(A4e2b3a1d2b1) British Columbia (Canada) College of Teachers versus Dr. Chris Kempling

This folder is about the disciplinary action taken by the British Columbia College of Teachers against Dr. Chris Kempling, a Quesnel BC Canada teacher and counsellor, for analysing and then commenting on the pro homosexual indoctrination of British Columbia public school children. It appears he was deemed to be interfering with the homosexual agenda and was forthwith punished. ******* In short, Chris Kempling drew public attention to the misinformation concerning homosexuality which was being taught to British Columbia public school teachers and students. The BC College of Teachers called this "conduct unbecoming a member of the college" and suspended him from teaching for one month. The college has failed to publish a definition of "conduct unbecoming a member", and has failed to make public any guidelines concerning what is appropriate speech and what is not. It seems that only they know the rules, if any. ********************************************************************************************************************* As of this date, 06-08-12, 60 items follow. ******* item 1 BCPTL: URGENT APPEAL ******* item 2 CHALLENGING HOMOPHOBIA IN SCHOOLS: A CRITICAL REVIEW ******* item 3 A LETTER FROM CHRIS KEMPLING (dated June 10, 2002) ******* item 4 LET'S DEFEND THIS TEACHER WHO IS DEFENDING OUR CHILDREN! ******* item 5 FURTHER NEWS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA COLLEGE OF TEACHERS VERSUS CHRIS KEMPLING ******* item 6 EVIDENCE UNNECESSARY, GUILT OBVIOUS ******* item 7 WALTER SZETELA'S COMMENTS ON SUSAN MARTINUK'S ARTICLE ******* item 8 B.C. COLLEGE OF TEACHERS RELENTLESS IN THE PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS AND OTHER RELIGIOUS FAITHS ******* item 9 TEACHER COULD LOSE JOB FOR LETTERS ON GAYS ******* item 10 CHRIS KEMPLING STORY IN THE VANCOUVER SUN ******* item 11 MESSAGE FROM CHRIS KEMPLING (30 Sep 2002) ******* item 12 RALLY - SPONSORED BY CANADIAN ALLIANCE FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE AND FAMILY VALUES ASSOCIATION ******* item 13 DO YOU WISH TO HELP CHRIS KEMPLING? ******* item 14 CHRIS KEMPLING'S PENALTY ******* item 15 TEACHER TO BE SUSPENDED ONE MONTH WITHOUT PAY FOR WRITING AGAINST HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA IN SCHOOLS ******* item 16 WHEN ETHICS GOES TO THE DOGS ******* item 17 CRITIC OF HOMOSEXUALITY CAN TEACH, NOT COUNSEL ******* item 18 BRITISH COLUMBIA COLLEGE OF TEACHERS NEWS RELEASE (April 22, 2003) ******* item 19 SUPPORT FOR CHRIS KEMPLING AND SUSAN MARTINUK ******* item 20 CHRIS KEMPLING'S SPEECH TO CITIZENS OF QUESNEL ?May 12, 2003 ******* item 21 UPDATE ON CHRIS KEMPLING ******* item 22 INTERVENTION BY THE BC CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION ******* item 23 COURT CASE - LATEST INFORMATION ******* item 24 UPDATE ON CHRIS KEMPLING'S JULY 28-30 HEARING IN THE BRITISH COLUMBIA SUPREME COURT ******* item 25 WHO WILL STAND WITH CHRIS KEMPLING IN DEFENCE OF TRUTH AND FREEDOM? ******* item 26 COLLIDING WORLDVIEWS: HOW TO SURVIVE AS A NARTH MEMBER IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM ******* item 27 THE GREAT DIVIDE: ETHICAL DIVISIONS BETWEEN SOCIAL LIBERALS AND SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES REGARDING SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR ******* item 28 A MESSAGE FROM CHRIS KEMPLING--December 7, 2003 ******* item 29 2004-02-03 BC SUPREME COURT DECISION AGAINST CHRIS KEMPLING ******* item 30 2004-02-04 LETTER FROM CHRIS KEMPLING RE; BC COLLEGE OF TEACHERS VERSUS CHRIS KEMPLING DECISION ******* item 31 2004-02-04 LETTER TO CHRIS KEMPLING FROM FRANK WAGNER ******* item 32 2004-02-04 NEWS OF CHRIS ******* item 33 BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS ******* item 34 LETTER RE: CHRIS KEMPLING, AND LIBERTY AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH... ******* item 35 FRANK WAGNER'S RESPONSE TO GLORIA POOLE ******* item 36 A BLACK DAY FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN CANADA ******* item 37 UPDATES ON CHRIS KEMPLING ******* item 38 GOOD NEWS: DR. CHRIS KEMPLING HAS NEW WEBSITE ******* item 39 UPDATED VERSIONS OF 2 ARTICLES BY DR. CHRIS KEMPLING ******* item 40 NOTE FROM CHRIS KEMPLING RE HIS CASE ******* item 41 CHRIS KEMPLING SUSPENDED ******* item 42 STAND OF BC TEACHERS COLLEGE ON HOMOSEXUALITY "HYPOCRITICAL" ******* item 43 FROM DR. CHRIS KEMPLING VIA ROBERT JASON ******* item 44 FROM FRANK WAGNER TO CHRIS KEMPLING ******* item 45 THE LATEST NEWS IN THE ONGOING SAGA OF THE CHRIS KEMPLING CASE ******* item 46 FROM CHRIS KEMPLING TO FRANK WAGNER ******* item 47 DR. CHRIS KEMPLING SUSPENDED 3 MONTHS FOR DEFENDING TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE ******* item 48 PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS IN CANADA - DR. KEMPLING AND THE BC COURT OF APPEALS ******* item 49 CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP RESPONSE - KEMPLING v. BC COLLEGE OF TEACHERS DECISION ******* item 50 DR. CHRIS KEMPLING'S STATEMENT ON SUPREME COURT DECISION ******* item 51 CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP response - KEMPLING v. BC COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ******* item 52 CHRIS KEMPLING'S CASE POINTS TO A HOST OF THREATENED FREEDOMS ******* item 53 CHRIS KEMPLING UPDATE, SEPTEMBER 15, 2005 ******* item 54 HOW TO CONTRIBUTE FINANCIALLY TO CHRIS KEMPLING'S LEGAL DEFENCE FUND ******* item 55 CHRISTIAN TEACHER DENIED HUMAN RIGHTS HEARING ******* item 56 LETTER TO B.C HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL RE KEMPLING ******* item 57 ACTION ALERT - BC HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL ******* item 58 MESSAGE FROM CHRIS KEMPLING ******* item 59 KEMPLING STATEMENT ON SUPREME COURT DECISION ******* item 60 MORE HARSH PUNISHMENT FOR DR. CHRIS KEMPLING ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* Please note that more information about the British Columbia Teachers' Federation and its promotion of homosexuality is available on the 2nd and 3rd web sites listed at the end of this folder. ********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 1 BCPTL: URGENT APPEAL ******* From: "BCPTL ListMaster" ******* Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 15:00:39 -0700 ******* Dear Members and Supporters of British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life: ******* Contrary to our usual practice, we are sending you, separate from our monthly Bulletin, this special message containing an urgent appeal. I hope you will act on the suggestions given at the close of the following article. Would you please also copy and paste this message (including this introductory note) and send it to those who are like-minded, adding and deleting nothing? If you wish to send your own appeal and explanation to those you pass this on to, please do so in separate e-mail messages. ******* Unavoidably, some will receive this message from more than one person. Please excuse this, since we know of no other way to get this appeal out quickly to as large a number of people as possible. ******* We trust that, unlike a Biblical victim of persecution who said, "...No man stood with me," Chris Kempling will know that many spoke up for him. If the College of Teachers' ruling against Chris is allowed to stand, it is quite true that what will be in danger will be the right of every teacher of faith to speak out on moral questions on behalf of parents and students. ******* Sincerely, Ted Hewlett, President British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life ******* P. S.: Should you suspect that something has been accidentally lost or miscopied from the following message, you may restore it prior to sending it on, by going to: http://www.bcptl.org/rights.htm#Kempling ******* SCHOOL COUNSELLOR FOUND �GUILTY?AFTER OBJECTING TO PRO-HOMOSESXUAITY AGENDA ******* Speak out publicly against the program of pro-homosexuality indoctrination being conducted by the British Columbia Teachers?Federation (BCTF) and you risk your job and your professional reputation. That seems to be the message sent to teachers by the action of the British Columbia College of Teachers against Chris Kempling. Kempling, a public-school counsellor who holds two degrees in counselling, has been found �guilty?for merely speaking out against aspects of the program launched by the BCTF. The action of the BC College of Teachers comes in the wake of actions against other teachers by school-board personnel at the local level. Teachers who have opposed the pro-homosexuality agenda have been called in to secret meetings where their actions have been questioned in ways that were highly intimidating. ******* Chris, who is a Christian, has written an appeal to fellow-Christians, which we reproduce here. The appeal is one which I believe not only Christians, but all people of faith, and indeed all who believe in liberty of speech and of religion, ought to respond to. At the close of this article are suggestions about what you can do to support Chris in his courageous stand on behalf of young people. ******* Chris Kempling�s Appeal for Support ******* Fellow Believers: ******* In May of this year I was declared guilty of conduct unbecoming a member of the BC College of Teachers. My crime: writing letters to the editor objecting to the promotion of the homosexual agenda in the public school system as well as for writing unpublished research essays, and private letters to my supervisors and elected officials. The College declared that �everything that you have written in its entirety is derogatory and discriminatory," even though some information was merely quoting previously published research data, or was even speaking supportively of measures to decrease maltreatment of the gay minority. The BC Human Rights Commission does not accept private correspondence as evidence of discrimination, but obviously the College has a different point of view. I have been compared to two other teachers who were members of white supremacy hate groups who were disciplined by their employers or human rights tribunals. Oddly enough, no one in the gay community has complained about what I wrote or filed a human rights complaint. In fact, I have yet to meet a gay person I don't like, and get along fine with all of them with whom I am acquainted. In other words, the College is continuing to display its bias against Christian teachers as they did in the Trinity dispute, by sanctioning a member without the evidence to do so. ******* Why should Christians and especially teachers who are Christian be concerned? If this ruling is allowed to stand, no Christian teacher will be allowed to express their religious views regarding moral issues in any public forum. I objected to the use of Xtra West, the newspaper of the gay minority, which has obscene and vulgar classified ads, as a recommended classroom resource. I objected to the use of propaganda produced by the Gay and Lesbian Educators of BC, published and distributed by the BC Teachers Federation. One of them, Counselling Lesbian and Gay Youth, stated "we must dishonour the attitude that heterosexuality is the only acceptable orientation", even though that would mean dishonouring the religious beliefs of Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. Another resource, Challenging Homophobia in Schools, is full of biased data and depicts David and Jonathan as a homosexual couple. Remember, these are learning resources which are enthusiastically endorsed by the senior leadership of the BC Teachers?Federation. ******* The apostle Paul cited his credentials--perhaps I can, too. A teacher and counsellor for 13 years, with two masters degrees and an almost complete doctorate in psychology, 14 letters of commendation in my file, and not one letter of discipline for any reason; a community volunteer as a Big Brother, president of the Child & Youth Support Society for 14 years; Employee and Family Assistance Counsellor in private practice and a Registered Clinical Counsellor; appointed by the Minister of Health to be the Chairman of the District Health Council; past member of the Quesnel Christian Ministerial Association, and an elder, Sunday School teacher and lay preacher of the Christian and Missionary Alliance Church. ******* Whatever I wrote was entirely in my off the job role as a "watchman" of our children, whom I do not want indoctrinated with false teachings about sexuality; nor will I be forced to be the agent by which they are instructed with immoral teaching. The College of Teachers dislikes the fact that I said so publicly. ******** I am very worried for the plight of children who are confused about their orientation--they need to hear a message of hope that there are recognized and effective treatments for those who wish to change their orientation. ******* My pastor asked me if I were willing to "be a martyr for the cause". I told him I would rather be a soldier like Gideon, who achieved a great victory against huge odds by trusting in the Lord. I will be appealing this verdict of the College of Teachers, and I do so for all of us who entrust our children to the public school system. Don't leave me like Uriah, but stand with me: The righteous are as bold as a lion. ******* In case you may have missed it, the reference to Uriah is to the Biblical story of Uriah the Hittite, who was ordered placed in the forefront of a battle, to be slain by the enemy when his fellow-soldiers retreated. ******* I would appeal to all who are moved by Chris�s appeal to support him by doing the following: ******* 1. If you share Chris�s faith, pray for him. ******* 2. Write to the British Columbia College of Teachers protesting their high-handed actions against those who speak out against the pro-homosexuality program. ******* 3. Write to the Premier, with a copy to the Minister of Education, protesting the abuse of power by the BC College of Teachers. ******* 4. E-mail Chris Kempling, to tell him you are standing with him, and to let him know what actions you have taken on his behalf. ******* The addresses you need are the following: ******* British Columbia College of Teachers 405-1385 West Eighth Avenue Vancouver BC V6H 3V9 Fax: 604-731-9142 ******* (A phone call to BCCT yielded the information that they do not give out an e-mail address by which they can be reached.) ******* Hon. Gordon Campbell, Premier Room 156, Parliament Buildings Victoria, B. C. V8V 1X4 Fax: 250-387-0087 E-mail: [email protected] ******* Hon. Christy Clark, Minister of Education and Deputy Premier Room 248, Parliament Buildings Victoria, B. C. V8V 1X4 Fax: 250-387-3200 E-mail: [email protected] ******** Mr. Chris Kempling 1158 Croft Road Quesnel, B. C. V2J 5R5 E-mail: [email protected] ******* -- E.S.H. ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 2 CHALLENGING HOMOPHOBIA IN SCHOOLS: A CRITICAL REVIEW ******* By Chris Kempling M.Ed. M.A. R.C.C. ******* December 31, 2000 ******* INTRODUCTION ******* The annual Maclean�s/Global poll (Gregg, December 25, 2000) asked 1400 Canadians what they thought was better or worse compared to 25 years ago. Topping the "better" list was "our treatment of gays and lesbians", with 72% saying it was better or much better. Another poll question testing values found that 79% disagreed or were neutral on the statement "Ban homosexuals from teaching in Canadian schools". Openly gay politician Svend Robinson was re-elected yet again by a comfortable margin by his predominantly heterosexual constituents, while the voters of Winnipeg elected an openly gay mayor. Institutional and legal obstacles to gay equality have fallen to court challenges and legislative change in the last 25 years, all of them widely reported on in the media (thus likely prompting the statistic listed above). ******** Adoption rights, common law marriage rights, pension rights have all been granted, following the earlier bans against discrimination under all other human rights categories. The only one which remains is the prohibition against same sex marriage, the last legislated bastion of heterosexual exclusivity, but one that is being put to a legal challenge by no less than 19 gay couples, and the government of B.C. A majority of those surveyed in the Maclean�s/Global poll (54%) were either in favour of allowing gay marriage or neutral on the question (Nicol, December 25, 2000). ******* Against this backdrop of achievement and tolerance by Canadians is the recently produced teacher resource book, Challenging Homophobia in the Schools (GALE BC, July, 2000). After reading this resource, one would think that Canadian society is harbouring a medieval mindset with regard to homosexual issues, and that institutionalised oppression against gays needs vigorous action on the part of educators. While the resource does have some good lesson plans, much of the background and rationale material is a thinly veiled polemic using dated, conflicting and inaccurate statistics. The intent is clearly to brainwash the gullible rather than provide BC teachers with an accurate and balanced resource to deal with a very controversial issue. The resource attempts to portray gays as victims in a society actively hostile to them, despite the overwhelming evidence of positive change with regard to societal attitudes. ******* This essay will examine the data used by the authors to validate their claims, and attempt to refute those which are clearly biased or erroneous. This will not be a comprehensive review of the resource�rather the goal is to stimulate corrective action. One would hope that the authors would seriously re-examine the resource, and produce a second edition which will actually have some credibility. ******* REVIEW OF RATIONALE SECTION�REIS ESSAY ******* The Rationale section opens with an essay by Beth Reis, a public health educator from Seattle. Reis makes an unfounded extrapolation from adult data (Laumann, 1994), claiming that incidence of adult homosexuality was "at least about two and nine percent" [sic]. She then claims that those percentages automatically translate into identical percentages in high schools. In checking with my own copy of Laumann, I found the statistic was 2.8% for men and 1.4% for women (which included both homosexuals and bisexuals). Children were not even surveyed. Those who were exclusively homosexual (i.e. have never had sex with someone of the other gender) was even smaller?.6% for men and 0.2% for women. However, a massive study of 36,741 adolescents in Minnesota conducted by Gary Remafedi (whose research Reis also quotes), found that the rate of homosexuality was 0.7% for boys and 0.2% for girls (Remafedi et al, April, 1992). ******* Reis goes on to quote an "estimate" by Gay Parenting author J. Schulenberg [although she erroneously lists the author as "Schuler"] that six million children in the U.S. had a gay or lesbian parent. There is no study supporting this figure, but it is obviously another unfounded extrapolation from inflated incidence statistics. Reis then uses some bizarre mathematics to claim up to 40% of school children are either gay or have a gay relative. I confess that was where I lost all confidence in Reis?claim to be recognized as an authority in public health education. ******* In paragraph B, Reis rhetorically asks, "How can we express support and respect for gay and lesbian youth without condoning their engaging in homosexual behaviour?" I would ask, should educators be condoning sexual behaviour among their students at all? The majority of adolescents are virgins (McCreary Centre Society, 2000), and in British Columbia, the age of consent for sodomy is still 18. Public school teachers can teach about sexuality without "condoning" sexual behaviour�orientation is not really the issue. ******* Reis then makes the rather amazing statement that "homosexuality per se is not a matter of values: it is a fact". If it were as simple as that, then there would be no controversy. What is a fact is that a sizable percentage of the population continues to believe that homosexual behaviour is immoral--73% consider same sex relations to be "always wrong" (Laumann, 1994). The entire controversy is about relative values, and ethical educators must take this into consideration when teaching about homosexuality. ******* One statement I do agree with is Reis?assertion that "schools can be resources to parents, providing accurate information". In my experience, the information provided by gay lobby groups such as GALE tends to be less than accurate, such as Counselling Lesbian and Gay Youth (GALE BC, September,1995), which appears to be one of the source documents for the current resource. ******* In paragraph D, Reis claims that U.S. Department of Justice statistics report "that homosexual people are probably [sic] the most frequent victims of hate-motivated violence in the nation." FBI statistics do not support this statement. The most frequent victims of hate crimes are visible and ethnic minorities, followed by religious hate crimes. Orientation offenses ranked fourth at 12% (Satinover, 1996). ******* Nevertheless, I certainly agree that bullying and physical violence are serious problems in public schools, but I would say that the data does not support that gay students are victimized at a higher rate than heterosexual students. The McCreary Centre Society�s survey of B.C. adolescents (2000) found that threats of physical harm were reported by 41% of males and 26% of females in school, and 23%/19% respectively out of school. The figures for gay students was 34% in school and 29% out of school (McCreary Centre Society, 1999), a negligible difference considering the margin of error and the difference in sample sizes. Anti-bullying/anti-violence campaigns need to be a part of every school�s service repertoire, but I would argue that racism and sexism are much more important areas of concern, if only for the larger numbers of victims. ******* In paragraph E, Reis claims that "there are no scientifically valid studies that indicate than people can change sexual orientations or identities by willing themselves to do so. Even therapy or religious experiences apparently cannot eliminate same-sex feelings?