because it makes us vulnerable to mockery and marginalization and detracts from the essence of the message. Rather than a conspiracy, it's a mindset and an attitude that is born from various sources - one being a widespread shift in public morality - another being that arts and media are filled with gays and lesbians - and, of course, we can't ignore the intimidation tactics which gay activists have honed to perfection, and with which I have had plenty of first hand experience. ******* In 1998, I was invited to write an op-ed piece for the Ottawa Citizen in which I criticised the extremism and excesses of Gay Pride. Now I don't really expect everyone to agree with my outspoken opinions and I certainly welcome challenge, confrontation and opposition. But the very day the article appeared, the self-annointed leaders of the gay community demanded a meeting with the publisher and editor of the newspaper and demanded to know why they printed my essay. What a joke! What a hissy fit! They could easily shut me up by smartening up, but they are so blinded by their fanaticism that they don't realize that every time they resort to these Stalinist tactics, they make me look good. They give me credibility and justification. ******* Another egregious example of media bias is the ever partial-reporting of the Matthew Sheppard murder. For sure, this was a brutal and barbaric crime and I'd be happy to see his killers fry. But I'm also disturbed at the canonization of Matthew as the patron saint of hate crimes. His sexual proclivity was cruising for "rough trade", which means he was attracted to his assailants precisely because they were scuzzy punks whose look and manner vitually screamed trouble. He doesn't deserve to burn in hell as Fred Phelps constantly rages. But rational public discourse about his destructive behavior could help save lives - especially among gay youth. So shame on the media for placing political correctness ahead of safety and responsibility. ******* A well respected Toronto journalist recently expressed to me her dismay that, despite the mainstreaming of Gay Pride, teenagers are still being harassed. Sorry, but I'm afraid the connection is lost on me. For years, I've been warning that the primary contribution of Gay Pride is to reinforce every public prejudice against us and to accelerate the inevitable backlash. When well meaning but foolish politicians, such as Alan Rock or Joe Clark, march in our cheezy, sleazy pride parades, they're not doing us any favours. The media pronounces them cool, enlightened and compassionate, but, like the Emperors New Clothes, the naked eye sees awkward sychophants. Or as my beloved lesbian author and professor of humanities, Camille Paglia, has said, "If you don't swing with the sodomites, you're nowheresville on the A-list". ******* Now if you happen to be the mayor of any municipality, don't even think about not issuing an official proclamation for gay pride, unless you want to find yourself in front of a human rights tribunal. I realize that Kelowna has managed to dodge this bullet for the time being, but there will be other years, other events and other mayors, and who knows what the future will bring. But this relentless effort toward mass education and forced compliance cannot be achieved without fascist obliteration of all individual freedoms. And since freedom is a hell of a lot more important than political correctness or tolerance, you can rest assured that any perceived threat to freedom will result in a societal backlash which will guarantee oppression of all homosexuals. And gay males, especially, are forever on the edge of a precipice because, in a political cataclysm, we're always the first to be purged. ******* It's important and essential to distinguish that the human condition is capable of both creative and destructive conduct, and that a civilized society recognizes and upholds this distinction. Throughout history, homosexuals have always been at the forefront of creativity in art, music, fashion, literature etc. In recent times, however, we have massacred our most promising by ignoring, tolerating or embracing destructive conduct. Indeed, it is civilized and compassionate to treat all human beings with love, respect and concern. But it is also civilized and compassionate to discriminate between creative and destructive behaviour. Candid discussion and constructive criticism of aberrant conduct does not denigrate the human being and does not imply or encourage discrimination. In fact, the correct and conventional meaning of "discrimination" has always been "refinement, perception, the ability to form opinions and the ability to discern", but, these days, it's been hijacked by the language and thought police who have fallaciously designated it a pejorative. ******* Another word whose classical and true meaning has been distorted by current pop-culture and political correctness, is 'pride'. We've practically deified the word, and like Stalinists, we persecute and prosecute those who fail to pay homage. The dictionary defines pride as, 'inordinate self esteem, an overweening opinion of one's own qualities and attainments that give rise to superiority over and contempt for others'. (Ha! it is any wonder that the gay lobby has designated this word as it's chief mascot?) Pride is also one of the seven deadly sins; it's destructive and divisive; it's the cause of most wars; it's responsible for the spread of AIDS. Happy, successful people are humble. If one needs to have pride, then be proud of your achievements, your morality, your independence, your discipline. But pride in your sexual orientation? How shallow, narcissistic and infantile! ******* One could fairly and legitimately ask, who annointed HOPE or John McKellar to speak on behalf of any segment of the gay and lesbian community. A more pertinent question would be, 'who authorized lobby groups, such as GALE BC, to bring their self-serving agenda and their cultural angst into the schools?' And how thoroughly have these activists been qualified and scrutinized? HOPE is non-partisan, non-sectarian, unattached to all intents and purposes, and seeks not to indoctrinate or reform, but to comment, criticize and inform. I have often expressed the unfortunate, but undeniable truth, that the number of times one was called 'faggot' in the schoolyard is directly proportionate to the stridency of one's activism. So, special interest groups, such as GALE BC, are comprised mostly of wounded and resentful individuals who should be receiving counselling and compassion, rather than trying to dispense it. You don't need gay activists to teach young