#034; Reis simply has not done her homework. ******* As early as 1978, Bell & Weinberg (whom Reis also quotes) found that 84% of homosexuals and 29% of heterosexuals shifted their sexual orientation at least once in their life, and 32% of homosexuals and 4% of heterosexuals reported a second shift in orientation. A significant 13% of homosexuals claimed at least five orientation changes in their lifetime (Bell & Weinberg, 1978). ******* The results for orientation reparative therapy are quite impressive. The average success rate for reparative therapies prior to 1973 was 53% (Satinover, 1996). ******* More recently, a study of 882 dissatisfied homosexuals (726 of whom had received reparative therapy) found that 45.4% made major changes in their orientation, while 35.1% did not (Nicolosi, Byrd, & Potts, June, 2000). Interestingly, 26% of the therapists surveyed in a related study were ex-gays themselves (Nicolosi, Byrd, & Potts, April, 2000). ******* Masters and Schwartz achieved even more impressive results with a two week intensive therapy program at their sexual disorders treatment centre in St. Louis. Their behaviour modification program had a 65% success rate after a five year follow-up in one study (Schwartz & Masters, 1984), and a 71% success rate after a six year follow-up (Masters & Johnson, 1979). Even Kinsey himself reported more than 80 cases of successful revision therapy (Pomeroy, 1972). I contend that the so-called "lack of evidence" is primarily due to a combination of willful ignorance of published research and successful lobbying against those who fund research in the field (Socarides, 1996). ******* Reis also claims that there is no evidence that sexual trauma influences a person�s sexual orientation in either direction. Her citation is from a 1988 resource edited by Tineke Bodde, and published by the Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, hardly an impartial source. In fact, there is a strong correlation between early sexual abuse and later orientation. ******* A detailed analysis of Kinsey�s 11,000 subjects (1938-1963) showed that intense sexual experiences, feels of arousal, pleasure or discomfort associated with early experiences were the strongest correlates of adult sexual orientation (Van Wyck and Geist, 1984). Van Wyck also found that boys who learned to masturbate by being masturbated by another male were much more likely to be attracted to men in adulthood. A similar correlation was also found for those whose first orgasm occurred through homosexual contact. ******* Doll et al (1992) found that 37% of 1001 homosexual and bisexual men reported being sexually abused as children, 94% of them by older males. Their median age of abuse was 10, while their abusers averaged 11 years older. BC statistics confirm Doll�s results, with 40% of gay adolescents reporting being sexually abused, versus 12% for heterosexual youths (McCreary Centre Society (1999). ******* Reis has clearly ignored the correlational evidence of pedophilia influence on orientation. ******* Reis states that "gay and lesbian youth often mistakenly believe the myth that homosexual relationships don�t endure." She then goes on to quote studies which indicate high levels of gays living with a partner (which is not the same thing as how long those relationships endure). Reis claims there has been very little research on the same-sex couple�again, her ignorance of it doesn�t mean it hasn�t been done. ******* David McWhirter and Andrew Mattison, researchers who are gay themselves, wrote a book called The Male Couple, based on almost 300 couples. They found that less than 5% of gay men could be classified as monogamous, and not one of all their research subjects had maintained fidelity for more than 60 months (in Marcus, 1988). In fact, lack of faithfulness appeared to be a major source of disruption in the relationship (as it is with heterosexual couples), rather than external "homophobia". Bell & Weinberg (1981 in Marco, 1996) determined that only 3% of gay men had had fewer than 10 "lifetime" sexual partners and could class only 2% as monogamous or partially monogamous. ******* While it is common for gay men to be in relationships, it is uncommon for those relationships to endure. Another irony is that the lesbian couple from Victoria who are challenging the federal marriage law with the full support of B.C. taxpayers, are not even living together and do not plan to do so even if they win their case (Smith, July 21, 2000). So much for Reis?"myth". ******* Much of the remainder of Reis?essay appears to be factually correct, and would be useful in the context of a CAPP class or counselling situation. Any future edition of this resource, however, needs to correct the glaring errors noted above. ******* RATIONALE SECTION�SUICIDE RISK DATA ******* The rationale section alludes several times (pp. 12, 18, 23, 27, 29) to the rate of gay youth suicide. Gay suicide rates are twice reported as being three times higher than for heterosexual youth, once as 30% higher, and elsewhere as forming 30% of all youth suicides. Obviously all three are inconsistent with one another and need some editorial attention. My reading of the McCreary statistics (1999, 2000) support that the rate of suicide attempts for gay youth is approximately three times the rate for heterosexual youth (40% vs. 13%). ******* The figure of gay youth committing 30% of all youth suicides is the most blatant error. It is based on the "research" of gay social worker Paul Gibson, who claimed that the prime causal factor of these suicides was "internalization of homophobia" (Gibson, 1989). Perhaps he overlooked depression, drug abuse, untreated sexual abuse trauma, being victimized by being a sex trade worker, and lack of effective stable relationship as other possibilities. ******* Gibson collected data from gay-run drop-in centres for homeless youth in large U.S. cities (i.e. not a representative sample), then used the dated and discredited Kinsey data on the incidence of homosexuality in the population to extrapolate his statistics (LaBarbera, 1996). He did not submit his data to rigorous peer review and his "essay" contained more "hocus pocus" than new research data, according to David Shaffer, a Columbia University psychiatrist and recognized specialist on adolescent suicide (Shaffer, May 3, 1993). ******* Bell and Weinberg, (1978) found that the most common reported cause for a suicide attempt among adults (47%) was a dispute with a lover. Gay youth in BC stated that their number one reason for a suicide attempt was "feeling lonely and isolated", followed by "problems with parents" [unrelated to orientation]. Rejection by school friends due to their reaction to the respondent�s orientation (i.e. orientation bias) placed last in a list of 10 reasons (McCreary Centre Society, 1999). ******* I do not dispute that the rates of suicide attempts are considerable higher among gay youth than heterosexual youth. What research has yet to determine definitively are what are the prime causal factors. The pro-gay lobby would lay the blame entirely on "homophobia", despite not having any credible research to back up their claim. Remafedi and his associates (Remafedi, Farrow and Deisher, 1991) compared gay and bisexual adolescents who had attempted suicide to a control group of gay teens who had not. The gay teens who had attempted suicide had risk factors significantly more elevated than non-attempters. ******* Risk factors included the following: ******* early self-identification as gay; ******* early sexual activity, ******* broken homes (27% of attempters had married parents vs. 50% of non-attempters); ******* sexual molestation (61% vs 29% for non attempters); ******* illicit drug use (85% vs 63%), ******* illegal activities (51% vs 28%); ******* prostitution (29% vs 17%); ******* and gender conflicts (37% of attempters were classified as effeminate, vs 18% for non-attempters) (Remafedi, Farrow and Deisher, 1991). ******* Statements like "Not acknowledging the existence of gay and lesbians means educators may have to live with the question of whether they contributed to a young person�s suicide or murder" (p. 18) are not particularly helpful. ******* Laying the blame on "societal oppression" or on something as ridiculous as failure to "acknowledge existence" rather than exploring and attempting to ameliorate the more obvious causal factors is simply professional irresponsibility. ******* Does the gay lobby really think that suicide rates will improve significantly merely with better social acceptance, without addressing much more pressing causal factors? One is tempted to think that the gay lobby is intentionally trying to divert attention away from other potential causal factors, such as sexual molestation by adult gays, to avoid confronting the serious problem of same-sex pedophilia, and its demonstrable role in influencing orientation and suicidal ideation. ******* On pages 20-21 of the rationale, the authors claim that reluctance to discuss LGBT issues with students is due to the belief that young people may be recruited into homosexuality, despite the "fact" that "it is now certain [underline mine] that sexual orientation is no more about choice than, for example, height or gender." Simon LeVay�s brain research is mentioned as evidence of the inherent nature of homosexuality. What few people know is that LeVay�s study was far too small from which to draw significant conclusions. He compared the hypothalamus of 19 known gay patients who had died of AIDS with those of 16 "assumed heterosexual" brains. He later admitted to a reporter from a gay periodical that he did not know for certain the orientation of his control group (Botkin, September 5, 1991). Moreover, since 25% of those who die from AIDS suffer neurological dementia, hypothalamus anomalies could be attributable to the disease itself (Marco, 1996). In any case, a study with only 19 subjects cannot be used to draw conclusions about anything. ******* The issue of orientation choice, based on psychosocial influences, is not only supported by research, but openly promoted by gay writers. Analysis of Kinsey�s data covering 11,000 subjects over 25 years (1938-63) (Van Wyck & Geist, 1984), found that the mean age of learning about homosexuality for females predominantly homosexual as adults was 13.9 years, while those who were primarily heterosexual was 19.4 years. For boys, adult homosexuals?mean age for learning about homosexuality was 12.0 years versus 16.4 years for heterosexual men. In other words, in the age prior to widespread sex education, there was a correlation between early exposure to knowledge about homosexuality and later orientation choice. Van Wyck�s analysis made it clear that knowledge related to experiential learning had a predictive correlation with adult orientation. ******* Recently, Vancouver Sun columnist Stan Persky admitted in an essay published in Xtra West, the newspaper of the gay community in Vancouver, that recruitment of heterosexual adolescents into homosexuality was a worthy goal, and one that should be pursued in public high schools. His argument is that since there is nothing inherently wrong or immoral about homosexuality, gays should not try to hide the fact that they have been recruiting heterosexuals all along: ******* �the Good Grey Gay Establishment stood up, to a man, and solemnly, but hypocritically assured one and all that good homosexuals would never do anything so sneaky and underhanded as to persuade someone to be gay or engage in homosexual acts. The official gay leadership insisted that gays were born gay, and that no one who wasn�t gay could be turned into a homo, not even for 10 minutes. Of course, they were lying through their teeth�and worst of all, they persuade other people�often young people who aren�t necessarily gay�to give it a go. And guess what? Some of those who give it a go keep on going?The] main battleground of the homo movement is not the wedding aisle of a nice church, but the nasty schoolyard?Perksy, June 29, 2000). ******* And what better manifesto to implement the Persky agenda than Challenging Homophobia in Schools, with its half-truths, outright falsehoods and misuse of research data? The author's claim that by focusing on choice, which puts gays into conflict with groups who believe sexuality actually is about moral choices, "wastes time". The arguments for the alleged immutability and inherency of homosexuality are weak, while the evidence for social conditioning as a causal factor are much more convincing (Bailey, Miller & Willerman, 1993; Bell, Weinberg & Hammersmith, 1981; Whitam , 1977; Phillips & Over, 1992; Green, 1987; King & McDonald, 1992; Billings & Beckwith, July, 1993; Chillman, April, 1990; Van Wyck & Geist, 1984). Even the Journal of Homosexuality does not support "gay gene" theory or "gay brain" theory (Socarides, 1996). However, it suits the agenda of the gay lobby to avoid the debate altogether. Fortunately, there are gay writers like Persky who dare to admit what many of us on the other side of the question have long suspected. ******* REVIEW OF BACKGROUND SECTION ******* I found the definitions section accurate and useful, although I question some of the editorial comments included in the definitions. For example, in the definition of homophobia, the authors state "many of the problems faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people stem from homophobia and heterosexism." I would challenge the authors to cite some evidence of that. Any first year psychology student knows that making unsubstantiated assumptions of causality is a big mistake, yet this "professional" resource makes it repeatedly. ******* The definition of heterosexism includes the statement that it is the "belief that heterosexuality is the only right, correct, normal and moral expression of sexuality." I don�t dispute the definition, but point out that such beliefs are foundational to many religions, whose beliefs are protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The gay movement may not agree with their beliefs, but they must respect them, as must teachers, who are bound by a Code of Ethics to respect the sensibilities of their students. Certainly, the recent unanimous BC Court of Appeal ruling overturning GALE BC�s earlier victory against the Surrey School Board, asserts that points of view formed from religious convictions do have a role to play in the formulation of policies and practices in the public school system (McKenzie, September 20, 2000). It is not the role of educators to teach children that their religious beliefs about sexuality are erroneous. ******* The background section�s statement (p. 8) that systemic homophobia and heterosexism exists in government, courts, corporations is not substantiated by most recent court rulings, government initiatives, and corporate policies which now grant equality in the area of benefits to gay couples. The McKenzie decision is an anomaly in a long string of court decisions affirming gay rights. Did not premier Dosanjh volunteer the province as a co-litigant in the issue of same-sex marriage? That heterosexism exists in churches I do not dispute, but I would challenge the authors to come up with evidence of pervasive irrational fears of homosexuals among religious adherents. A phobia is a mental illness, and the gay movement�s attempt to demonize and ascribe pathology to those who merely have moral objections to homosexuality is reprehensible and professionally unethical. ******* On the same page, the authors state that gays are restricted from "contributing to and collecting pensions on behalf of same-sex partners, exclusion from job promotions, invisibility in school curricula, housing discrimination, discrimination with regard to child custody, inability to become ordained in most churches, and discrimination in the military." Other than the ordination matter, which is a Charter Right, the authors appear to be unaware that most of these issues have been dealt with in their favour. Where have they been in last 20 years? The issue of "curricula invisibility" is generally true, but clearly, the McKenzie decision has laid the ground rules on how this matter needs to be addressed. ******* Page 10 of the background section alleges that "brutal beatings are not uncommon, and hate crimes and murders based on sexual orientation are on the increase." There are no statistics to substantiate this claim, and given that the overall incidence that murder rates are at their lowest levels in 20 years, this seems yet another example of the authors talking through their hats. A "hate crimes" unit of the Toronto city police, set up to alleviate alleged widespread "gay bashing" received only 16 complaints in an entire year (1993) in a city with Canada�s largest gay population. Three of them were judged worthy of investigation, and ironically, two of them turned out to be assaults between homosexuals. A widely advertised gay bashing hotline established with government funding in Alberta received 31 calls in three months, but only two were considered worthy of investigation (Woodard, April 20, 1998). In fact, violence between homosexuals is a much more serious problem than "gay bashing" by violent heterosexuals. Patterson & Kim (1991) found that 37% of gay men report being raped by a sexual partner and 40% of lesbians report being physically assaulted by their partners. ******* Page 10 of the background section also makes some interesting claims, such as the "fact" that reparative therapies are not effective in changing orientation, and "are likely to cause further trauma and difficulties for most, if not all, LGBT people". Again there is no evidence cited to support this statement and studies already cited above refute that claim. The American Psychological Association did weigh the evidence in 1995, however, and determined that there was no evidence that conversion therapy was harmful (Sleek, October, 1997). Perhaps the gay community is proposing to ignore the fact that gay adolescents cite "worries about my sexual orientation" as the third most common reason for a suicide attempt (McCreary Centre Society, 1999). ******* Persistent and marked distress about one�s sexual orientation is still listed as a sexual disorder in the most recent issue of the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders (1994), and people who come to counselling professionals for help should be entitled to know of all of their options. If their goal is to become more comfortable in a homosexual orientation, fine. If their goal is to change, then it should not be the decision of the therapist to prevent achievement of that goal. This author knows personally of people who have successfully changed their orientation through therapy, and of professionals who have provided this therapy to those who requested it, with positive results. That reparative therapy is disapproved of by the gay community is much more about social politics than therapy. ******* The background authors lament the "invisibility" of gay people and state "it is a direct result of homophobia and heterosexism"�again without providing any evidence. They urge gays who are not out to come out so they can be role models. But one�s sexuality is a private matter, and the decision to be "out" or not can be very complicated. Andrew Sullivan, the erudite editor of New Republic magazine writes, "For lesbians and gay men, the option of self concealment has always existed and still exists, an option that means that, in a profound way, discrimination against them in linked to their own involvement, even acquiescence". For most gay people�a "queer" identity is precisely what they want to avoid (Sullivan, May 10, 1993). One of the main supporting actors portraying a gay character on the popular Will and Grace show, for example, refuses to discuss his orientation publicly, saying that it is nobody�s business. ******* Sullivan also speaks cogently on the "tyranny of outing": ******* "They have attacked the central protection of gay people themselves. They have assailed the ability to choose who one is and how one is presented, to control the moment of self-disclosure and its content. They have declared that the bonds of common sympathy must be sacrificed to ideology, that the complexities of love and loyalty and disclosure can be resolved by the uniformity that is the classical objective of terror. The