people love and respect for one another. And you certainly don't want young, impressionable minds forever inculcated with a victim and entitlement mentality. When you fancy yourself an oppressed minority - particularly one that is based on a basic human drive and compulsion - you become obsessed with increasing your numbers and mainsteaming your behaviour. You try to evoke guilt and intimidation by incessantly reiterating banal epithets, such as 'hate', 'homophobia', 'intolerance', 'teen suicide' and 'self-esteem'. You quickly discover that the optimum way to ensure future supporters to your cause and ideology is through the minds of the young. You skillfully master the techniques of invoking sympathy, hiding the truth and presenting a sanitized portrait of gay life. ******* Introducing kindergarten and grade one students to alternative behaviours and lifestyles is psychological pedophilia. You don't have to engage solely in physical contact to molest a child. You can diddle with their minds and their emotions. And this is exactly what some of my radical brothers and sisters are up to. And this is exactly what a disheartening majority of educators, school trustees and teachers unions endorse. Spare me the tolerance and compassion bunkum. Just leave the kids alone and let them enjoy their short period of innocence and sexual latency. Then when they approach puberty, balance the pop-culture bombardment with messages of abstinence, discipline and self-control. Don't just assume that all teens are out-of-control hormone factories and that all you can do is shrug your shoulders and throw condoms at them. Listen, I'll donate $100 to their favorite charity if anyone can show me a scientific study that proves condoms prevent the transmission of HIV. And the fabricated slogan 'safe-sex' is dangerous, misleading and designed to preserve lifestyle, not life. HOPE recommends that Dr Jeffrey Satinover's lucid and scholarly book, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, be compulsory reading at the secondary school level. But over and above everything, tell the truth and present the facts. Stop presenting young gay men as pretty 'St Sebastians', martyred by benighted homophobes and the big bad authorities, and instead, reflect on Oscar Wilde's hedonistic Dorian Gray, confronting his spiritual failures in his corroding portrait. ******* One of the most hauntingly memorable days of my life - which I recall as if it were yesterday - occurred in 1981 during a conversation with a friend, whose cousin was a physician in New York City. My friend told me there was a mysterious 'gay cancer' running through the homosexual community in Manhatten, which was spread by anal sex, which produced lesions on the skin, which weakened the immune system by destroying white blood cells and which was 100% fatal. ******* Let me assure you that as young, naive and perpetually horny as I was, that single conversation was all that was needed to put enough fear into me to forever alter my sexual activities. The phrase 'safe-sex' had not yet been coined, but believe me, I was practising it! But it was with great dismay that I watched the ravages of AIDS spread like wildfire and it was with great contempt that I observed how the activists carved careers for themselves, making a political circus out of this disease and trampling on the rights of the majority. Here we were confronted with the most easily preventible, difficult to acquire, behaviourally caused, fatal disease in the history of humankind - and look how the gay leadership responded to it. ******* To them, it was more important to change the name of this disease, which was originally called GRID (gay related immune deficiency), to the 'less homophobic' AIDS. To them it was more important to fight for the rights and the protection of those who suffer from this disease than to fight for the health and safety of the entire population. To them it was more important to canonize the victims of this disease with commemorative walls, memorial quilts, vigils and galas than to condemn the behaviour that resulted in their death. To them, it was more important to distibute condoms than to declare a moratorium on promiscuous anal sex. Shame. ******* I can recall numerous times sharing with friends my bewilderment and frustration over why traditional public health measures for combating epidemics were not deployed against AIDS. Sixty years ago, those afflicted with tuberculosis had their homes quarantined and fifty years ago, public swimming pools were closed during the polio epidemic. Throught the sexual revolution of the 1960's and 1970's, there was stringent and systematic follow-up for all those infected with gonorrhea, syphilis and herpes. But at a National AIDS Conference in Denver Colorado in 1983, gay leaders declared, 'we oppose any legislative attempts to close private clubs or bathhouses...we should never forget that we live in a homophobic society and that homophobia is the major threat to our health'. ******* This childishly self-serving attitude sealed the fate of the gay communities still free of the virus. Wth less than 2000 cases nationwide, drastic measures...the declaration of a health emergency in the affected areas, the closing of the bathhouses, testing among those at risk, contact tracing to warn those in the path of the infection... might have stemmed the tide of the epidemic and eventually saved tens of thousands of lives. Yet, gay leaders remained adamantly opposed to these measures because of the perceived stigmatization of the gay lifestyle. ******* So, as I observed the inexorable spread of AIDS and the effects of the gay left to control, weaken and obstruct the measures to combat it, I could easily extrapolate the numbers who were going to die. By doubling the 2000 existing cases every six months for the next ten years, I was able to calculate (accurately in hindsight) that by 1994 there would be 200,000 people - mostly gay men, mostly in the bloom of youth - who were going to die for an idea of liberation. And there wasn't a damn thing I or anyone else could do about it! Sure, Ronald Reagan may have been unconcerned and uncommunicative about AIDS, but as my aforementioned sister in solidarity, Camille Paglia, has stated, 'the delusional arrogance of the gay lobby unleashed the 20th Centuries second holocaust'. ******* So where are we in 2003? Well, we still have 20-year-olds, who weren't even born when AIDS first appeared in North America, becoming infected with HIV. We continue to introduce new, potent and costly anti-HIV drugs, none of which destroy the virus, but which give gay males a false confidence, which leads to high-risk behaviour. We have an increasing number of gay websites, phonelines and classifieds promoting the growing desire for 'bareback sex' and 'extreme sex'. And even at the Annual Global Conference on AIDS, the nightlife is more noteworthy than the daytime activities. The discos are packed with gay doctors, nurses, activists and researchers shamelessly cruising one another, and likewise, the bathhouses do land-office business. So, in spite of the solemnity and tragedy in dealing with a wasteful and fatal disease, the hedonistic, promiscuous, sex-carnival atmosphere never lets up. ******* Of course, it's no accident or coincidence that the major sponsors of World AIDS Day and the ubiquitous Walk For AIDS are the international pharmaceutical companies and the condom manufacturers. And it's neither callous nor cynical to point out that there are big bucks to be made from each new AIDS patient. But in North America, this is still a gay male disease, and while present sufferers deserve comfort and care, there needs to be far more emphasis placed on prevention than on cure. ******* My activist brothers and sisters, along with their ever-willing accomplices in media and academia, relentlessly drum into the public psyche that homosexuality is 'not a choice', because no-one would choose to be gay in a homophobic society. First of all, there is an element of choice in all behaviour. Secondly, despite media fanfare and trendy hypotheses, there is no conclusive scientific evidence as to the biological, genetic, psychological and social influences on sexual orientation. The modern change in opinion concerning homosexuality, though presented as scientific advance, is contradicted rather than supported by science. Once again, we have a transformation in public morals consistent with widespread abandonment of the Judeo-Christian ethics upon which our civilization is based. Though hailed as 'progress', it is really a reversion to ancient pagan practices supported by a counter-culture restatement of gnostic moral relativism. ******* The average person comprehends neither the complexities of good scientific research nor the extent to which politics has corrupted the scientific process. For instance, it was strictly politics and nary a speck of science that motivated the American Psychiatric Association in 1973 to declassify homosexuality as a mental disorder. So, that begs the question, do I consider myself mentally ill? Perhaps by the time I finish here today, some of you may think so. Seriously though, we are all born incomplete and vulnerable to compulsive and addictive behaviour. As I said previously with respect to 'pride', it's a constant struggle; you either control it or it controls you. My friend and colleague in the trenches, Reverend Ken Campbell, has often publically said that when he was a college student, his natural inclination was to chase every skirt. That's because young males are constitutionally prone to libidinal excess. The overwhelming power of sexual gratification, makes it highly susceptible to becoming compulsive and addictive. But as human beings, we possess the intellect and the free will to exercise restraint. Until AIDS came along, male homosexuality had no inherent biological controls and so the use of the body seemed unlimited. Then came the Apocalypse: a complete systems breakdown of the body which lost its defences against nature. And the the ugliness and premature ageing of this wasteful disease were especially painful and grotesque in view of gay men's historic idealization of youth and beauty. ******* Gay activists become particularly hysterical at the mention of sexual reversion therapy. Now it may be impractical to 'convert' totally from homosexuality to heterosexuality, but if counselling can allow a gay man to respond sexually to women, it should be encouraged and applauded, not lambasted or lampooned. If a gay male wants to marry and sire children, he shouldn't be harassed by gay activists accusing him of 'self-hatred'. Come on! Is gay identity so fragile that it cannot bear the thought that some people may not want to be gay? Or that a woman's power should not be ignored, especially in the context of raising children. The difficulties in changing sexual orientation do not spring from its genetic innateness. Sexuality is highly fluid, and reversals are theoretically possible. However habit is refractory, once the sensory paths have been blazed and deepened by repetition - something that is also evident in the struggle with obesity, smoking, alchoholism or drug addiction. ******* The obscene contention made by most activists that constructive and rational opposition to sexual conduct is tantamount to anti-semitism or other forms of racism, is not only intellectually dishonest, but insultingly disrespectful to Blacks, Jews and other minorities. Discrimination against skin colour, ethnicity or religion is not wholly comparable to the complicated resistance of virtually all societies in history to open homosexuality, which involves thorny questions of morality and psychology. There has never been a gay leader remotely near the stature of Martin Luther King or Ghandi, both of whom drew upon the profound spiritual traditions of religion, to which gay political rhetoric has always been childishly hostile. Remember, it was the influence of the Quakers in 18th century Britian and the flamboyent, thunderous activism of Evangelicals in 19th century America that powered the abolitionist movement and led to the end of slavery. ******* No major world religion has ever endorsed homosexuality which can be openly practised only in peaceful, affluent and cosmopolitan times. Even in classical antiquity, homosexuality was controversial, and despite the exaggerated claims of today's partisans, there was no place or period where it flourished in complete freedom from moral opprobrium. History shows that male homosexuality flourishes with urbanization, soon becomes predictably ritualized and always tends toward decadence. So my radical brothers and sisters should stop bitching about sincere Christians, Jews and Muslims who are merely exercising their constitutional right to free speech, and whose vast philosophical perspective easily triumphs over the provincialism and amorality of the gay world. Indeed, their position is far more credible and honest than the tortuous casuistry of self-interested clerics who take the path of least resistance by creating their own church, tailor-made to affirm their Rainbow philosophy. ******* The prominent recurring theme in the materials presented by gay advocates seems to revolve