gleam in the eyes of the outers, I have come reluctantly to understand, is not the excess of youth or the passion of the radical. It is the gleam of authoritarianism". (Sullivan, September, 9, 1991). ******* The background section entitled "Myth Busting�LGBT Myths and Facts" contains numerous unsubstantiated claims. "One does not learn to be LGBT, one is LGBT" and "it is impossible to make someone homosexual" are two of them. As already stated, social learning theory appears to have much more validity than the genetic or hormonal theories. Moreover, gay writers like Stan Persky now freely admit that seduction and persuasion play a role in the recruitment of non-homosexuals (Persky, June 29, 2000). ******* The most blatant factual error is the authors?claim that LGBT�s famous promiscuity is a myth. In five years of researching this topic, I have never yet seen a study that shows general heterosexual promiscuity anything close to that of homosexuals. Bell and Weinberg (1978) found that the average gay man had 500 different "lifetime" partners, while 28% had over 1000 partners. In addition, 79% of gay men in this study said more than half their partners were total strangers. ******* Corey and Holmes (1980) in a study published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, found that gay men who volunteered to keep sexual diaries averaged 100 sexual partners a year. Patterson and Kim�s 1991 study showed that homosexuals were four times more likely than heterosexuals to have had more than 100 sexual partners. Conversely, Laumann�s comprehensive survey of American sexuality (1994), found that married heterosexuals averaged 7.15 lifetime partners, and unmarried heterosexuals averaged 8.67 partners. Gay promiscuity, particularly among men, is not a myth�it is a fact, but not an admirable one, even by gay thinkers. ******* Washington, D.C. lawyer John Berresford, writing in the Washington Post (June 11, 1995) states: ******* As long as our primary image is one of gleeful promiscuity�an image promoted not only by our enemies but also by our own magazines and our own bars�we will be ostracized. Until we start imposing honesty, fidelity, and emotion on our lives�in other words, until we are willing to talk about moral standards�we will make little real progress in social acceptance (Berresford, June 11, 1995). ******* I couldn�t agree more. Anyone reading the personal classified ads of Xtra West, which are very pornographic, can see for themselves that casual promiscuity is a high priority for the gay community. ******* The authors claim that LGBT people are "just as capable of stable, monogamous, committed relationships as anyone else" (p. 19) may be true, but evidence already cited in this paper shows that they do not chose to form such relationships in any appreciable numbers. When researchers in San Francisco recommended to their study group participants that restricting themselves to one partner would reduce their health risks, they responded by saying "monogamy lacked creativity and showed a lack of understanding of an outsider to the gay lifestyle" (McCusick et al, December, 1985). In other words, it appears that monogamous relationships are "culturally unacceptable" to many gay men. ******* Page 19 also alleged that "many legal rights are unavailable to LGBT people". Other than marriage, I can�t think of any. Perhaps the authors could provide a few examples of the "many" rights which are denied them. ******* Myth 12 (We know what causes homosexuality and bisexuality) admits that we really don�t know the etiology of orientation. This is refreshing, but contradicts earlier statements which claim we "know" that it is not learned. The evidence of it being learned behaviour is confirmed by the success rates of reparative therapies already cited, i.e. if heterosexual behaviour can be readily conditioned through therapy, then it is unlikely that the homosexuality was inherent in the first place. ******* Myth 14, that LGB people can be "cured" by having really good sex with a person of the other gender, appears, in fact, to be true according to Schwartz and Masters (1979). Their methods involved daily therapy, and guided sex with their clients, over a two week period�a type of "therapeutic honeymoon". As previously stated, long term follow-ups found high percentages of formerly gay men remaining in committed heterosexual relationships. ******* Myth 15, that the majority of pedophiles are gay, is one research confirms as false, but primarily because there are so many more heterosexuals than homosexuals. In fact, the incidence of homosexual and bisexual pedophiles is far higher than their incidence in the general population. A meta-analysis of 19 separate studies exploring the ratio of heterosexual-to-homosexual molestation of children found that those who practice homosexuality are 12 times more likely than heterosexuals to sexually assault a child, and bisexuals were 16 times as likely to do the same (Cameron, 1985). ******* This statistic is also supported by data in the Report to Members of the B.C. College of Teachers. The issues from 1990-1996 were examined with permission by the author in October 1997. In this period 54 teachers were disciplined for sexual misconduct with children. For female teachers, four were disciplined: three were same sex incidents, while the gender of the fourth victim was not identified. For male teachers, 33 were heterosexual offenses, 13 were homosexual, and four were not identified. Thus, out of a total of 49 cases were the gender of the victim was identified, 16 were same sex offenses (33%), or approximately 15 times their incidence in the general population (using Laumann, 1994 for incidence data). ******* This data is further supported by two studies of adult sex offenders (Freund et al, 1984; Freund & Watson, Spring 1992). In the 1984 study, Freund, a psychiatrist at the Clarke Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto, found that the pedophilic predilection was more likely to be found in those of homosexual orientation, and that they had the highest rate of recidivism. Freund examined the offense records of 457 sex offenders in his second study. It showed that the proportional prevalence of homosexual offenders was 36% (13 times their incidence in the population). ******* Other researchers have noted that 23% of gay men and 6% of lesbians admitted to sexual interaction with youth under the age of 16, when the respondent was aged 20 or older (Jay and Young, 1979). Abel et al (1987), in an intriguing and original study of non-incarcerated sex offenders, found that male pedophiles admitted to an astonishing average of 150.2 victims. The figure for heterosexual pedophiles was 19.8. While heterosexuals do commit most of the pedophilic offenses, I have yet to see anyone from the gay movement acknowledge their extreme over-representation in pedophile populations, or for the deplorable number of children they victimize. ******* Myth 16, that most LGB people could by cured by psychotherapy or "orientation reparative therapy", has already been discussed. The National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality has conducted research which shows that treatment is a real possibility for those who wish to change their orientation. Apparently 11% of gays also believe this is possible (Leland & Miller, August 17, 1998). Gay lobby groups have been quite successful, however, in blocking attempts to conduct research into reparative therapy approaches, and continue to take refuge in the statement that there "is no evidence" (Socarides, 1996). If it is not possible, why block attempts to find out for sure? Perhaps they might visit the websites of NARTH (www.narth.com) and that of those who have successfully undergone reparative therapy (www.peoplecanchange.com) for some very interesting anecdotal and research evidence. ******* The background section on bisexuality (page 33) cites Kinsey�s data that "as many as 15-25% of women and 33-46% of men may be bisexual". Kinsey produced flawed research, according to one of his former colleagues and more recent researchers (Pomeroy, 1972; Laumann, 1994). Pomeroy writes that 26% of Kinsey�s 5300 subjects in his study of male sexuality were male prison inmates, while others were recruited from gay bars in Chicago�hardly a representative sample. Laumann�s statistics indicate those whose behaviour is consistently bi-sexual in orientation (i.e. practiced in the year just previous to the survey) was 0.8% for men and 0.5% for women. ******* Another statement reports that bisexuals face discrimination from within the gay and lesbian communities. Perhaps gay and lesbian communities need some help overcoming their "biphobia". They also seem to have a problem with transgendered people At the 1993 Michigan Womyn�s Music Festival, primarily a lesbian event, four post-operative male to female transsexuals were publicly humiliated by being ejected from the festival for violating the "womyn born-womyn only" policy (Miller, November, 1994). Thus, even men who have sacrificed their genitals to become women face discrimination from lesbians. Miller also writes that gay white males are routinely attacked by radical lesbians for being part of the "oppressor patriarchy". ******* In the transgender section of the backgrounder (p 37-40), there is some very useful information. Not one mention, however, is made of the fact that transgenderism is still classified as a mental disorder in the DSM-IV (1994), and that referral to treatment should be considered. ******* The background chart entitled "The Impact of Systemic Oppression" (pp. 43-49), again tries to play the "let�s all be victims" game, and numerous unsubstantiated and false statements are made. One of the most bizarre was that gays are "considered the anti-Christ (evil)" by religious institutions. In the Legal section, the chart alleges that "gay bashing goes unnoticed, undocumented; gay killings not seen as hate crime". This is patently untrue, as anyone with a television or access to a newspaper can tell for themselves. ******* On the Economics chart, they allege employment discrimination and "isolation in non-traditional jobs". Where they get these assumptions is a mystery. U.S. data shows that gay household incomes average $55, 430, which is 42% higher than the national average of $32,144 (Woodard, April 20, 1998). Moreover, given their general lack of dependents, gays have three times the disposable income per capita compared with heterosexual families. Gays are not systematically oppressed by any stretch of the imagination, and in fact, are doing much better economically than heterosexuals. ******* On the Media chart, the authors allege that gays are portrayed as child molesters and that "few positive images of gays and lesbians" are presented. The facts are that pro-gay themes are proliferating in the entertainment media (e.g. Will & Grace, Philadelphia, Ellen, In and Out, Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, etc.) Network TV had a record 29 openly gay characters in the 1998 season (Leland & Miller, August 17, 1998). How can the authors expect this resource to be viewed as credible when such glaring errors are promoted as fact? ******* REVIEW OF STRATEGIES SECTION ******* The authors make the blanket statement in opening the strategies section that "homophobia and heterosexism are pervasive in our culture?#034; Heterosexism I can see, and but as previously stated, a heterosexist point of view is often based on long established cultural traditions and sincerely held moral or religious beliefs. As educators we must tread very carefully down this path. The allegation that homophobia (and its equally ludicrous partner, transphobia) is pervasive is at best a misuse of a clinical term and at worst a paranoid delusion unsupported by any serious research. Laumann (1994) reports that the same survey respondents who express moral disapproval for homosexuality also consistently expressed the belief that gays should not be discriminated against. I would strongly recommend that the gay movement consider dropping the term homophobia as it is currently used, and leave it in the clinical realm where it belongs. "Orientation bias" is a much more accurate and less inflammatory term. ******* Generally, however, the strategy section has some good ideas for creating a more inclusive environment and for reducing harassment and name-calling. Abandoning all references to heterosexual terms takes political correctness to a ridiculous level, though. ******* I was interested by the reference to "commonly held educational principles" which included the statement "as professional educators, we are obliged to check our own personal values at the classroom door and try not to impose them on our students". Justice McKenzie found that Mr. Chamberlain apparently failed to do this by intentionally provoking a confrontation with the Surrey School Board (McKenzie, September 20, 2000). Point one of the B.C Teacher�s Federation Code of ethics adequately covers the gray area of how much of one�s own personal values a teacher can use in a classroom situation. Personally, I bring all my personal values into my classroom�how can one expect to be true to oneself by behaving as a hypocrite? But no matter what one�s personal views, all educators are responsible to treat students respectfully, and be mindful of their sensibilities, an increasing challenging task in today�s multicultural and multi-faceted values environment. ******* REVIEW OF THE LESSON PLANS SECTION ******* While I did not review every lesson plan in detail, many seemed suitable for classroom use if presented impartially. The "Two Dads are Blue" and "Lesbian & Gay Families" lessons include the books which were at the centre of the Chamberlain vs. Surrey case, and should be used only after the consultation process recommended by Justice McKenzie in his ruling (September 20, 2000). ******* The "Famous, Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals" list will be controversial, mainly due to the inclusion of historical figures whose alleged orientation is based on speculation, and questionable interpretation of source documents. For example, the inclusion of the Jewish king David and his platonic soulmate Jonathan will likely outrage both Jews and Christians, who revere David as the author of the Psalms and progenitor of Jesus Christ. To interpret their philos relationship as an eros one is both erroneous and extremely insulting to people of faith. I�m surprised they didn�t include the apostle John and Jesus Christ, whose relationship is similarly portrayed in the Bible. The inclusion of six Popes will likely raise the ire of Roman Catholics as well. ******* The lesson "Myth Busting�How do myths affect us" is a regurgitation of the alleged "myths" already discussed above, and should be used with caution, if at all. ******* "A sociometry of oppressions" is rather interesting, but could inflame Christian and Jewish sensibilities, as three of the "pseudo-identities" are posed as both gay and Christian, while one is bisexual and Jewish. With some modifications this would be a good CAPP 11 class lesson. ******* The "Notes to Teachers" section in the gay trivia lesson (p. 77) reports the original Surrey book case decision, which was favourable to GALE. This section should be amended to include the appellate court�s decision, which overturned the first judgment. ******* REVIEW OF RESOURCES SECTION ******* This section contains the bibliography information for numerous resources related to gay issues. As I haven�t examined them individually, I cannot offer an opinion. The pamphlets "Gender Dysphoria" and "I Think I Might be Gay or Lesbian or Bisexual" are fairly well done, with the exception of a few questionable statements in the latter one about the origins of homosexuality and what constitutes "homophobia". All resources should be carefully screened, preferably by a district committee, to avoid "Surrey-like" confrontations, however. ******* CONCLUSIONS ******* While I commend the authors on assembling some useful resource materials, on the whole Challenging Homophobia in Schools is not acceptable in its current form. It was obviously written and edited with a biased agenda, and at times verges on propaganda. I will be using the resource challenge protocol in my district to restrict its use until the district reconsideration committee examines it, and I recommend teachers or parents in other BC school districts do the same. ******* Moderate gays appear to have moved well beyond the need to manipulate the heterosexual community with resources such as this. Gay writer Jonathan Rauch asserts: ******* "The standard political model sees homosexuals as an oppressed minority who must fight for their liberation through political action. But that model�s usefulness is drawing to a close. It is ceasing to serve the interests of ordinary gay people" (Rauch, May 10, 1993). ******* Apparently, no one at GALE shares this view. Other moderate gays take a very different view of social activism. John McKellar is the president of HOPE (Homosexuals Opposed to Pride Extremism). HOPE�s founding charter asserts that ******* "gay propaganda not be allowed in schools, that the final authority in sex education be parents, that the age of consent for sex be raised to 16 (18 for anal sex), and that HIV and Hepatitis C carriers be monitored by the government (in Woodard, May 11, 1998). ******* McKellar also appears to have a low view of the gay left: ******* "The activists are noisy caterwaulers, and their organizations have impressive acronyms like EGALE and GALA, but they could hold their monthly meetings in a phone booth. They�re caught up in their shallow, narcissistic sexual self-expression, so they demand the right to make the whole world their closet. But they don�t really speak for most homosexuals" (in Woodard, May 11, 1998). ******* Challenging Homophobia in Schools will not likely get an endorsement from HOPE. I also noted that the BC School Counsellors Association, the PSA whose members would be most likely to spearhead the use of this resource, did not provide an endorsement, despite the fact that its current president, Diane Noort, contributed to GALE�s previous resource, Counselling Lesbian and Gay Youth (1995). Perhaps its members saw what I did, and wisely withheld their approval until something more accurate and less biased could be produced. ******* I really do wish Stan Persky�s prediction about schools being the next battlefield for the gay movement, is wrong. But if GALE BC does not recall and rewrite this resource, and instead pushes ahead with the adoption of the biased agenda it delineates, this issue will become a minefield, fought district by district by polarized activists. Is this really necessary? Our efforts need to be on mitigation not litigation. Let�s focus on what we can all agree on�zero tolerance for harassment and violence for all students and staff, no matter what their orientation and social support for gay youth who undeniably have much higher risk factors than their heterosexual peers. ******* BIBLIOGRAPHY ******* Abel, G., Becker, J. Cunningham-Rather, J. Mettelman, M., & Murphy, W. (1987). Self reported sex crimes of non-incarcerated paraphiliacs. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2: 3-25. ******* American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed..). Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association. ******* Bailey, J., Miller, J., & Willerman, L. (1993). Maternally related childhood gender Nonconformity in homosexuals and heterosexuals. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 22, 461-469. ******* Bell, A. & Weinberg, M. (1978). Homosexualities: A study of diversities among men and women. New York: Simon & Schuster. ******* Bell, A., Weinberg, M. & Hammersmith, S. (1981). Sexual preference: Its development in men and women. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. ******* Berresford, J. (June 11, 1990). A gay right agenda. Washington Post. ******* Billings, P, & Beckwith, J. (July, 1993). Technology Review: 60. ******* Botkin, M. (September 5, 1991). Salk and pepper. Bay Area Reporter: 21, 24. ******* Cameron, P. (1985). Homosexual molestation of children/sexual interaction of teacher and pupil. Psychological Reports, 57, 1227-1236. ******* Chillman, C. (April, 1990). Promoting healthy adolescent sexuality. Family Relations, 39, 2: 123-131. ******* Corey, L. & Holmes, K. (1980). Sexual transmission of hepatitis A in homosexual men. New England Journal of Medicine, 302: 435-438. ******* Doll, L et al (1992). Self-reported childhood and adolescent sexual abuse among adult homosexual/bisexual men. Child Abuse and Neglect, 16, 6, 855-64. ******* Greund, K., Heasman, G., Racasky, I. & Glancy, G. (1984). Pedophilia and heterosexuality vs. homosexuality. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 10, 3, 193-200. ******* Freund, K. & Watson, R. (Spring, 1992). The proportions of heterosexual and homosexual pedophiles among sex offenders against children: An exploratory study. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 18, 1, 34-42. ******* Gay and Lesbian Educators of British Columbia. (September, 1995). Counselling Lesbian and Gay Youth. Vancouver, BC: GALE BC ******* Gay and Lesbian Educators of British Columbia. (July 2000). Challenging homophobia in schools. Vancouver, BC: GALE BC. ******* Gibson, P. (1989). Gay male and lesbian youth suicide. Report of the Secretary�s task force on youth suicide. Washington: Federal Department of Health and Human Services. ******* Green, R. (1987). The "sissy boy syndrome" and the development of homosexuality: A 15 year prospective study. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. ******* Gregg, A.. (December 25, 2000). Politics, social attitudes and sex. Maclean�s. 113, 52, 54. ******* Jay, K. & Young, A. (1979). The gay report. New York: Summit. ******* King, M. & McDonald, E. (1992). Homosexuals who are twins: A study of 46 probands. British Journal of Psychiatry, 160: 407-499. ******* Labarbera, P. (1996). The gay youth suicide myth. Journal of Human Sexuality: 65-72. ******* Laumann, E., Gagnon, J., Michael, R. & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ******* Leland, J. and Miller, M. (August, 17, 1998). Can gays convert? Newsweek, 46-53. ******* Marco, A. (1996). Same-sex marriage. The Journal of Human Sexuality: 45-64. ******* Marcus, E. (1988). The male couple�s guide to living together. New York: Harper & Row. ******* Masters, W. & Johnson, V. (1979). Homosexuality in perspective. Boston: Little, Brown & Company. ******* McCreary Centre Society. (2000). Listening to B.C. youth: Cariboo region results. Burnaby, BC: McCreary Centre Society. ******* McCreary Centre Society. (1999). Being out: Lesbian, gay, bisexual and Transgender youth in BC: an adolescent health survey. Burnaby, BC: McCreary Centre Society. ******* M cCusick et al. (December, 1985). AIDS and sexual behavior reported by gay men in San Francisco. American Journal of Public Health, 75: 493-496. ******* McKenzie, K. (September 20, 2000). Chamberlain v. Surrey School District #36. Vancouver, BC: Court of Appeal for British Columbia. ******* Miller, S. (November, 1994). Gay bashing by homosexuals. Heterodoxy. ******* Nicol, J. (December 25, 2000). Marriage vows. Maclean�s, 113, 52, 100-102. ******* Nicolosi, J., Byrd, D. & Potts, R. (April, 2000). Beliefs and practices of therapists who practice sexual-reorientation therapy. Psychological Reports. ******* Nicolosi, J., Byrd, D. & Potts, R. (June, 2000). Retrospective self-reports of changes in homosexual orientation: A consumer survey on conversion therapy clients. Psychological Reports. ******* Patterson, J. & Kim, P. (1991). The day America told the truth. New York: Prentice Hall. ******* Persky, S. (June 29, 2000). Recruit, recruit, recruit: Homosexuality is a good thing. Xtra West. ******* Phillips, G. & Over, R. (1992). Adult sexual orientation in relation to memories of childhood gender conforming and gender nonconforming behaviors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 21, 543-558. ******* Pomeroy, W. (1972). Dr. Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Research. New York: Harper & Row. ******* Rauch, J. (May 10, 1993). Beyond oppression. New Republic. ******* Remafedi et al. (April, 1992). Demography of sexual orientation in adolescents. Pediatrics, 89, 4, 714-21. ******* Remafedi, G., Farrow, J., & Deisher, R. (1991). Risk factors for attempted suicide in gay and bisexual youth. Pediatrics, 87: 869-875. ******* Satinover, J. (1996). Homosexuality and the politics of truth. Baker Books: Grand Rapids, MI. ******* Schwartz & Masters, W. (1984). The Masters & Johnson program for dissatisfied homosexual men. American Journal of Psychiatry, 141, 173-81. ******* Shaffer, D. (May 3, 1993). Political science. The New Yorker: 116. ******* Sleek, S. (October, 1997). Resolution raises concerns about conversion therapy. American Psychological Association Monitor. ******* Smith, M. (July 21, 2000). Gay marriage. Vancouver Province. ******* Socarides, C. (1996). How America went gay. Journal of Human Sexuality: 29-32. ******* Sullivan, A. (September 9, 1991). Sleeping with the enemy. New Republic. ******* Sullivan, A. (May 10, 1993). The politics of homosexuality. New Republic. ******* Van Wyck, P. & Geist, C. (1984). Psychosocial development of heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 13, 505-544. ******* Woodard, J. (April 20, 1998). A rich, educated underclass. British Columbia Report, 23. ******* Woodard, J. (May 11, 1998). A gay for family values. British Columbia Report, 42. ******* ABOUT THE AUTHOR ******* Chris Kempling holds two post graduate degrees in Counselling Psychology, and is a Ph.D. candidate in psychology. He is a member in good standing with the British Columbia Association of Clinical Counsellors. In addition to working as a secondary school counsellor, he operates a private counselling practice, and is chair of the Quesnel & District Community Health Council. ******* This paper may be reproduced without the author�s permission. Feedback is welcome at [email protected]. ******* Printable Version ******* Related Links *** Lifesite Canada *** InterLIFE *** Canadian Pregnancy Centres--addresses and phone numbers *** Canadian Family Action Coalition *** Focus on the Family *** Focus on the Family Canada *** familyfacts.ca *** REAL Women of B.C. *** Campaign Life Coalition BC *** NARTH *** Canadian Physicians for Life *** Euthanasia.com *** Save the Union Movement *** Teachers Saving Children. ************************************************************************************************************************ ******* item 3 A LETTER FROM CHRIS KEMPLING (dated June 10, 2002) ******* Friends and Fellow Believers: ******* I have been overwhelmed by the outpouring of support from all of you. In just four days I have received over 75 e-mails supporting me (and one against), from all over Canada and five U.S. states. I really appreciate you willingness to stand alongside me in this spiritual battle, for that is what I believe it is. ******* Three Christian lawyers have been advising me, and believe this is a very significant case which could go all the way to the Supreme Court. They also believe I have an excellent case. I have not yet hired a lawyer and wish to respond to a rumour that I "left my lawyer in the lurch" at my hearing. I did not have a lawyer and did not attend my hearing. My reasons are both legal and personal, but what I can say is that it relates to an alleged conflict of interest on the part of those who sat in judgment of me. My three legal advisors tell me that although it was not a good idea not to go, it still does not jeopardize my chances of winning. ******* I am told that the BCCT lawyer is a formidable adversary, and that I must have the best legal representation available. Please pray that the right legal warrior will step forward, and that I will be able to secure the resources necessary to see this battle to the end. Thanks again for all your support and God bless. ******* Chris Kempling ******* Note from the editor of the BC Parents and Teachers for Life website (bcptl.org) We need many more people to write in support of Chris. If you have not done so yet, take a moment to write, especially to the premier with a copy to the Minister of education Send a copy of what you have written to Chris for his encouragement. (e-mail and mailing addresses given above). To get contact information for Members of the British Columbia Legislature, including cabinet ministers, go to www.legis.gov.bc.ca/mla/mla_alphaemailinfo.asp ******* Later news : Chris was granted a request for a postponement of his "sentencing" session--to October 21, 2002; and then it was further postponed at the request of the BC College of Teachers to some time in mid-November. Definite News received November 9th: Chris Kempling's "sentencing" session before the BCCT was held on November 18th. ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 4 LET'S DEFEND THIS TEACHER WHO IS DEFENDING OUR CHILDREN! ******* 02-06-12 ******* note: this is the lead story June 11, 2002 on the web-page of the Christian Heritage Party of Canada -- canada's only pro-life, pro-family federal political party. ******* The 'tribunal' model of justice, made popular in the former Soviet Union and brought to Canada by Pierre Trudeau, still thrives in British Columbia in spite of the recent thundering defeat at the polls of the NDP. Many of their commissars are still in posts of authority. ******* The contortions of their model of 'justice' were never more bizarre than in the case of Quesnel teacher Chris Kempling, whose career is threatened because he wrote letters to the Editor of his local newspaper. Free speech does not extend to teachers while the BC College of Teachers is on control of education in BC. ******* The BCCT, in a kangaroo-court 'hearing', has convicted Kempling of 'conduct unbecoming to a teacher'. There was no complainant: the BCCT complained to itself. This government-sanctioned, union-appointed tribunal is complainant, judge, jury and executioner. ******* To appreciate how Orwellian this decision is -- maybe Kafka-esque is a better adjective -- remember that the BCCT recently LOST a decision in the Supreme Court of Canada. In that case, the BCCT had refused to certify the teacher training program at Trinity Western University because TWU wouldn't knuckle under to the 'gay' agenda of promoting homosexuality in public school classrooms. TWU doesn't train teachers to oppose homosexuality in the classrooms; it just doesn't allow homosexuality -- nor any other biblically-forbidden practice -- on its own campus. There was never any evidence of discrimination by TWU-trained teachers. ******* The BCCT lost three times in the courts, and in their final appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, the vote against them was 7-1. Only radical activist judge Claire L'Heureux-Dub?wrote an opinion in their favour. She said it's not possible to hate the sin but love the sinner. ******* In deciding Chris Kempling's case, the BCCT cited ONLY L'Heureux-Dub?s opinion -- in the very case in which the BCCT's pro-'gay' agenda was defeated! ******* As in the TWU case, the BCCT was without evidence in the Kempling case. They couldn't even suggest that his classroom behaviour was anything but exemplary; it was simply the fact that he wrote letters-to-the-editor that expressed an opinion different to theirs that offended them. ******* Were his letters inflammatory? ******* No, they were not. ******* Chris Kempling merely expressed an opinion that many -- probably most --BC parents share: that it is wrong to indoctrinate children (who are in school under legal constraint) into the politically-correct doctrines of the homosexual activist minority. ******* But the BCCT goes further than just promoting "tolerance" of homosexuality: they want us all to join them in affirming sexual perversion. Indeed, the BCCT has endorsed classroom use of materials that state "we must dishonour the attitude that heterosexuality is the only acceptable orientation..." ******* It isn't tolerance of homosexuality they're after; they want to "dishonour" the perspective that is central to the religions of the parents of most of their students: Christians, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs and adherents of many other faiths assert that heterosexuality is the only acceptable orientation. It's our children they're after. ******* Chris Kempling's "offense" was that he wrote letters stating that the homosexual activists were going too far. And he's right. ******* Chris Kempling is no "far-out radical". Consider his credentials: A teacher and counsellor for 13 years, with two master's degrees and an almost complete doctorate in psychology; 14 letters of commendation on his file, and not one letter of discipline for any reason. A community volunteer as a Big Brother, president of the Child & Youth Support Society for 14 years; Employee and Family Assistance Counsellor in private practice and a Registered Clinical Counsellor; appointed by the Minister of Health to be the Chairman of the District Health Council; past member of the Quesnel Christian Ministerial Association; and an elder, Sunday School teacher and lay preacher of the Christian and Missionary Alliance Church. ******* "Whatever I wrote," he points out, "was entirely in my off-the-job role as a 'watchman' of our children, whom I do not want indoctrinated with false teachings about sexuality; nor will I be forced to be the agent by which they are instructed with immoral teaching. The College of Teachers dislikes the fact that I said so publicly. ******* "I am very worried for the plight of children who are confused about their orientation," he continues. "They need to hear a message of hope that there are recognized and effective treatments for those who wish to change their orientation." ******* That message of hope is exactly what the radical 'gay' activists would deny to other homosexuals: part of their campaign is lobbying the American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association to declare that therapeutic attempts to change orientation are "unethical" -- even if the patient requests the treatment! ******* The worst enemies of those who suffer from disoriented sexuality are not teachers like Chris Kempling; their worst enemies are the radical gay activists who promote 'Gay Pride Parades'; politicians like former Prime Minister Joe Clark, who pander to that agenda to buy votes; and the odious classroom tactics of the BCCT, the BC Teachers' Federation and other teachers' unions, which are willing to sacrifice our children to their political agenda. ******* What can Canadians do about it? ******* Right now, you can write or e-mail the authorities in British Columbia, and ask them to rebuke -- and maybe disband, or at least replace -- the BCCT. Here are the addresses: ******* British Columbia College of Teachers 405-1385 West Eighth Avenue Vancouver BC V6H 3V9 Fax: 604-731-9142 ******* (BCCT say they do not give out an e-mail address by which they can be reached. These are 'public servants'!) ******* Hon. Gordon Campbell, Premier Room 156, Parliament Buildings Victoria, B. C. V8V 1X4 Fax: 250-387-0087 E-mail: [email protected] ******* Hon. Christy Clark, Minister of Education and Deputy Premier Room 248, Parliament Buildings Victoria, B. C. V8V 1X4 Fax: 250-387-3200 E-mail: [email protected] ******* Then, If you share Chris's faith, pray for him. And send him a letter or an e-mail to tell him you are standing with him, and to let him know what actions you have taken on his behalf. ******* Mr. Chris Kempling 1158 Croft Road Quesnel, B. C. V2J 5R5 E-mail: [email protected] ******* --+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The CHP is Canada's only pro-Life federal political party, and the only federal party that endorses the principles of the Preamble to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Canadian Constitution: ******* 'Canada was founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.' ******* For more information, call toll-free 1-888-VOTE CHP (868-3247) or (819) 669-0673 ******* (c) Copyright: LifeSite Daily News is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com). ******* NEWS TIPS to [email protected] or call 1-866-787-9947 or (416) 204-1687 ext. 444 ******* Please help us to continue this service. Mail contributions to: Interim Publishing, Att'n LifeSite, 104 Bond St. E., Toronto, ON M5B 1X9 or contribute on line at http://www.lifesite.net/contribute/lifesite/ ************************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 5 FURTHER NEWS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA COLLEGE OF TEACHERS VERSUS CHRIS KEMPLING ******* Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 06:42:17 -0700 ******* From: "Ted Hewlett" ******* ----- Original Message ----- ******* From: "Chris Kempling" ******* Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 11:08 PM ******* I haven't talked to my lawyers recently so not much on that front. My good friend Jim Sagert has agreed to set up a blind trust entitled Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund, to help me out, and, if God blesses this fund with more than I need, to make it available for others in the future. I'll let you know more details as soon as it is set up. ******* Rick Hiebert of the Report has put my story in the June 24 edition of that magazine, and except for a statement saying my accuser, Patricia Turner, never had her children attend my school, it seems fairly accurate. (Her children did go to Correlieu but I wasn't a teacher at the time). He apparently contacted the Civil Liberties Association who said they wouldn't help me because I might "convert" gay students (now wouldn't THAT be a horrible thing). So much for that organization protecting freedom of religion and speech. A local web news provider has picked up the story so it is now "news" in my town. On the positive front, I am still receiving about five-eight letters of support and encouragement a day. I received a very good letter from Dr.Guttowski who wrote to the College saying while I might be politically incorrect, I was scientifically correct. It was an excellent letter. ******* I also got an e-mail offering prayer support from a doctor in Mumbai, India! But the most amazing letter was from a nun in Alabama. She told me that her entire abbey was going to pray for me for 30 straight days, 24 hours a day (in shifts I would presume). I cried when I read that. God's people are really amazing. ******* I also had a radio interview with a reporter from American Family Radio (based in Mississippi) today, and have another one with a Minneapolis Christian station next week. There seems to be a lot of interest in this case. ******* I am so grateful for your support, Ted, and the executive of BCPTL. You are doing God's work and I honestly don't know what I would have done without you. God bless. ******* Chris Kempling *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 6 EVIDENCE UNNECESSARY, GUILT OBVIOUS ******* Wednesday ?June 26 ?2002 ******* by Susan Martinuk ******* The Province ******* Wednesday, June 26, 2002 ******* It's become an obsession for the B.C. College of Teachers (BCCT) to worry more about what teachers are thinking than what they are doing in the classroom. ******* But in persecuting teachers for their thoughts, the ugly and offensive biases that undergird the BCCT have been exposed -- and there is ample cause for parents, teachers and citizens to be concerned. ******* The BCCT recently ruled that Chris Kempling, a Quesnel teacher and counsellor, was guilty of "conduct unbecoming a teacher." ******* His punishment has yet to be determined, but he could lose his teaching license. ******* His crime? Writing letters to the editor of a local paper to oppose same-sex pension legislation and the use of Xtra West -- a homosexual activist newspaper with obscene content -- as a recommended classroom resource. ******* A sincere Christian, he also publicly objected to another resource (endorsed by the BCCT) that depicted the Biblical characters, David and Jonathan, as homosexuals. (If such an affront was made to any other religion, it would surely be deemed "hate literature." But Christians are seemingly exempt from such protection). ******* Mr. Kempling made the apparent error of expressing concerns that many adults ascribe to -- particularly if they have seen Xtra West or some of the literature that is available to students. Yet -- and this is key -- Mr. Kempling stated his case outside of the classroom and in a reasoned, respectful manner, citing published data and his religious beliefs. ******* No teacher or student made any complaint: he handed the BCCT 14 letters of support from colleagues and his supervisors specifically assign gay students to Mr. Kempling because of his respectful attitude. ******* It is significant that the complaint came from a resident who didn't even have children at Mr. Kempling's school, because the complaint wasn't based on any evidence of wrongdoing -- it was based solely on assumptions. ******* The only thing more frightening than such a vague, factless charge is that the BCCT was so willing to assume that those who hold certain religious beliefs --and have the conviction to publicly proclaim them -- must be guilty of some kind of intolerance, at some time, against some one. Based on this inane logic, the BCCT pronounced Mr. Kempling guilty as charged. ******* This is highly reminiscent of the BCCT dragging Trinity Western University through the courts, charging that graduates from the Christian college would be homophobic teachers. ******* Once again, their argument was based on ideology and assumptions -- not evidence. Fortunately, the Supreme Court of Canada saw through this empty logic and ruled that private religious beliefs could not be discriminated against. ******* In 1997, B.C.'s Supreme Court ruled that if the BCCT had considered only the evidence -- it could not have possibly concluded that TWU students would be discriminatory. ******* Similarly, in the case of Mr. Kempling, consideration of only the evidence -- or lack of it -- could not possibly have led the BCCT to find him guilty. ******* But the BCCT is more concerned with an Orwellian pursuit to squash Christian belief to be bothered with evidence or what is really going on in its classrooms. ******* Prosecuting an individual on the basis of belief and in the absence of any evidence of wrongdoing is hardly the hallmark of a progressive educational institution. So why should we trust them to teach our kids about tolerance? ******* ?Copyright 2002 The Province ******* Copyright ?2002 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest Global Communications Corp. All rights reserved. Optimized for browser versions 4.0 and higher. ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 7 WALTER SZETELA'S COMMENTS ON SUSAN MARTINUK'S ARTICLE ******* Praise to Susan Martinuk for showing the true colours of the BC College of Teachers in its ruling that a Quesnel teacher was "guilty of conduct unbecoming a member." Mr. Kempling's "misconduct" as judged by the BCCT court of inquisition was to write letters to express his disgreement with same-sex pension legislation and educational policy on sexuality. The message of the College to BC teachers which has the power to remove Mr. Kempling's teaching licence is to be silent if their opinions and views conflict with the Big Brothers and Sisters of the College. The College which tried to stifle instruction at Trinity Western University, thankfully disavowed by the Canada Supreme Court, is clearly in breach of freedom of expression and itself needs to amend its ways. ******* Sincerely, ******* Walter Szetela, ( Prof. Emeritus, UBC) 604-943-7159 *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 8 B.C. COLLEGE OF TEACHERS RELENTLESS IN THE PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS AND OTHER RELIGIOUS FAITHS ******* from Citizens Research Institute ******* PHONE: (604) 514-1614 . FAX: (604) 514-1669 ******* P.O. BOX 12014 MURRAYVILLE SQUARE, LANGLEY, B.C. V3A 9J5 ******* ~ E-MAIL [email protected] ~ ******* September 23, 2002 ******* Kari Simpson, Executive Director of the Citizens Research Institute has filed two Human Rights Complaints against the B.C. College of Teachers for discrimination. Simpson states: "The B.C. College of Teachers has promoted contempt, intolerance and blatant discrimination against citizens with religious beliefs. They have made a public spectacle in their unwarranted and mean-spirited persecution of BCCT member, Mr. Chris Kempling, a Christian." ******* Background - Mr. Chris Kempling, a teacher, contacted the Citizens Research Institute in January 2002 for help. Mr. Kempling had been charged with conduct unbecoming a teacher. His crimes: Writing letters to the editor objecting to the use of the homosexual newspaper Xtra West as a classroom resource. Xtra West often contains graphic pictures of individuals and groups engaged in homosexual sex acts, detailed stories depicting the sex acts and vulgar classified ads. Mr. Kempling also expressed his opposition to the propaganda produced by the Gay and Lesbian Educators of BC, published and distributed by the BC Teachers Federation. One example cited by Mr. Kempling is from the publication, Counselling Lesbian and Gay Youth, where teachers are directed to "dishonour the attitude that heterosexuality is the only acceptable orientation." This of course would mean dishonouring the religious beliefs of Christians, Jews and Muslim and those who share a similar perspective. ******* Predictably, a resident - with no children in the education system - took exception to Mr. Kempling's published opinions and made a complaint to the B.C. College of Teachers about him. Relying on the tiresome rhetoric associated with this one-sided debate, the BCCT uncharacteristically accepted the complaint from a non-member and acted upon it. The BCCT struck a modern-day Star Chamber hearing. Refusing to fund Mr. Kempling's legal counsel, they found him guilty and declared that, "everything you have written in its entirety is derogatory and discriminatory." ******* Mr. Kempling provided CRI with all the documents relating to this case. Mr. Kempling's real crime appears to be that he actually researched his information and did not rely upon the common propaganda assigned to the topic of homosexuality. Additionally, he cares about truth, children and believes that as a citizen he has the right to free speech, freedom of belief and the right to express opinion. ******* Kari Simpson, after investigating the information provided by Mr. Kempling, reviewed the mountain of unsubstantiated, contemptuous and false statements written by militant homosexual activist James Chamberlain against the Surrey School Board and others that opposed his misuse of the public education system to facilitate his political agenda. There was no comparison between the two authors. Mr. Kempling provided credible research, a sound opinion and legitimate concerns. Mr. Chamberlain provided outrageous rhetoric. Kari Simpson filed a complaint against Mr. Chamberlain to the BCCT, purposefully using the same wording as in the accepted complaint against Mr. Kempling. The BCCT refused to investigate the complaint against Mr. Chamberlain. The BCCT must not arbitrarily persecute/prosecute one member over another to benefit a political agenda. This discriminatory practice will not be tolerated. ******* There are a number of critical issues at stake: Free speech, the right to express opinion, and the right to believe in God and the overt intolerance of the BCCT toward Christians and other religious faiths. It is the position of the Citizens Research Institute that Mr. Chamberlain has the right to express his opinion subject to the law as it relates to libel. (Mr. Chamberlain's comments were most helpful during the Human Rights Tribunal that he initiated against CRI. Under cross-examination, he confessed that he had lied and could not meaningfully support much of his published commentary.) ******* Kari Simpson states: "Perhaps it is time for the BCCT to get its own house in order and become informed on the facts concerning homosexuality rather than ignorantly limiting the basis for decision-making to the political rhetoric of activists. After all, the BCCT governs the so-called professionals who claim to want to promote tolerance, diversity, critical thinking and respect in our schools and communities." ******* The remedy CRI is seeking from the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal is as follows: ******* 1. That a finding be made by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal that the BCCT discriminated against Mr. Kempling. 2. That the BCCT be ordered to apologize to Mr. Kempling. 3. That the BCCT be ordered to pay all costs Mr. Kempling has incurred as a result of the actions of the BCCT. 4. That the BCCT be ordered to compensate Mr. Kempling for his pain and the harm done to his reputation. 5. That the BCCT participate in sensitivity training that will educate their members in appreciating and understanding Christianity. 6. That the BCCT require its members to attend workshops arranged by the Citizens Research Institute that would inform them on the facts of homosexuality. Including: ? Separating the political rhetoric from fact. ? Recovering from a distorted sexual identity. ? Conditions that contribute to a distorted sexual identity i.e.: sexual abuse, family dysfunction family break-down, choice, genetic predisposition, etc. ? Health risks associated with the practice of homosexuality. ******* Kari Simpson will withdraw her complaint against Mr. Chamberlain if the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal finds that the BCCT did discriminate against Mr. Kempling by unjustly disciplining him for exercising free speech and his right to express opinion. If the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal fails to protect Mr. Kempling's rights Simpson will pursue her complaint against the BCCT for failing to employ the same test against Mr. Chamberlain as was used against Mr. Kempling. ******* Chris Kempling: A teacher and counselor for 13 years, with two masters degrees and an almost complete doctorate in psychology, 14 letters of commendation on file, and not one letter of discipline for any reason; a community volunteer as a Big Brother, President of the Child & Youth Support Society for 14 years; Employee and Family Assistance Counselor in private practice and a Registered Clinical Counselor; appointed by the Minister of Health to be the Chairman of the District Health Council; past member of the Quesnel Christian Ministerial Association, and an elder, Sunday School teacher and lay preacher of the Christian and Missionary Alliance Church. ******* For More Information contact Kari Simpson at 604.514.1614 ******* COMPLAINT TO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ******* Kari D. Simpson ******* P.O. Box 12014, Murrayville Square, Langley, B.C. V3A 9J5 ******* Telephone: 604.514.1614 ******* Facsimile: 604.514.1669 ******* B.C. Human Rights Commission, #201-815 Hornby Street, Vancouver, B.C. V6Z 2E6 ******* VIA FACSIMILE 604.660.0195 ******* September 23, 2002 ******* Dear Sir or Madam: ******* Complaint #1 - That the B.C. College of Teachers, referred to from herein as BCCT, violated the B.C. Human Rights Code by subjecting a teacher to ridicule, contempt, discrimination and harm due to his religious beliefs and his public and private _expression of researched opinions, and has in doing so violated sections 8, 13, and 14 of the Code. ******* Facts - ******* - The BCCT discriminated against a member by aggressively and maliciously pursuing a frivolous complaint against him because of his religious beliefs and his publicized views on homosexuality. ******* - The complaint made against this teacher resulted from his well-researched, fact-based opinions on homosexuality and provided a public service. ******* - A resident, with no children in the public education system, took exception to this teacher expressing facts on homosexuality. She wrote to the BCCT and her complaint was acted upon. ******* - The teacher who was the subject of the complaint was denied legal counsel and subjected to a prosecutory regime whose enthusiasm would only be out-performed by the Salem witch-hunters. ******* - This teacher was found guilty by the BCCT of conduct unbecoming of a teacher and of discriminating against homosexuals. ******* Complaint #2 - The BCCT has refused to provide a service otherwise available to the public due to my political and religious beliefs, sexual orientation, sex, marital status, family status and class of person. ******* Facts - ******* - That on April 10, 2002, I made a complaint to the BCCT concerning the discriminatory conduct of a teacher, Mr. James Chamberlain. ******* - That the BCCT refused to investigate my complaint. ******* - That I made this complaint after being appraised of another complaint made against a teacher in the Quesnel area. ******* - That the complaint against a Christian teacher was accepted, investigated, given a hearing and a decision made and that the teacher was found to be guilty of publishing derogatory and discriminatory comment. ******* - That my complaint was rejected. ******* I have reviewed the extensive information concerning the case against the Quesnel teacher. In comparing the content of information in support of the BCCT decision to pursue the complaint against Mr. Kempling versus the mountain of information supporting my complaint, there should have been a finding that my complaint was actionable and that Mr. Chamberlain breached the BCCT Code of Ethics. ******* The difference in the cases is simple. The Quesnel teacher is a Christian. The teacher in my complaint a homosexual activist. The BCCT has a pattern of discrimination against British Columbians who practice their Christian faith. ******* The remedy I seek: ******* 1. That a finding be made by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal that the BCCT discriminated against Mr. Kempling. 2. That the BCCT be ordered to apologize to Mr. Kempling. 3. That the BCCT be ordered to pay all costs Mr. Kempling has incurred as a result of the actions of the BCCT. 4. That the BCCT be ordered to compensate Mr. Kempling for his pain and the harm done to his reputation. 5. That the BCCT participate in sensitivity training that will educate their members in appreciating and understanding Christianity. 6. That the BCCT require its members to attend workshops arranged by the Citizens Research Institute that would inform them on the facts of homosexuality. Including: ******* - Separating the political rhetoric from fact. ******* - Recovering from a distorted sexual identity. ******* - Conditions that contribute to a distorted sexual identity i.e.: sexual abuse, family dysfunction, family breakdown, choice, genetic predisposition, etc. ******* - Health risks associated with the practice of homosexuality. ******* If the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal finds that the BCCT did discriminate against Mr. Kempling, I will withdraw my complaint against Mr. Chamberlain, provided that the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal recognizes in its findings that free speech and the right to opinion and the freedom to express that opinion is a lawfully protected right. If the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal supports the conduct of the BCCT in the Kempling matter, I will pursue my charge that the BCCT discriminated against me by refusing a service, and in doing so failed to employ the same test against Mr. Chamberlain as was used against Mr. Kempling. ******* Sincerely, ******* Kari D. Simpson ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 9 TEACHER COULD LOSE JOB FOR LETTERS ON GAYS ******* Freedom of _expression is at stake, argues Quesnel teacher cited for 'derogatory' views ******* by Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun ******* Wednesday, September 25, 2002 ******* A teacher who could lose his job for writing letters to a newspaper about homosexuality and what he contends is the promotion of gay issues in public schools says he is fighting for his right to express his religious views outside the classroom. ******* But a panel of the B.C. College of Teachers says Chris Kempling, a long-time teacher at Correlieu secondary school in Quesnel, is guilty of conduct unbecoming for making "derogatory and demeaning" statements against homosexuals. ******* It has recommended discipline, which could range from a letter of reprimand to revocation of his teaching certificate. ******* Kempling, a school counsellor who teaches psychology and creative writing in Grade 12, is accused by the college of writing letters that encourage stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination based on sexual orientation. ******* The letters were published by the Quesnel Cariboo Observer between July 1997 and December 2000. ******* College lawyer Bruce Laughton told the panel that the writings are such that a reasonable person would believe that Kempling would not treat his pupils fairly and equally. There was, however, no evidence or argument that Kempling had acted improperly inside his school or with his students. ******* Kempling said he is being vilified because he believes that heterosexuality is preferable to homosexuality and has grave concerns about learning resources in schools, which have been distributed by the B.C. Teachers' Federation, that he says promote homosexuality and are attempting to indoctrinate children. ******* The federation promotes the resources -- titled Challenging Homophobia in Schools and Counselling Lesbian and Gay Youth -- because it says they help their members teach acceptance and reduce student bullying linked to sexual orientation. ******* In an interview Tuesday, Kempling said he does not disagree with those goals -- "I don't think any serious member of our community does" -- but he believes the resources are biased and rely on evidence from gay activists rather than scholarly works. ******* They also contain statements that are offensive to religious people, added Kempling, who is a lay preacher of the Christian and Missionary Alliance Church in Quesnel. ******* "Our [religious] community has been demonized by those on the other side of the question," he said. "If we raise any concern or ... object to our own children being indoctrinated with something that is the opposite of what we teach them in our churches and Sunday schools, then we are homophobic. That's not acceptable to our community." ******* The college has refused to discuss the case, saying it has not completed its review, but The Vancouver Sun obtained a copy of the panel's decision and its call for discipline. The college hasn't decided whether to accept or reject the recommendation, but has told the teacher it will make a ruling next month. ******* Kempling said the BCTF has recently agreed to provide him with legal counsel when he next appears before the college. The union did not respond to inquiries Tuesday. ******* In its ruling, the panel cites several letters that Kempling wrote to the paper as well as a few responses from people who challenged his views. It notes the following comments by Kempling: ******* - A letter criticizing Quesnel council for proclaiming a Gay Pride day says: "The majority of religions consider this behaviour to be immoral and many mental health professionals, including myself, believe homosexuality to be the result of abnormal psycho social influences. Homosexuality is not something to be applauded." ******* - When a letter of his was criticized, he responded further: "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 said the college does not need to find direct evidence of a poisoned school environment to determine that a member is guilty of conduct unbecoming. "It is sufficient that an inference can be drawn as to the reasonable and probable consequences of the discriminatory comments of a teacher," it states. ******* College registrar Doug Smart, while refusing to discuss the Kempling case, said the college follows the direction of the Supreme Court of Canada in determining when restrictions on a teacher's freedom of _expression are reasonable. ******* In a 1996 ruling against Malcolm Ross, a New Brunswick teacher who published anti-Semitic books and pamphlets, the Supreme Court said schools have a duty to maintain a positive environment for all children. ******* "The conduct of a teacher bears directly upon the community's perception of the ability of the teacher to fulfil such a position of trust and influence," the court said. "Young children are especially vulnerable to the messages conveyed by their teachers." ******* Kempling argued that his case is different from the Ross case because the latter prompted a broad debate and resulted in dozens of angry letters to the school objecting to the way he was conducting himself. ******* Kempling said his views have not prompted the same reaction. He said his lawyer will argue that it is inappropriate for the college to discipline a teacher unless there is direct evidence that harm has occurred. ******* Although Kempling's case is unusual in B.C., the Ontario Labour Relations Board recently upheld the firing of a teacher who participated in white supremacist and anti-Semitic groups, even though the teacher never expressed racist views in the classroom. The Peel board of education fired Paul Fromm, a former high school teacher, last year. ******* [email protected] ******* ?Copyright 2002 Vancouver Sun ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 10 CHRIS KEMPLING STORY IN THE VANCOUVER SUN ******* from: "D.Fernandes" ******* Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:14:26 -0700 ******* Today, when teachers stand up and proclaim the truth in order to protect society, and particularly vulnerable children, from the promotion and indoctrination of a lifestyle that is medically harmful and morally wrong, they are being disciplined by the BC College of TEachers. ******* We urgently need to speak out in support of people like Chris Kempling, against those who would sacrifice the health and well being of all Canadian citizens. for their own ideology. ********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 11 MESSAGE FROM CHRIS KEMPLING (30 Sep 2002) ******* From: "BCPTL ListMaster" ******* Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 19:55:49 -0700 ******* The following is a message, sent to us by Chris Kempling on September 25th, 2002 for the readers of this E-Bulletin and others: ******* Friends: I have been grateful for your prayers and letters of support and encouragement. While the recent headline in the Vancouver Sun made it appear that I could soon be unemployed, I am confident that I will still be teaching when the College of Teachers is replaced by a more representative College of Educators, promised earlier this year by the Liberal government. ******* On Thursday, September 19th, 2002 I met with my lawyer William Clark at the BCTF offices to appeal their denial of legal aid benefits. Mr. Clark made such a good presentation, that the BCTF lawyer agreed with him entirely, and stated, "this is a very bad decision for teachers". He stated that it was unacceptable for the College of Teachers to discipline a member for "implied harm", when they had absolutely no evidence of actual harm. The College stated that they didn't need such evidence, even though the Supreme Court of Canada rejected that line of thinking in the Trinity case. ******* The BCTF Executive Committee