around the acceptance of same-sex families. This approach is clearly less controversial than attempting to discuss specific sexual practices and, of course, one can candy coat the agenda with cute titles and seemingly innocuous story lines (such as Blue Dads... Green Dads... Pink Dads). But it is still an attempt to undermine the traditional family and to inure young, fresh minds to the current ethos that same-sex parenting is equivalent to opposite-sex parenting. Once you have effectively broken one of societies taboos, others will fall away easily and rapidly. Children must not be used as guinea pigs for social engineering experiments. Children need a biological mother and father. We know that this is not always possible, even in the context of opposite-sex marriage, but we don't solve the problem or alleviate the inconsistency by adding to it. Self-interested partisans will manufacture statistics to support their specious claims that children of same-sex marriages fare as well as those of opposite-sex marriages. However, the phenomenon of same-sex parenting doesn't have the longevity needed for such conclusive evidence, whereas the experience of single parent families has, not always, but often shown detriment to the development of the offspring. ******* So what about those gays and lesbians who really want to raise a family? Some of us have 'baby envy'; it's intrinsic to our species. Some of us feel excluded and stigmatized. Too bad! Since when does everybody get everything they want? Laws are written for the good of all society and not for the individual, the special rights advocates or the legal radicals. The true libertarian recognizes that we are first of all social, interdependent beings - free, but also bound. And because human community can only arise from some prevailing unity, society always has a natural and logical primacy over the individual. For the true libertarian, there is a connected stream of virtues, standards and institutions that must be distinguished and protected. And if we ignore the lessons of history and natural law, then everything becomes legal and everything becomes moral, and civilization descends into chaos. ******* Last December, I wrote an article for Ethics and Medics entitled, 'The Irony of Same-Sex Marriage'. And the irony that seems to be lost among most media and politicians is that for a long time the gay press has been replete with articles, letters and editorials sneering at the whole concept of gay marriage. Clearly, most of us don't want anything to do with it. Even lesbian icons, such as Jane Rule, stridently dismiss the entire notion. We neither need nor want the state in our bedrooms. We neither need nor want to be shackled by rules regulations or paperwork. We've already won the same-sex benefits battle, so there's no longer concern over matters of pensions or estates. And other than the legal radicals, who hone their skills contesting these issues. the right to marry is being fought by a tiny minority, most of whom are already hitched, their youth gone, their kids growing or grown, and their parents shrinking before their very eyes. So for the sake of 'choice and diversity' for a few, a lot of time, energy and money that should be going to help the truly disenfranchised, is being wasted. ******* Well, I began today with Svend Robinson, so I may as well end with him - or, at least, Svend's private member's bill, a.k.a. C-250 and whatever it was before. It really doesn't matter what you call it or how many times you try to revise or euphemize it. It's sole purpose is to shut people up. So let's just call it 'Svend's Shut Your Mouth Bill'. Sorry Svend, I won't shut my mouth! In fact, I'm ready and willing to be your first test case, your first 'hate crime' prosecution. So come and get me, Svend. There's nothing more I would love than to face you across a courtroom or a tribunal and watch your face turn a hundred shades of red. Oops, there's my pride and arrogance showing, so I'd better cool it! ******* Anyhow, I've either heard directly or read transcripts of the cross-country interviews that Svend has been conducting to promote his agenda. And there's one name that constantly and consistently gets mentioned by Svend - and that name is Fred Phelps. It's so amusing to observe the love/hate relationship that Svend has with this character. Of course, he hates the venom Phelps spews, as we all should. But he loves the fact that he exists. He needs Phelps to create his chimera of religious bigotry. Now if you confront Svend and ask him if he really thinks that Phelps typifies most religious fundamentalists, he will say with great alacrity, oh, no, no, of course not! But Svend is as sharp and as smooth as they come. He understands the suble art of suggestion and the psychology of repetition. He knows that he can get a substantial portion of the population to think that there is a little bit of Phelps in all religious fundamentalists. But Svend's hippocrasy is exposed by the fact that Phelps comes into Canada every now and again and, in fact, he was in BC last November. And we all know that Svend isn't bashful about getting what he wants. A few years ago, he vigorously petitioned the department of immigration to get his 25 year old Cuban boy-toy landed status. So Svend could easily raise a fuss about letting Phelps into Canada, but don't hold your breath. No way is he about to spoil this convenient Mephistophelian alliance. ******* And speaking of dancing with the devil, let me give equal and well-deserved reproach to our purported leader of the opposition. At least with Svend, there are no surprises - you're getting exactly what you expect. But look, fellow Canadians. See how hopeless Harper hides when the angry dogs bark 'homophobia'. And see how easily Svend's Bill passes second reading. If this assault on our freedom becomes law, I'm placing the blame squarely on Stephen Harper's shoulders. Come on, Mr Harper, it's time to stop meandering in the morass of moderation and show some gumption and some leadership. Otherwise, you and your Alliance Party may as well join the Pink Triangle Brigade, hoist the rainbow flag and shout with belligerent confidence, 'We're here, we're queer, so stick it in your ear!' ******* Ladies and gentlemen, real affliction out there is not 'homophobia', but rather, 'truthphobia'. ******* John McKellar, National Director, HOPE ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 5 HAS CANADA LOST IT'S MIND? ******* Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 11:35:45 -0400 (EDT) ******* Subject: An Open Letter to Prime Minister ******* Right Honourable Jean Chretien, Prime Minister, Government of Canada ******* Dear Jean Chretien; ******* Has Canada lost its mind? Gay Marriage will Harm Democracy. We are extremely disappointed and alarmed at your recent decision to allow gay marriages to go ahead. ******* This is a slap in the face to all honest, hard working, morally upright Canadians who have been the backbone of Canadian society. But worse, it is a knife in the back to our democratic allies in the third world. ******* I have recently returned from East Africa where I spoke with many of our African colleagues who have been fighting against tyranny and oppressive dictatorships for years. On numerous occasions they expressed bafflement and frustration over this decision by your government to allow same-sex marriage. The preponderance of opinion among these democratic minded people -- many of whom risk their lives on a daily basis to promote an end to oppression and establish democratic rule -- is that Canada has lost its mind! How is it possible that the view of a few judges could be allowed to alter an institution which pre-dates the nation state itself? How is it that the "democratic process" could be so easily by-passed and subordinated to the opinions of a few activist jurists who have an obvious political agenda? ******* Your government's decision is going to make it extremely difficult for democrats in oppressive third world countries such as Sudan to counter the charges that their oppressors are certain to make --that "western democracy" leads to decadence, moral depravity and societal decay. ******* Did you not promise in the past that you and your party would uphold the traditional definition of marriage? Why are you breaking your promise? ******* It is distressing to see how the "gay marriage" debate has been framed as a conflict between "progressive" views seeking "equality" versus anachronistic religious tradition. Presenting the issue in this deceptive way implies a choice between being "enlightened" and being a "bigot". By employing such disingenuous sophistry the gay rights movement and its political allies have forced a new paradigm on our culture. The debate has been stifled by psychological manipulation and intimidation by the liberal media and Canada's intellectual elite. ******* Before we accept gay marriage some hard questions need to be asked, including: ******* - What are the psychological implications for children who grow up without parents of both sexes? ******* - What about freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and freedom of religion? ******* - What will this decision mean to those pursuing democracy under cruel dictatorships where it will certainly be portrayed as proof of western culture's moral inferiority. ******* - Will the moral legitimacy of homosexuality lead to more promiscuity? And if so, what are the implications for our health care system from the inevitable increase in psychological trauma, AIDS, and other sexually transmitted diseases? Who is going to pay for that? ******* The gay marriage issue deserves comprehensive and honest debate from religious and non religious people alike. It deserves a full debate in the House of Commons; It deserves the informed participation of all Canadians, who must understand what this will mean for both our nation and our democratic allies all over the world. It should NOT be left up to activist judges who, regardless of their intentions, have a limited perspective. ******* Mel Middleton, Executive Director, Freedom Quest International, Box 369, Trochu, Alberta, T0M 2C0 403-442-2177 ******************************************************* Frank Wagner's response to the above letter which was forwarded by Robert A. Jason ******* Dear Robert, ******* Thanks for this email. Perhaps it's our Prime Minister who's lost his mind, and what's far worse, he may lose his immortal soul as well. ******* My opinion, for what it's worth, is that it's actually Mr. Chretien himself who's orchestrating the push for homosexual "marriage", the attempt at making sodomy sacred. He wants to be Secretary General of the U.N. and thinks by leading Canada to make "progressive" laws he'll be more likely to get the job. ******* Mr. Chretien is not only following in the footsteps of his mentor Pierre Trudeau, who legalized contraception, abortion and sodomy, but is actually attempting to glorify them. ******* Not only is Mr. Chretien risking his own, but also many other people's eternal salvation. ******* Canada is on an accelerating slide into physical and spiritual self-destruction. If we want the direction in which we are going to change we must repent, do penance and ask for God's help. ******* for life, ******* Frank Wagner ********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 6 ECP NEWS RELEASE ******* Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 11:35:34 -0700 ******* From: "Tristan Emmanuel" ******* Subject: [FWD: ECP News Release] ******* Rev. Emmanuel, executive director of the ECP Centre has published a new book. ******* Bill C250 (or whatever replaces it in the near future) is uniquely dangerous to freedom of religion in Canada. But did you know that the bill�s ultimate aim is the suppression of the Christian gospel? ******* Christophobia: The Real Reason Behind Hate Crime Legislation outlines exactly why Christians need to oppose hate crime legislation if they want to defend the gospel of Christ. In this book, Reverend Emmanuel squarely addresses the inherent flaws in the bill and offers a comprehensive solution to win back our culture for Christ. ******* This is a must read for every active Christian. ******* WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING: ******* �Complacent Christian Beware. If you thought the gay rights movement was just about �tolerance,� and that �discrimination� is anti-scriptural and immoral, think again. This deft, compact book examines the lethal threat to religious liberty posed by the rising demand for special �hate laws� to protect homosexuals. Emmanuel explores the terrible paradox wherein gays, who no longer suffer any measurable discrimination at all, angrily seek to suppress the most basic rights of Christians, who on all sides are openly defamed, deplored, mocked and marginalized. Clearly, calmly and boldly, he explains why Christians must stop apologizing, stop hiding, and stop pretending they can coexist peacefully with the perverse new faith that has seized control of North American culture.