subsequently decided to grant me legal aid, not only for the sentencing hearing on October 21st, but also for the Supreme Court appeal, likely to occur in the spring. They limit their support to $145/hour, however. ******* This case will be costly. My lawyer is an extremely experienced administrative law expert, and charges $300/hour for his services. Court costs and disbursements will also be substantial, as well as expenses for subpoenaed witnesses. To ensure that Christian teachers have the freedom to speak out when Christian children are at risk of being indoctrinated with the homosexual agenda, I am asking for your support. ******* The trust fund is entitled the Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund. The three trustees are Maurice Johnson, Jim Sagert, and Brian Gruber, all Christian public school teachers who are members of the E-Free, Alliance, and Lutheran churches, respectively. "Mo" Johnson was the first person to graduate from Trinity College (now TWU). Any surplus funds will be made available to other Christian teachers who may face a similar situation. ******* If you would care to contribute to the trust fund, you may make a contribution at any Royal Bank branch. The transit number is 4720. The account number is 101-030-5. I would be very grateful for your support, but especially your prayers, on October 21st, when I will be sentenced. ******* Chris Kempling [email protected] *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 12 RALLY - SPONSORED BY CANADIAN ALLIANCE FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE AND FAMILY VALUES ASSOCIATION ******* The Canadian Alliance for Social Justice and Family Values Association Suite #792 - 916 West Broadway, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, V5Z 1K7 ******* Phone/Fax: (604) 872-3300 ******* Come out and support all citizens�� right of freedom of speech and freedom of religion! ******* British Columbia College of Teachers has ruled that Mr. Chris Kempling is guilty of conduct unbecoming of a member of BCCT and the ruling clearly is in breach of Mr. Kempling��s right of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. (See CASJAFVA��s letters to BCCT attached.) If the said ruling is allowed to stand, the immediate consequence will be that no teachers will dare to say what is right and what is best for our kids and ultimately, all citizens�� right of freedom of speech and freedom of religion will suffer and be deprived. ******* Please mark your calendar and notify all your friends, relatives, family members and your church congregation that their presence at the following rally organized by the Canadian Alliance for Social Justice and Family Values Association is of utmost importance. ******* (If you wish to join us for a free lunch after the Rally, please call us to reserve a seat for you no later than November 6, 2002 on a first come first served basis) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Rally in Support of Freedom of Speech Saturday, November 9th , 2002 10:30 a.m. ******* In front of the building of BCCT 1385 W. 8th Avenue, Fairview Centre, Vancouver, B.C. (8th Ave & Hemlock) ******* For further information, please call CASJAFVA at 604-872-3300 ******* IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please allow our designated spokesperson ( K-John Cheung ) as the only person to be interviewed by media. We supply all signs for use at the Rally. Do not bring your own sign(s) to the Rally. We thank you for your co-operation. *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 13 DO YOU WISH TO HELP CHRIS KEMPLING? ******* From: Robert A Jason ******* Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 ******* Dear Friends: A number of deeply concerned people on my list have asked me they would like to help a Christian brother, Chris Kempling, defend himself against the persecution of the Inquisition. So, I dutifully coveyed the concern to Chris. ******* Here is his reply: ******* Robert: Thank you so much for your assistance. God bless you! People who wish to help financially can do so in two ways: ******* Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund, Any branch of the Royal Bank, Transit# 4720, Account # 101-030-5 (but no receipts or acknowledgements can be given) ******* If people wish to receive acknowledgement of their gift: Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund c/o Mr. Jim Sagert, 798 Beaubien Ave., Quesnel, BC V2J 1S5 ******* Those who wish a tax receipt would have to make a designated offering through their church. ******* The fund is administered by three Christian public school teachers (Mr. Brian Gruber, a Lutheran, and Mr. Maurice Johnston, Evangelical Free Church, who is also the very first graduate of Trinity University, are the other two). ******* All surplus funds will be made available to other Christian teachers facing similar persecution (and there is one more in BC at this time). ******* Thank you for coming to my aid, as my need is great. ******* Chris Kempling Psalm 55: 16-19,22 *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 14 CHRIS KEMPLING'S PENALTY ******* From: Chris Kempling ******* Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 10:59 PM ******* The College has decided that my penalty is to be one month's suspension (the original recommendation of their own committee in November, but rejected by them in January). It is to commence on May 1st unless they agree to suspend it until after the court renders its decision. *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 15 TEACHER TO BE SUSPENDED ONE MONTH WITHOUT PAY FOR WRITING AGAINST HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA IN SCHOOLS ******* from LifeSiteNews.com ******* Wednesday April 16, 2003 ******* Penalty is More Than That Given to Teachers Guilty of Criminal Acts ******* VANCOUVER - Chris Kempling, a Christian and a public school teacher who is under fire for writing letters to the editor of a newspaper in which he objected to the homosexual agenda being brought into classrooms, is facing a one month suspension without pay. The British Columbia College of Teachers, made the decision after considering a more severe penalty of five months without pay. The penalty is to commence May 1st. ******* Kempling, who, for writing the letters to the editor, was found guilty of "conduct unbecoming" a member of the College in May 2002, has appealed the finding to the BC Supreme Court. The case will begin in May. ******* In the letters to the editor Kempling objected to the use of Xtra West, a BC homosexual activist newspaper, which has obscene and vulgar classified ads, as a recommended classroom resource. Further, Kempling objected to the use of propaganda produced by the Gay and Lesbian Educators of BC, published and distributed by the BC Teachers Federation. One such item, Counselling Lesbian and Gay Youth, stated "we must dishonour the attitude that heterosexuality is the only acceptable orientation." ******* Interestingly, Kempling points out that he is being given one month suspension without pay for his letter whereas College disciplinary records indicate other teachers have been issued reprimands (no suspensions) for criminal behaviour such as assault, theft, uttering threats, and flashing. ******* For previous coverage see: ******* TEACHER REPRIMANDED BY COLLEGE FOR OBJECTING TO HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2002/jun/02060702.html *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 16 WHEN ETHICS GOES TO THE DOGS - CATHOLIC CIVIL RIGHTS LEAGUE NEWS RELEASE Western Region 16 April, 2003 ******* What does the Golden Retriever Club of British Columbia have that the BC College of Teachers doesn�t have? ******* Answer: a code of ethics. ******* Perhaps that is why the College of Teachers has suspended a Christian teacher Chris Kempling for one month without pay. His crime: publicly criticizing advocacy of homosexual conduct and relationships. ******* Meanwhile, a teacher is before the BC Human Rights Tribunal seeking an order to have students from kindergarten to grade 12 taught that it is wrong to object to homosexual activity or sex change operations. If he is successful, children from kindergarten to high school will be exposed to displays, parades, and clubs intended to drive out "heterosexism" - the notion that heterosexual relationships are morally or socially preferable. Teachers will be forced to deliver the same lessons in the classroom. ******* In other words, the College believes that teachers can publicly encourage homosexual activity, but that it is disgraceful to publicly oppose it. So disgraceful, in fact, that it warrants a punishment more severe than it has imposed for theft, uttering threats, and sexually inappropriate conduct towards a student. ******* The College refused to adopt a code of ethics because it did not want to be "fettered" in disciplining teachers like Kempling. It also wanted to prevent them from being able to defend themselves by referring to a code. ******* But BCTF members of the College who convicted and sentenced Kempling are bound by the BCTF Code of Ethics, which forbids them from prejudicing the collective strategy of the union. One of those collective strategies is the agenda being pursued by the teacher now before the Human Rights Tribunal. The phrase �conflict of interest� comes to mind. ******* Chris Kempling is appealing his conviction and sentence to the BC Supreme Court. ******* Contributions to "Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund" will help him with his legal expenses. The fund will continue so that it can be used to help other Christian teachers who may find themselves in a similar position. You may contribute to this fund at any Royal Bank branch: transit number, 4720, account number 101-030-5. ******* CCRL Contacts Ed De Vita (B.C. Lower Mainland) Tel:604- 430-9596 E-mail: [email protected] *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 17 CRITIC OF HOMOSEXUALITY CAN TEACH, NOT COUNSEL - Quesnel teacher has to keep his views out of his office. ******* Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 ******* From: "Ted Hewlett" ******* Received courtesy of John Hof. I don't know how many of you have seen it. Walter has already written in response to it. The Sun article is partly on Chris's side, but some of the article is false and some of it misleading. ******* Vancouver Sun Saturday, April 19, 2003 ******* If all goes as planned, Quesnel teacher Chris Kempling will be suspended from school for one month beginning May 1. ******* The B.C. College of Teachers found Mr. Kempling guilty of "conduct unbecoming a member of the BCCT" for letters he wrote to a newspaper criticizing homosexuality. ******* Mr. Kempling, who cites his Christian faith as the basis for his views on homosexuality, has indicated that he will appeal the decision to the B.C. Supreme Court on the grounds that his Charter rights to free expression and religion are being violated. ******* The teacher-counsellor wrote two research essays, and sent several letters to the Quesnel Cariboo Observer and to local officials. In them, he took issue with homosexuality, though it appears his biggest complaint was with what he sees as the "pro-homosexuality" bias of the B.C. school curriculum. ******* Mr. Kempling charged that homosexual relationships are unstable and noted that many religions consider homosexuality abnormal. ******* Of the school curriculum, he wrote: "I refuse to be a false teacher, saying that promiscuity is acceptable, perversion is normal and immorality is simply 'cultural diversity' of which we should be proud." ******* Those are strong words and, indeed, Mr. Kempling has since said he regrets some of his strident words and unkind language. ******* But publishing strong words in a public forum, far away from the school grounds, shouldn't be cause for suspension. ******* To be sure, Mr. Kempling's right to free speech may be rightly circumscribed by his duties as a teacher. The Supreme Court of Canada upheld such restrictions on teachers' freedom when it ruled against New Brunswick teacher Malcolm Ross for his anti-Semitic ravings. ******* But Mr. Kempling's situation is different. He broke no laws, and, while formal objections were raised about Mr. Ross's writings, not one person complained about Mr. Kempling's. Even the BCCT admitted that there was no evidence Mr. Kempling's words resulted in a poisoned school environment, but it concluded that an inference can be drawn as to the consequences of his discriminatory comments. ******* The BCCT has no business drawing such inferences. And if Mr. Kempling commits no offences and keeps his views out of the classroom, the BCCT has no business taking any action against him, either. ******* That said, Mr. Kempling is also a school counsellor, which means that he might well deal with children who are wrestling with questions about their sexual orientation. And he has made it clear that he will be guided by his religious beliefs when counselling such students. ******* After the BCCT delivered its decision, Mr. Kempling sent a letter to B.C. Parents and Teachers for Life in which he wrote: ******* "I am very worried about the plight of children who are confused about their sexual orientation -- they need to hear a message of hope that there are recognized and effective treatments for those who wish to change their orientation." ******* Those "effective" treatments aren't recognized by the Canadian Psychiatric Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the Canadian Medical Association or the American Medical Association. Those organizations have condemned the use of reparative therapy, the treatment touted by some Christian groups as a cure for homosexuality. ******* According to the APA, "psychiatric literature strongly demonstrates that treatment attempts to change sexual orientation are ineffective. However, the potential risks are great, including depression, anxiety and self destructive behaviour." ******* Mr. Kempling, who holds two master's degrees and has completed some work toward a doctorate in psychology, is clearly willing, when counselling his students, to allow his religious beliefs to trump the latest psychiatric research. ******* That's unacceptable. Mr. Kempling is employed by a public school board, not a parochial one. If he can't keep his religion out of his counselling office, then the BCCT is right to close down that office for one month. And if he continues to let his religion guide his counseling practice, the BCCT should shut down his office for good. ******* But he should still be allowed to teach as long as he keeps his personal views to himself while he's in the classroom. ******* � Copyright 2003 Vancouver Sun ******* Copyright � 2003 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest Global Communications Corp. All rights reserved. ******* COMMENT: The author of the Sun article is misinformed. Dr. Robert Spitzer, who was instrumental in removing homosexuality from the American Psychiatric Association's list of mental disorders, after seeing the evidence, now admits that reparative therapy works. ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 18 BRITISH COLUMBIA COLLEGE OF TEACHERS NEWS RELEASE (April 22, 2003) ******* The College of Teachers conducted a discipline hearing into the conduct of Christopher Stephen Myles Kempling on the grounds of conduct unbecoming a member. ******* The hearing was held on April 15, 2002, at the College offices. The hearing on penalty cost and publication was held on November 18, 2002 at the College offices. The report and recommendations of the Hearing Panel were presented to Council on January 23, 2003. A further oral hearing with the full Council on penalty and costs was held April 1, 2003. Council further considered this matter on April 3, 2003. ******* The citation alleged that Christopher Stephen Myles Kempling, between July, 1997, and August, 2000, made discriminatory and derogatory statement against homosexuals in a number of published writings. ******* The Hearing Panel found Christopher Stephen Myles Kempling guilty of conduct unbecoming a member. ******* The following reasons were considered in the determination of the penalty: ******* The number, the content and the extended period of time of Mr. Kempling�s writings and publications which contained derogatory and demeaning statements against homosexual people. ******* It is Mr. Kempling�s actions and not his beliefs that are incompatible with his role as a teacher in a school system that must function in an environment of tolerance and understanding. ******* Mr. Kempling�s actions disclose failure to uphold values that are fundamental to the education system and Canadian society, values that include sexual equality and respect for persons of differing sexual orientation. ******* Furthermore, Mr. Kempling used his status as a teacher to give authority and credibility to these views. ******* Mr. Kempling�s publication in the local newspaper caused considerable distress and division among members of the community including the teaching community. ******* The Council determined that Mr. Kempling�s professional teaching certificate be suspended for a period of one month from May 1, 2003. ******* Contact W. Douglas Smart, Registrar, 604 731 8170 ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 19 SUPPORT FOR CHRIS KEMPLING AND SUSAN MARTINUK ******* From: "D.Fernandes" ******* Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 ******* re: Susan Martinuk's Vancouver Province article "Teachers' college -- not Christian educator -- guilty of intolerance" ******* The B.C. College of Teachers (BCCT) seems determined to prove that teachers who are members of the Christian faith are unfit to teach in public schools. Its charge: Christians don't promote homosexual practices and, thus, they discriminate against students who may be homosexuals and they create a 'poisoned,' homophobic class environment. ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 20 CHRIS KEMPLING'S SPEECH TO CITIZENS OF QUESNEL May 12, 2003 ******* The following is the text of the speech Chris Kempling presented to the friends attending the Renaissance-sponsored "Chris Kempling Appreciation night", May 12, 2003, in the Quesnel Seniors' Centre ******* My name is Chris Kempling and I am a free man. I�m a free man because I�ve been redeemed by my Saviour, Jesus Christ. But I�m also a free man because I�m a citizen of a country that values freedom. We value freedom so much that we sent our fathers and sons, husbands and brothers, uncles and boy friends, and some of our daughters and sisters, as well, to far off lands to defend those freedoms. And the names of those who didn�t make it back are engraved on that cenotaph just a stone�s throw from this building. My father and my grandfather laid their lives on the line in two world wars. And my great uncle Harold, and my uncle Russell paid for that freedom with their blood. One lies in Flanders fields, killed during the battle for Vimy Ridge, the other in a graveyard in England, after crashing his Spitfire during the battle of Britain. While I haven�t put on a uniform like my father, I am a Christian soldier and I do not fear what man can do to me, and I am standing up for freedom. ******* Freedom! We ask God to keep our land glorious and free in our national anthem. In 1982, our sovereign, Queen Elizabeth, signed a Charter of Rights of Freedoms. It says that all citizens of this land have the right to freedom of religion, and freedom of speech, and freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association. And I cherish those freedoms�all of them. ******* I am also a citizen of Quesnel, these past 23 years. All of my three children have been born here, and I have devoted my professional skills and thousands of volunteer hours to make this a better place to live. So how did all this get started? In August of 1996, I attended a Ministry of Education sponsored workshop in Vancouver on Youth at Risk. One of the sessions was entitled Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Youth at Risk, and I thought it would be a good idea for me to find out more about this student group. In the session, the presenters made the erroneous claim that homosexuals form 10% of the population. They also handed us a copy of Xtra West newspaper, the paper of the gay community in Vancouver, and recommended we use it in our classrooms and counseling office waiting rooms. They said, �But you may not want to look at the classified ads? Of course we all did. I was appalled by what I read. There were numerous advertisements for bathhouses, which are notorious venues for orgies and perversion. The personal ads were absolutely pornographic with people describing their genitalia in great detail and requesting partners for casual sex, including sex involving urine and feces. They gave us another resource booklet with addresses and phone numbers of programs and services for gay youth. I was a little confused by one called Vancouver Jack and asked what that was. I was told it was a masturbation club. ******* When I realized that these workshop presenters actually wanted us to provide pornographic material to students and encourage them to join masturbation clubs, I was greatly disturbed and started