� ******* Link Byfield, Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy (Former publisher of the Alberta Report) ******* �Canadians who know in their hearts that same-sex marriage is wrong-headed, and who would like to challenge both the courts and the current government�s�have a helpful resource�In a short volume called Christophobia: The Real Reason Behind Hate Crime Legislation, Emmanuel reviews the rising prejudice against Christian citizens in Canada by the courts of the land�He explains the thinking behind the rise of Bill C-250 and then systematically breaks down the bill to expose its flaws and its dangers to Christians if enacted.� ******* John Van Dyk, Christian Renewal ******* LIMITED OFFER: ******* ECP Centre is offering Christophobia for a limited time, at the low rate of $17.95 (includes tax, shipping and handling) to all email supporters of the ECP Centre. ******* There are two options for payment. 1) Send a cheque to: ECP Centre, PO Box 112, Jordan Station, ON L0R 1S0 or, 2) pay on line using our credit card with PayPal secure method at www.tristanemmanuel.com ********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 7 CRIMINALIZING WORDS TOO CLOSE TO THOUGHT CONTROL ******* by Susan Martinuk ******* Special to The Province ******* Wednesday, February 18, 2004 ******* "God! You people are sick. God should strike you dead." ******* Let's imagine for a moment that I wrote the above about, say homosexuals. Or Jews. Or any other identifiable group -- including blond columnists. ******* I'd quickly be labelled an intolerant, narrow-minded bigot who spews hatred. My column career would likely be over. ******* But I didn't write them -- Laurier LaPierre, a Liberal senator since 2001 and an officer of the Order of Canada, did. ******* It is his e-mail response to a respectful letter by a Christian concerned about Bill C-250, a law which seeks to make public expressions of hatred against homosexuals a criminal offence. LaPierre, an avowed homosexual, is a prominent supporter of the bill, but he doesn't seem to support the spirit of the bill. Apparently, he believes speaking against homosexuality should be a crime, but that it's open season for vitriolic outbursts against Christians. ******* Calling for God to strike you dead for speaking against an intended law sounds more like the Taliban rule in Afghanistan than democracy at work in Canada. ******* Three more e-mails on my desk provide similar verbiage to letter writers, so the remarks don't stem from a moment of madness. ******* Rather than making legitimate arguments or even opting for a letter of polite disagreement, LaPierre descends the ladder of decency to tell another writer to "Get another God," be "ashamed" for reading the Bible and not to bother expressing opposition to the bill because "you are not intelligent enough." Very mature debating points. No wonder he's on the public payroll. ******* LaPierre doesn't just want to silence ordinary Canadians. When Senator Anne Cools put forth a bill to uphold the traditional definition of marriage in law, he responded by comparing the Catholic Church to the Taliban and publicly derided the B.C. justice who ruled against same-sex marriage. ******* LaPierre pushed Senate decorum to the limit with invective toward Cools for her perspective on marriage (which, according to recent polls is held by at least two thirds of Canadians). She's faced his fits of rage and aggression and comments that, "He is tyrannized by his own intolerance and prejudice." ******* A senator known for hateful outbursts is a key supporter of criminalizing ill-spoken words? LaPierre should realize his nasty comments speak louder against Bill C-250 than any argument I could make. That is, the determination of what constitutes hate speech is highly subjective and thus problematic. ******* Freedom of speech to one can easily be hateful invective to another. LaPierre may think his remarks are just, but they seem quite hateful to others. But while his words may raise questions about whether he's right for the Senate, they don't make him a criminal. ******* Criminalizing words will lead us to penalize people for any belief we disagree with in the name of tolerance. ******* When rational debate becomes impossible and open dissent is penalized, we are living in a totalitarian state. LaPierre is already there -- he wants to control our thoughts and speech. He's the perfect example of why Bill C-250 should be defeated. ******* Susan Martinuk is a Vancouver freelance writer and broadcaster. ******* � The Vancouver Province 2004 ********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 8 OH, CANADA, WE HARDLY KNEW YE.... ******* From: "Robert A Jason" ******* Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 ******* Dear Friends: ******* Here is a great article by an American (Allan Dobras) on Canada and its attack on Faith, Family, Life and Freedom. ******* <><> ******* DEBATING FREEDOM IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE ******* By Allan Dobras, May 24, 2004 ******* There is something sinister emanating from Canada. It carries the ominous sound of high-stepping jackboots pulverizing the Canadian Charter of Rights into dust. As Canada leaves behind its heritage the once tight bond with its historic legacy of faith and code of values, has perhaps become irreparably unraveled. America, which shares a similar legacy, now stands in near isolation as it struggles with the same forces of moral anarchy. ******* ILLEGAL TO "HATE" IN CANADA ******* On April 26, 2004, the Canadian Senate passed, Private Member's Bill C-250, which provides institutional protection to the practice of homosexuality and other undefined sexual behaviors. The law provides severe penalties for anyone who openly expresses an opinion that may be construed as �hateful� toward homosexual practice or any other �alternative� sexual orientation. Canadians, therefore, no longer have the moral or legal right to question the virtue of deviant sexual behaviors. ******* The bill was sponsored by Svend Robinson, who was first elected to the Canadian House of Commons in 1979. In 1988, he publicly declared his homosexuality and by so doing became the first openly �gay� member of Parliament. He has been relentless in his pursuit of gay rights and the bill that he successfully promoted�under the guise of protection for homosexual persons�will, in application, profoundly limit freedom of speech and religion in Canada. ******* The implementation of the new law simply adds �sexual orientation� to a list of �identifiable groups� noted in Section 318 (4) of the Canadian Criminal Code�meaning color, race, religion or ethnic origin, and now, sexual orientation. Most disturbing, the application of Section 318 extends to Section 319, which provides draconian legal