writing letters privately, to my union and to the Minister of Education. Neither was concerned. When I realized that no one in authority was prepared to take any action, I decided to educate myself, and start writing directly to the public, to make parents aware of what was being proposed for their children. ******* The result of my efforts to inform parents was that on May 9th of last year I was convicted of conduct unbecoming a member of the BC College of Teachers. The reason was because I expressed my opinion in the Quesnel Cariboo Observer. Between April 1997 and July, 2000, I wrote one freelance column and six letters to the editor in the Quesnel Cariboo Observer, which questioned the wisdom of promoting the homosexual agenda. I provided factual information on rates of promiscuity and disease infection which had been previously published in scholarly journals. I quoted from members of the homosexual community such as John McKellar, the president of an organization called Homosexuals Opposed to Pride Extremism, who do not share the radical agenda espoused by the Gay and Lesbian Educators of BC (GALE) and the BC Teachers?Federation. I said that many religions consider homosexuality to be immoral, that it may be caused by negative psycho-social influences, and that it wasn�t something to be applauded. I said this not in my classroom, or my staff room, but on the editorial pages of our newspaper, primarily during the summer months. I had thought that the editorial page was a place where all Canadians have the right to express their points of view, whether other people like them or not. ******* I have been a freelance journalist for over 20 years and I highly value the freedom of the press. Maybe you saw my picture in the recent anniversary edition. I�m the one with the bag over his head�that�s right, I�m the mysterious Johnny Quesnel. Say, I guess I just came out of the closet! I wrote that column for people�s amusement, but I also wrote about things which are much more serious. I believe all points of view should be represented in our newspapers, including those opposed to mine. But a man by the name of Hayward Broun once said, �Everyone favours free speech in the slack moment when no axes are being ground.?And how true that is. ******* Our editor Neil Horner made the decision to publish my letters, and believe me, he does not personally support my point of view. Yet I think Mr. Horner is the most unappreciated man in our community. While I do not always agree with his editorial decisions I respect him as a fellow professional, and one who values freedom of the press as much as I do. And I want to thank publicly Marcus Ermisch for his fair, balanced and accurate reports of my case in the Observer. ******* Freedom of the press is a vital element of any democracy. Mr. Horner published four letters from Quesnel citizens who were supportive of me. He published more than twice as many letters from people who were opposed to my point of view. They criticized me very harshly, calling me homophobic and undeserving of being a teacher in the public school system. ******* That I am allegedly homophobic is absurd. I have yet to meet a gay person with whom I do not get along, and certainly am not afraid of them. In fact, I have been a guest in the home of an openly gay man, a colleague whom I befriended during my masters degree program at Uvic, as well as two others. Homophobic? I don�t think so. In fact, I have yet to encounter anyone in my 16 years of being a mental health therapist who has an irrational fear of homosexuals, although I�m sure there are some out there. The gay lobby is misusing a mental health term for propaganda purposes. Orientation bias is a more accurate term and one that ethical educators ought to be using. ******* Someone in Quesnel, who is not a homosexual, and who has no connection whatsoever with the school system, collected all these newspaper clippings and sent them to the College of Teachers. When they asked me to respond in my defense, I sent them copies of private letters I had written to Quesnel city councilors, as well as confidential memos to my Director of Instruction. I also sent them two unpublished research essays I had written as part of my doctorate in psychology. All of these documents clearly showed that my views were based on scholarly research and my Christian beliefs. None of the recipients of these private letters expressed any concerns to me, or to the College, over their contents, and that includes a letter I wrote to Barry Nordin in his role of city counselor. ******* The College�s response was to add these documents to their list of evidence against me, and to declare that �everything you have written in its entirety is discriminatory and derogatory? When I pointed out that Human Rights legislation in BC forbids the use of private documents to establish that public discrimination has occurred, and that my Christian beliefs are protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, they simply repeated their claim that everything I had written was derogatory and discriminatory in its entirety. This includes quotations from gay writers, quotes from the Bible, and even a letter which actually supported one of the major goals of the gay lobby. But because these were contained in something I wrote, it was deemed discriminatory. I�m still trying to figure out why quoting homosexuals constitutes discrimination against homosexuals. ******* If their verdict stands, teachers will not be able to write privately to their own supervisors to question a new curriculum resource, or write privately their own elected officials on a matter of public policy, nor will they able to address the topic of homosexuality in post graduate research papers. This is an unacceptable restriction of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and freedom of intellectual expression. ******* The College of Teachers thinks that my membership with them trumps all of my other memberships and associations. It doesn�t. I have the freedom to associate with a Christian church and the freedom to act as a self employed therapist who believes that orientation can be changed. And if we cannot act or speak in a manner consistent with our other associations, what kind of freedom is that? I rent 40 hours of my time each week to be a teacher�and the College of Teachers has no right to tell me what to think or say when I am acting on my own time, with my own religious beliefs, or in ways consistent with my membership and associations with other groups, if those actions have no negative effect on my ability to do my job�even the College has admitted it found no evidence of negative impact. ******* But I�m a reasonable guy. So in October of 2000, I promised my superiors that I would stop writing on this topic in the local paper. I had made my point, and saw no further need to continue the debate. In February 2001, I made the same offer to the College of Teachers, without being asked to, so that the matter could be resolved without further controversy. Their response was to launch a full investigation, and send an investigator to Quesnel to speak to community members, to my colleagues and supervisors. They did not even ask to interview me, and to this day I have yet to speak directly with anyone from the College of Teachers about my case. Can you imagine being convicted of a crime without ever being interviewed by the police? It happened to me. ******* The investigator did not find any evidence of a �poisoned atmosphere?at my school. She did not find any evidence that students, gay or straight, were negatively impacted by what I had written. They ignored the 14 letters of commendation in my personnel file, as well as the letter from my former Vice Principal William Fowkes who declared that in his seven years of supervising me, my publicly expressed views had no impact whatsoever on the learning atmosphere at my school. Four other administrators at Correlieu wrote letters saying the same thing. ******* The College presented no complaints about what I had written publicly from teachers, none from students, none from parents, and most importantly, none from any member of the gay community. The people who did disagree with me did so by writing their own letters to the editor, and I fully support their right to do that. ******* In their verdict, the College of Teachers compared me to White Supremacist Nazi hatemongers like James Keegstra and Malcolm Ross. That really hurt. I have dedicated my entire adult life to supporting children. I am a Big Brother, and am on my third match in 10 years. I was president of the Quesnel agency of Big Brothers for four years. I have been a member of the Quesnel Child & Youth Support Society for twenty-one years and was president for 14 of those years. Currently, I am a part-time children�s therapist for that society. To have the College of Teachers declare that I am somehow a danger to children is outrageous and defamatory. They actually intended to suspend me from teaching for five months, and decided on a lesser penalty only after my lawyer made a vigorous defence on my behalf. In my view, they are simply repeating the groundless accusations they laid against the Christian student teachers of Trinity Western University. ******* So where does this hostility to freedom of speech come from? Perhaps the clue is in a conversation between a Prince George teacher, who is now retired, and Douglas Smart, the registrar of the College of Teachers. When this teacher asked Mr. Smart in 1996 what he hoped to accomplish by pursuing the Trinity Western case, he allegedly replied, �We intend to arrange it so that no teacher will dare to write any letter to the editor critical of homosexuality, and will not even raise their voice on this issue on any public street corner.?Our Member of Parliament Phillip Mayfield called the College of Teachers, the �thought police?in a recent column published in the Observer, and given Mr. Smart�s statement, I�m inclined to agree. ******* Some people have wondered if I am getting any support. The College of Teachers has already received hundreds of letters of protest. The December 3rd, 2002 edition of the Vancouver Province, published 17 letters to the editor on my case and 16 of them were critical of the College. I have had e-mails, letters of support, and financial donations from almost every province and many U.S. states. I recently received donations to my legal trust fund of $1000 from three different people. The Catholic Civil Rights League, REAL Women of Canada, and the Canadian Alliance for Social Justice and Family Values Association have pledged their support. I have received character references or letters of support from Mayor Bello, former mayor Wallace, Dr. John Wilson, the president of Big Brothers, the president of the Child & Youth Support Society, the CEO of our hospital, the chair of the Quesnel Christian Ministerial Association, the President of the Quesnel School District support workers union, my current principal, my former principal, three former vice principals, Psychologist Dr. Christopher Montoya, Psychiatrist Dr. William Glutowski, and Bishop Dorrington, the Anglican Bishop of Victoria. And two weeks ago, Rafe Mair blasted the College for their suppression of free speech in his radio talk show. A group of nuns in Alabama e-mailed me to say that they would be praying for me for 30 days for 24 hours per day. I cried when I read that. I am receiving a great deal of support. ******* The Supreme Court case that is to come some time this month will be about whether my Charter rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion have been violated. The College of Teachers has told my lawyer that they do not need any evidence of actual harm to discipline a member, only the possibility that harm could occur. This position is so alarming that even the BC Teachers Federation lawyer Susan Charlton stated, and I quote, �This a very bad decision for teachers.? ******* Think about it. Is our respect for freedom of speech so frayed that no one employed as a teacher is permitted to express a controversial opinion? Why do I not have the same right to express my point of view as a Christian, when gay activists who are teachers not only have total freedom to say whatever they want, with the enthusiastic support of the BCTF. It is patently unfair. ******* The School Act of British Columbia states that the highest morality must be inculcated. To inculcate means to emphasize by repeated teaching. I ask you�why is Christian morality not considered to be part of the highest morality? Why is it that a very small cohort of a small minority can dictate to the rest of us that our version of morality is not acceptable? According to Murray Mollard, the executive director of the BC Civil Liberties Association, highest morality means secular morality and for that reason he has refused to offer any assistance to protect freedom of speech and freedom of religion. He said I might try to convert someone at my school, which frankly is a stupid statement. His declaration was very surprising to me since I had not even asked them for support. He basically volunteered not to help me, before I even asked for it. I find it appalling that the BC Civil Liberties Association has such a low regard for freedom of speech and freedom of religion. ******* According to the gay lobby, highest morality that means we are obliged to celebrate homosexuality. I believe that there is only one highest morality, however, and that is the revealed Word of God, and I for one will not accept a lower standard of morality for my children and neither should you for your children and grandchildren. ******* But this case is more than about my personal Charter freedoms. This is also about whether the Gay and Lesbian Educators of BC and their allies in the BC Teachers Federation have the right to use biased learning resources to indoctrinate Christian children, and children of other faith communities such as Sikhs, Jews, Jehovah�s Witnesses, Mormons and Muslims, with the pro-gay agenda and do whatever they wish with impunity. ******* A little history. In 1997, the BCTF launched a campaign to eliminate so-called homophobia and heterosexism. To that end they published and distributed to every school district, lesson aids written by the Gay and Lesbian Educators of BC. In these lessons aids, GALE implies that everyone who does not support the pro-gay agenda is homophobic and needs to change their views. When I wrote to them saying that it was unprofessional to accuse people who happened to believe that homosexuality was morally wrong due to their religious beliefs, and entirely inappropriate to declare that those who held those beliefs had some sort of mental illness, a phobia, or irrational fear, they ignored me. ******* In their lesson aid Counselling Lesbian and Gay Youth, the authors state that �we must dishonour the prevailing belief that heterosexuality is the only acceptable orientation? I pointed out to them that it was unprofessional and unethical to attempt to dishonour the religious beliefs of children in their classrooms, and the moral teachings of their parents. They ignored me. ******* In their lesson aid Challenging Homophobia in Schools, GALE states that homosexuals make up 10% of the population. That is false. That figure is from the discredited Kinsey study in 1948. Most people don�t know that 26% of the men in his study were prison inmates, and he asked them if they had had sex with another man in the last year. Well, duh! The most recent comprehensive and valid study done by researchers at the University of Chicago in 1994 found that it is between 2 & 3%. Another study in Holland published in 2001 found identical figures. The College found me guilty of misconduct for publicly correcting that error. ******* They blame the high suicide rate among homosexuals on homophobia. There have never been any studies which show that. They state that homosexuality is inherited and unchangeable. That is not true, either. The origins of homosexuality have never been proven by any current research, and anyone who claims there is definitive proof of homosexuality as an inherited condition is talking through their hat. Even the authors of the studies which seem to show a genetic connection, such as Dr. Dean Hamer, have publicly denied that their studies prove inherency. ******* Furthermore, there is plenty of evidence that homosexual individuals who wish to change their orientation can do so, and some of them do so with no therapy whatsoever. I have met and spoken with some of them and they are very happy to be ex-homosexuals. The journal of the American Psychological Association has recently published research on reparative therapy, and so has the Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy. This fall, the psychiatrist who spear-headed the removal of homosexuality from the handbook of psychological disorders in 1973, Dr. Spitzer, will publish research on successful orientation change in the Archives of Sexual Behavior. Apparently he was convinced by ex-gays that change is indeed possible. Anyone can read about the techniques for change on the following websites: narth.com, peoplecanchange.com, pfox.org, gaytostraight.org, and exodusnorthamerica.org. ******* GALE states in a lesson plan resource called Famous Gays and Lesbians in History, that David, the author of the Psalms, was the gay lover of Jonathan. How dare they insult and slander one of the most revered figures of the Christian and Jewish faiths. This document was endorsed by the then president of the BC Teachers Federation, David Chudnovsky and MP Svend Robinson. Why am I not surprised? The resource is unprofessional, unethical, inaccurate, and in my opinion, meets the definition of propaganda. It is both insulting and insensitive to members of the Christian faith. ******* The BCTF passed a resolution in 1998 that calls for pro-gay themes in every grade from Kindergarten to grade 12 and in every curriculum area. Currently, two homosexual teachers have launched an appeal to the BC Human Rights Tribunal to force the Ministry of Education to implement this policy and make it mandatory for all teachers to teach this to your children. The BCTF has devoted thousands of dollars of union funds to publish and distribute the GALE resources. ******* I am in trouble, because I publicly stated that these policies were offensive to the religious beliefs of many students, parents and teachers, and that I would refuse to implement them. I am a Christian seven days a week, both on the job and off the job, and I will not compromise my faith to deliver these union directives. ******* So what can we do? The BCTF Code of Ethics also requires that teachers be mindful of the rights and sensibilities of their students. Now that means that I cannot preach in my classroom, or refer a student for orientation change therapy if they or their parents have not requested it. But it also means that students from faith communities who believe that this is a moral issue, should not be indoctrinated with teachings about sexuality which directly contradict the values of their faith. That would create a poisoned atmosphere for our children. It means that teachers should not use biased, inaccurate and propaganda-like teaching resources. It means that no teacher should be trying to dishonour the teachings of the word of God. ******* There is another point in the Teachers?Code of Ethics which says this: The teacher recognizes that a privileged relationship with students exists and refrains from exploiting that relationship for material, ideological, or other advantage. That means that using biased resources to implement BCTF policies hostile to Christian beliefs is unethical, because it exploits children for ideological advantage. To combat heterosexism, which is the belief that only heterosexuality is appropriate moral sexual behaviour, means that Christian and Sikh and Mormon children must be taught the opposite of what we teach them in our homes and in our churches and temples. ******* The gay lobby wants to teach your children that homosexuality is safe, normal and as acceptable as heterosexuality. But is that true? In 1994, research by Cameron and Cameron looked at the obituaries of 18 gay publications. They compared 6700 obituaries with a comparable number of obituaries in regular newspapers. The average age of death of never divorced heterosexual men was 75. It was 78 for women. The average age of death for gay men was 42, and if they died of AIDS it was 38. The average age of death for lesbian women was 44. The three main causes of death were AIDS, drug and alcohol abuse, and domestic violence. Health Canada statistics state that almost 80% of all those with AIDS are men who have sex with other men. Health Canada also reports that 40% of young gay men in Vancouver are having anal sex without using condoms, which is the most efficient way to contract HIV and other serious illnesses. This is despite 20 years of anti-AIDS education. Recent statistics show that the rate of AIDS infection is going up in both Canada and the US in the homosexual community. ******* These rates are so high because of promiscuous sexual behavior. In 1980, a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that study