consequences for persons expressing what is called �hate propaganda� and �genocide� against a member or members of one of the protected groups. As noted in the Canadian Criminal Code: ******* 319. (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in a public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace if guilty of (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction. ******* (2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, willfully promotes hatred against and identifiable group is guilty of (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction. ******* Since sexual orientation is undefined, the term can easily be interpreted to apply beyond homosexuals, but to bisexuals, transgenders, polygamists, pederasts, and co-habiting partners, as well. In order to completely stifle dissent on these issues, the law provides that: ******* �communicating� includes communicating by telephone, broadcasting or other audible or visible means; �public place� includes any place to which the public have access as a right or by invitation, express or implied; and �statements� includes words spoken or written or recorded electronically or electromagnetically or otherwise, and gestures, signs or other visible representations. ******* �Inciting hatred,� therefore, can mean openly communicating a negative opinion of homosexuality, whether from the perspective of morality, lascivious behavior, medical consequences, or social corruption. Even though the new law is an admitted violation of free speech, Canadian legal precedent favors the legislation, as declared in a Section 319 footnote: ******* Although some of this section infringes the right to freedom of _expression, as guaranteed by section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms it has been ruled that it constitutes a reasonable limit on that right and is therefore valid legislation. ******* FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND RELIGION DENIED ******* In other words, freedom of expression is trumped by the right of the Canadian people to commit sodomy and other alternative sexual practices without being subjected to the �hatred� of dissenting opinions. Therefore, no public debate can take place in Canada on the merits and morality of any issue involving sexual orientation�e.g., sodomy, same-sex marriage, cross-dressing, or pederasty�if discussion can be construed as expressing a �hateful� opinion. Incredulously, the statute would seem to protect members of parliament who voted for the bill from being opposed for reelection on the basis of the morality of the law they helped pass! ******* There is a provision in the new law that states, �No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2) if he establishes that the statements communicated were [as follows]: if, in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject; or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text�� ******* It remains to be seen how �secular� criticism of same-sex marriage, for example, can be separated from �belief in a religious text.� Unfortunately, there is precedent in Canadian law to suggest that any criticism of sexual orientation issues will not be tolerated. ******* Chris Kempling of Quesnel, British Columbia (B.C.), was found guilty of unbecoming conduct by the B.C. Collegeof Teachers, which asserted that certain of his writings contained "discriminatory and derogatory statements against homosexuals." He was suspended for one month from his position as a teacher and guidance counselor with the Quesnel Board of Education. ******* One letter cited by the panel quoted Kempling as saying: "Gay people are seriously at risk, not because of heterosexual attitudes but because of their sexual behaviour, and I challenge the gay community to show some real evidence that they are trying to protect their own community members by making attempts to promote monogamous, long-lasting relationships to combat sexual addictions." ******* The panel was also disturbed by statements made by Kempling that �homosexual relationships are unstable, �gay� sex poses health risks and many religions consider homosexuality immoral.� ******* Kempling appealed his suspension to the B.C. Supreme Court on the grounds that the suspension violates the Canadian Charter of Rights protections of freedom of _expression and religion. Justice Ronald Holmes of the B.C. Supreme Court upheld the suspension, ruling last February that Kempling's comments were �discriminatory� and could reasonably cause disruption to the school system. Kempling called the decision, �a black day for religious freedom in Canada.� ******* The possible exception for �an opinion based on a belief in a religious text� is actually a two-edged sword and, if applied literally, could actually facilitate intolerance. The Koran, for example, reads in Surat 9.5: ******* So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters (Christians and non-Muslims) wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. ******* LEGITIMIZING HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOUR WORLDWIDE ******* There is much more behind this legislation than the allegation it will protect persons who engage in sodomy from �hate speech� that could lead to a �breach of the peace.� It is actually part of a worldwide movement to validate homosexuality as a legitimate alternative lifestyle. As noted by the Catholic Civil Rights League of Canada: ******* - Last fall, the Rt. Reverend Dr. Peter Forster, Anglican Bishop of Chester, England was investigated under hate crimes legislation and reprimanded by the local Chief Constable for observing that some people can overcome homosexual inclinations and "reorientate" themselves. (The Telegraph, 10/11/03) ******* - In January of this year a Swedish Pentecostal Pastor Ake Green was prosecuted for "hate speech against homosexuals" for a sermon he preached last summer citing Biblical references to homosexuality. (Kyrkans Tidning, 01/11/04) ******* - Belgian Cardianal Gustaaf Joos faces a lawsuit under that country's discrimination laws for his remarks about the nature of homosexuality and the Church's teaching published in a Belgiummagazine. (CWNews.com, 01/26/04) ******* - Cardinal Antonio Maria Rouco Varela of Madridis facing a suit in Spainfor preaching against homosexuality in a homily he gave in the MadridCathederal on the feast of the Holy Family. (WashingtonPost, 01/03/04) ******* - In Ireland, clergy and bishops were warned that the distribution of the Vatican's publication on public recognition of same-sex relationships could face prosecution under Irish incitement to hatred legislation. (The Irish Times, 07/02/03) ******* THE CREED OF TOTAL SEXUAL FREEDOM ******* It is most important, however, to understand that the legitimization of homosexual behavior is not the driving issue behind these actions. After all, practicing homosexuals account for perhaps only 2-3 percent of the adult population, which hardly explains why the homosexual rights agenda commands such power. ******* The answer is that homosexual rights are just the forerunners of a broader pansexual movement pursued by hedonistic elitists who demand total sexual freedom. Their cause is fueled by rogue justices and brazen public officials who have stripped the law of its moral underpinnings and rule by fiat. Canada is just the latest outpost to fall in their worldwide struggle for domination of the culture. ******* In America, �hate crimes� legislation pending in the House and Senate provides increased penalties, funding grants, and federal interventions pertaining to a list of crimes �motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability of the victim.� Under these guidelines, almost any crime victim can likely fit within one of the distinctive categories, so the legislation�s major purpose seems to be to gain legal credibility for homosexual behavior. It is no accident that �gay rights� advocates are the prime movers behind the legislation. ******* If such legislation is passed, deviant sexual behaviors will be protected under law and anyone accused of a crime against a homosexual person, for example, will find that what he says could be used against him. Even where he goes to church could be indicative of his opinions about homosexuality. ******* Logically, it is only a short step from applying greater penalties to crimes motivated by �hatred,� to discouraging such incidents by prohibiting certain kinds of �hateful� speech. Canada has now placed these prohibitions into law and it would be na�ve to believe that this is not the intent of hate crimes legislation in America. ******* All of these initiatives have as their final purpose the pursuit of same-sex marriage�the culture�s ultimate _expression of legitimacy. As a consequence of this occurrence, the oneness of the male/female relationship established by God at the dawn of creation would be joined by practitioners of a behavior He declares to be �abominable,� and the era of sexual anarchy would begin. ******* In this battle for the culture, the primary obstacle to the success of the hedonists is the committed Christian, whose faith and moral code pose a formidable challenge to their quest for victory. In other words, you are their enemy and you are called upon to make a stand for the faith. If not you, who? Not the media�not the government�not academia. It is the Christian faithful who are being summoned to rise to the task before us and make our voices heard in this, the final battle of the Culture War. As it is written: ******* And I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge, and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none. Ezekiel 22:30. ******* Al Dobras is a freelance writer on religious and cultural issues and an electronics engineer. He lives in Springfield, Virginia. ******* See also:BreakPoint�s Sanctity of Marriage resource page. ******* Articles on the BreakPoint website are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Chuck Colson or Prison Fellowship Ministries. ******************************************************************************************************** ******* item 9 LETTER TO "TEMISKAMING SPEAKER" - By Lila Pasenow Wipprecht ******* From: [email protected] ******* Sent: May 17, 2004 ******* The Temiskaming Speaker ******* Dear Editor: ******* Christian people�were�already persecuted with impunity,�convicted and�fined for telling the truth about�dangerous homosexual practices, for warning youth, for following�their Christian conscience, before Svend Robinson's Bill C-250�was passed. ******* Adding the undefined term "sexual orientation" to the Criminal Code of Canada has made matters�incalculably worse.� It�is now a crime punishable by two�years in prison to express�a negative opinion (interpreted as�inciting hatred)�on any and all known�sorts of perverse sexual behaviour:�not only homosexuality, with its related practices of�pederasty, pedophilia, bisexuality,� sadism,�masochism,�and transgenderism, but also�the mixed sorts: bestiality,�incest, necrophilia,�and voyeurism.� ******* All� will be protected from criticism by this law.�The sexual perversions will all become "normalized." Nothing may lawfully be said about them,� except�in a laudatory vein.��A splendid example�for lauding pederasty is already extant, in a book by D.L. Riegel called UNDERSTANDING LOVED BOYS AND BOYLOVERS: I quote: "Men who sexually pursue young boys are not monsters, but sincere, concerned, loving human beings who simply have a sexual orientation that is neither understood nor accepted by others."��� ******* Whose young sons�and grandsons will be their victims ?��� Will they be allowed to adopt ? ******* We�who follow the teachings of Jesus Christ reject all sexual perversions as unnatural and immoral; we reject all sexual�immorality, including heterosexual promiscuity and�adultery,�as�sinful, and not what God intended for the creatures He made in His image.��If�Canadian Christians�cannot freely say so,�then�Canadian freedom has been stolen.� We want to reach all those who do not walk in God's ways with the message of Christ's love and forgiveness.���� ******* To use a typical Canadian understatement, I respectfully submit that Bill C-250�was ill-advised.�It should�have been�defeated.��Now that it is the law,�concerned people must�object, agitate, and engage in civil disobedience until�it is rescinded, or leave a�moral and political�cesspool for our children and grandchildren to�live in.� We seniors, with our pension incomes, can do this.� The jails will not be big enough to hold us all. ******* Sincerely in Christ's service, Lila Pasenow Wipprecht, Cobalt, Ontario *********************************************************************************************************

Links to other sites on the Web

(A4c4c6) (A) home page

The following warning is a prophetic message given to me, Frank Wagner, in November of 1974. ******* LISTEN TO THE CRY OF THE ABORTED CHILDREN. THEIR CRY IS NO. THEIR CRY IS A CRY OF TERROR. HEED THEIR CRY. ******* This prophecy is now being fulfilled. ******* For details about the source, meaning and fulfillment of this prophetic message go to ******* http://ca.geocities.com/fwagner4/index.html ******* email me at *** [email protected] ***