members had, on average, 100 sex partners per year. Another study done in 1982 by the US Center for Disease Control found that men with AIDS had an average of 1,100 lifetime sex partners, and most of them were strangers. That means that half of this study group had more than 1100 sex partners. I was found guilty of conduct unbecoming a teacher for quoting that statistic, so if there are any spies from the College in the audience, I just did it again. ******* There are now reports that gay men are purposely infecting themselves with HIV because they are too stressed by all the precautions they have to take to avoid getting it�unbelievable. ******* How about mental health. A study done in Holland by Sandfort et al, and published in the Archives of General Psychiatry in 2001, looked at the mental health of almost 6000 individuals and compared heterosexuals to homosexuals. In every single major category of mental illness�depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, panic disorder, phobias, and in substance abuse, homosexuals had incident rates 3 to 9 times that of the general population. The gay lobby claims that their problems are due to so-called homophobia. But Holland is one of the most gay friendly countries on the planet. Yet these mental health problems are almost the same as in the US, where homosexuality is much less accepted. Their mental health problems are not due to homophobia, but more likely due to destructive lifestyle choices, and dysfunctional early lives. ******* I am in trouble, because I stood up and said that teachers should not be encouraging behaviour which puts children at risk. And as I have just shown, the risks of practicing the gay lifestyle are life threatening, life shortening, and a detriment to mental health. The CAPP curriculum requires teachers to teach students to avoid lifestyle practices which put them at risk of acquiring HIV-AIDS and other STD�s. And I agree with that requirement. I think we should teach children the truth, and teach them how to stay safe. We harangue kids repeatedly about the dangers of tobacco, alcohol, drugs, drinking and driving, reckless driving and other high risk activities. I find it amazing that the BC Teachers Federation believes it acceptable to teach children that engaging in homosexual behaviour is safe, normal, and okay. ******* So what can you do? You can write to the College of Teachers, and to the Education Minister, you can make financial contributions to the legal defense fund, and you can take an active interest in what goes on in our schools by attending parent advisory council meetings or using the school district�s challenge policy to ensure inappropriate materials are not being used in your children�s classroom. I can tell you that a package of this material was recently delivered to Quesnel schools by a gay activist group in Prince George, and they are requesting that we use them. I have personally reviewed them and I am not impressed. ******* But when we take action, we must do it in a way that protects not only our own children, but children who are indeed confused about their orientation. They need to be protected from harassment and name-calling, and I call upon the parents here to encourage your children to stand up in defense of those who are, or appear to be gay. Let it never be said of our children that they participated in the harassment of their classmates because of their orientation. These children deserve our compassion and support, because I am convinced that most of them cannot help how they feel. The research shows that large numbers of adults who are homosexual were molested or seduced by gay pedophiles before the age of 14, the legal age of consent. ******* Parents, talk your children as I have done with my own, and tell them that you expect them to intervene to protect those who are subjected to name-calling and harassment. There is a middle ground, where children who need support and protection from harassment can receive it, while children from the various faith communities are also protected from inaccurate teaching resources about orientation issues. ******* But some children and their parents need to hear a message of hope that orientation is indeed changeable, and that there is help for them if they wish to change. As a clinical member of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, I hope I can assist my colleagues who wish to help those who want to change. ******* Sometime in August, I will face my accusers in court, and ask a judge to defend my freedom of speech and freedom of religion. If they can take these freedoms from me, they can take it from you. My lawyer has said these precedent setting cases are used for all types of regulated professions�nurses, doctors, engineers, social workers, pharmacists, and so on. I am standing up for freedom, and I am standing up for the safety and well being of our children, and I ask you to stand with me. Thank you for inviting me to speak. ******* Chris Kempling M.Ed. M.A. R.C.C. Registered Clinical Counsellor 250-983-3949 Quesnel, BC V2J 5R5 [email protected] ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 21 UPDATE ON CHRIS KEMPLING ******* From: "D.Fernandes" ******* Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 23:36:06 -0700 ******* Update on Chris Kempling - excerpt from Lifesite Daily News, May 28, 2003 ******* July Court Hearing of Case Of Christian Teacher Suspended Over Objections To Homosexual Agenda ******* VANCOUVER, May 28, 2003 (LifeSiteNews.com) - LifeSite News interviewed Chris Kempling this week. Kempling is nearing the end of his one month suspension without pay from his teaching job for having objected, via a letter to the editor of a local newspaper, to the homosexual agenda being foisted on public schools. ******* Kempling told LifeSite that while he is contemplating moving and looking for other work, he is still employed as a teacher and looking forward to his upcoming July 28 and 29 court challenge to the suspension. Kempling noted that the BC Teacher's Federation (BCTF) was forced to fund his challenge due to its own policy mandates. However, he noted he was previously twice rejected this funding despite BCTF policy mandating funding for cases of teachers in conflict with the College of Teachers. ******* In a strange twist, the B.C. Liberal government has replaced the 20 leaders of the BCCT. Thus the case may even be dropped following the possible withdrawal of charges of professional misconduct against Kempling. ******* However, Kempling's supervisors have muzzled him completely. He has been told that he is not permitted to write anything on the topic of homosexuality. Moreover, he is never to express any professional or personal opinion on homosexuality in any school district facility. The last requirement is particularly troublesome as Kempling is teaching psychology, a course which covers human sexuality. ******* Kempling told LifeSite that he has so far received $35,000 in contributions toward his legal fees. ******* To assist Kempling with his legal bills: ******* Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund ******* c/o Jim Sagert ******* 798 Beaubien Ave ******* Quesnel, BC, V2J 1S5 ******* See related LifeSite coverage: ******* TEACHER TO BE SUSPENDED ONE MONTH WITHOUT PAY FOR WRITING AGAINST HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA IN SCHOOLS http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/apr/03041603.html ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 22 INTERVENTION BY THE BC CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION ******* 03-07-06 from Chris Kempling ******* It may interest you to know that the BC Civil Liberties Association has officially applied for intervenor status in my case against the BC College of Teachers--and intend to support the College. Apparently this civil liberties organization believes professional bodies are entitled to regulate the free speech of its members. Keep in mind I have not been accused of any crime or even had a complaint laid against me before a Human Rights Tribunal. I was simply expressing the views of my faith community on the matter of same sex behaviour. Now I will be facing the BCCLA as opponents. The hypocrisy of this organization is appalling. I'll be in BC Supreme Court on July 28th and 29th. ******* Chris Kempling ******* Quesnel, BC ******* Psalm 3 ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 23 COURT CASE - LATEST INFORMATION ******* date July 27, 2003 ******* If you wish more info on Chris and/or if you wish to contribute to his defence fund, go to: http://www.bcptl.org ******* The court case dates are July 28th and 29th. The BC Civil Liberties Association has been granted intervenor status and half an hour to make their statement. There is a possibility of postponement, however, either due to unavailability of a judge or other reasons. Nevertheless, this is the current information. ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 24 UPDATE ON CHRIS KEMPLING'S JULY 28-30, 2003 HEARING IN THE BRITISH COLUMBIA SUPREME COURT ******* From: "BCPTL ListMaster" (website: www.bcptl.org ******* E-mail address: [email protected]) ******* Phone (voice and fax): 604-512-9594 ******* Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 17:01:25 -0700 ******* Chris Kempling's appeal of the British Columbia College of Teachers finding that he was guilty of conduct unbecoming a member was heard July 28-30th at the BC Supreme Court, 800 Smithe Street, Vancouver. We understand that the extra day was added due to the BC Civil Liberties Association's intervention--against Chris. We had the sad spectacle of an organization supposedly dedicated to individual liberty intervening against someone whose only offence has been to exercise his right of free speech on behalf of students. ******* We are now able to give Chris Kempling's account of the British Columbia Supreme Court's hearing of his appeal of the BCCT finding. Justice Holmes, who heard Chris's appeal, reserved decision. Chris may not know the result of the hearing for three or four months. We are happy that besides a number of members of BC Parents and Teachers for Life, a number of teachers were present at the court to encourage Chris Kempling. ******* [Click here for Chris Kempling's account of the BC Supreme Court hearing. Hyperlink: http://www.bcptl.org/#Aug._2_2003] ************************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 25 WHO WILL STAND WITH CHRIS KEMPLING IN DEFENCE OF TRUTH AND FREEDOM? ******* From: "BCPTL ListMaster" (website: www.bcptl.org ******* E-mail address: [email protected]) ******* Phone (voice and fax): 604-512-9594 ******* Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 17:01:25 -0700 ******* Some of our readers who have followed Chris Kempling�s story may have gotten the impression that the support for his stand against pro-homosexuality propaganda in the schools and for his right to free speech has been overwhelming. Well, he has received strong support from individuals in many parts of this continent and from some organizations. Those who have heard him speak have been practically unanimous in being impressed by his quiet and reasonable statements in defence of the children and youth in our schools. ******* Yet something needs to be said�and said even at the risk of causing offence and of alienating some who are on our side but who need to know the truth. It is this: While Chris�s support from many individuals has been gratifying, the support from some quarters has been decidedly underwhelming. ******* Chris is a devout Christian. One might have expected strong support for his stand from the Christian churches. We are grateful to those who have opened their doors and allowed him to tell his story. But he has not exactly been swamped with speaking requests. In fact, some churches have been distinctly reluctant to identify with someone so controversial. One might have expected that a variety of church organizations would have issued statements in support of Chris�s stand against pro-homosexuality propaganda in the schools. Parachurch organizations such as Focus on the Family and the Catholic Civil Rights League have given publicity to his case (as well as organizations such as BC Parents and Teachers for Life and the Canadian Family Action Coalition and others). But, to our knowledge, official church organizations generally have not yet taken a public stand on the issues regarding public education in British Columbia which Chris has raised. ******* Chris is a teacher and school counsellor�one who in his years of service to the youth of his community earned high praise. We might have expected that some group of teachers would have openly come to his defence�particularly since the right to the freedom of speech that is called into question is not just Chris�s right but their own. But although individual teachers have expressed admiration for his stand and some have given support, the reaction from most teachers has been public silence. Teachers are in a somewhat public position, and seem to feel vulnerable. But a lack of willingness to speak out on issues of education is hardly to their credit, and is in fact likely to undermine their own freedom. It is understandable to react in fear lest Chris�s fate should befall them, but it would surely be worthy of respect if a group of teachers were to publicly declare, as Chris has done, that they will not be a party to the dissemination of falsehoods among the young. It would certainly be to their credit if they would take a stand as a group against the misuse of the public schools for harmful propaganda. ******* Chris is a citizen who has exercised what most have regarded as the ordinary rights of free speech which any citizen is entitled to, and which, indeed, are essential to the survival of any democracy. One might have thought that those who value free speech would have come to his defence. There is in British Columbia an organization called the BC Civil Rights Association. Here is a group whose very reason for being is ostensibly to defend such basic rights as the right to publicly enter into debate on public issues�just what Chris has done. Yet we had the spectacle of an official of the BC Civil Rights Association publicly stating his hostility to Chris�s stand and his unwillingness to defend him, even though Chris had not requested defence from this organization. Now we witnessed this supposed bastion of liberty, this organization dedicated to the defence of civil rights, seeking to intervene in Chris�s appeal in the BC Supreme Court�against Chris. ******* Who will stand with Chris Kempling in defence of truth and freedom? Our readers may rightly construe this article as an appeal for support from those groups who one would expect to be the natural supporters of Chris Kempling�s stand. But it is also an appeal to individuals to stand up�or to continue standing up�for the truth and for the right of teachers and others to speak on behalf of the children and youth of our schools ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 26 COLLIDING WORLDVIEWS: HOW TO SURVIVE AS A NARTH MEMBER IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM ******* From: "D.Fernandes" ******* Subject: Emailing: 2003conference ******* Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 23:07:58 -0700 ******* See info on Chris Kempling on the NARTH website below: ******* Chris S. M. Kempling, M.Ed., M.A., RCC Mr. Kempling is a Registered Clinical Counselor living in Quesnel, British Columbia. He works as a high school counselor and teacher, and as a children's therapist and counselor in private practice. He is currently appealing disciplinary action by his profession and his school district for publicly questioning the agenda of the homosexual lobby in public education. http://www.narth.com/docs/2003conference.html ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 27 THE GREAT DIVIDE: ETHICAL DIVISIONS BETWEEN SOCIAL LIBERALS AND SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES REGARDING SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR ******* By Chris Kempling M.Ed. M.A. R.C.C. November 23, 2003 ******* The raging public debate over same sex marriages in Canada, and now Massachusetts, has highlighted the great divide between those who are socially liberal, and those who are socially conservative. Generally speaking, the socially liberal are found on the centre-left of the political spectrum, and include labour unions, women�s and gay rights organizations, human rights tribunals, much of the popular media, a good proportion of the "intelligentsia", and, it may be argued, the judiciary. Social conservatives tend to occupy the political right, and may be found in large numbers among those who adhere to organized religions, and many immigrant cultural groups. The socially liberal appear to be in the ascendancy and have been remarkably successful in achieving many of their goals to "modernize" culture and society. Social conservatives decry such "progress", seeing instead a degradation of moral behaviour and standards of social conduct. ******* A very thoughtful analysis of why this great divide exists is contained in an article entitled "Sexual Morality: The cultures and emotions of conservatives and liberals", published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology (Haidt and Hersh, 2001). Haidt and Hersh argue that, in the area of sexual conduct, social liberals operate within a narrow moral framework which they call the "ethics of autonomy (EOA). The ethics of autonomy hold that only acts that cause harm to self or others should be condemned. Acts which are consensual and are perceived not to cause harm should be tolerated or even affirmed. Under EOA, rationalization for approval of various non-traditional sexual behaviours is justified under the concept of the right of individuals to behave autonomously, acting according to their own conscience, rather than a higher authority. ******* It can be argued that EOA is foundational to the arguments social liberals make for re-defining what types of sexual behaviours and relationships are acceptable in today�s society. Thus, when people say that there is nothing wrong with allowing homosexuals to marry, or that homosexuality should be taught as a normal variant in public school sex education classes, or that adult-child sex is not really harmful and should be permitted, they are using the ethics of autonomy as the philosophical base for their position. The EOA recently prevailed in the US when the Supreme Court struck down the anti-sodomy laws of Texas. Pierre Trudeau�s decision in 1968 to remove homosexual acts from the criminal code, because "the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nations", was also an EOA based decision. ******* Social conservatives operate on a much broader moral plain. Haidt and Hersh posit that social conservatives base their attitudes of what is morally acceptable on two additional sets of ethics: the ethics of community (EOC) and the ethics of divinity (EOD). The ethics of community are concerned with duty, perceived social roles, traditions, mutual respect, and what is appropriate for maintaining social order and family life. EOC is found in such organizations as Focus on the Family, REAL Women and the Canadian Alliance for Social Justice and Family Values. The latter organization is almost entirely made up of Chinese Canadians. Middle Eastern and South Asian cultural groups (religiously Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus) would also ascribe to EOC values. ******* People holding to EOC values are genuinely concerned about the decay of family and societal values, and perceive that those who ascribe to EOA values rank hedonism, the pursuit of pleasure, as more important than maintaining the social fabric. ******* The ethics of divinity (EOD) are concerned with the sacred, purity, and with living a life consistent with the requirements of God, generally as revealed in sacred scriptures. Those who ascribe to EOD believe in a universal moral order, ordained by God, and that to depart from it risks eternal separation from the divine in the life to come. All the world�s great religions hold to these beliefs. Thus, in the area of sexual morality, EOD believers have behavioural standards much more restricted than those who hold to EOA beliefs. This is why when EOD people write publicly, they often tend to cite holy scripture as the justification for their concerns. The reaction from those in the EOA camp is often dismissive, because they generally do not subscribe to the concept of accountability to a divinely ordained universal moral code. Heidt and Hersh found in their research, not surprisingly, that study participants from conservative church groups were much more likely to use EOD than EOA in their assessment of what types of sexual behaviours were acceptable. Atheists and the non-religious tended to use EOA in their assessments, and consequently were more accepting of non-traditional sexual behaviours. ******* There has been a growing tendency among those in the EOA camp to accuse those in the EOC/EOD camp of "homophobia" if they dare to speak or write publicly about their concerns. Indeed several Christians have been successfully prosecuted by gay activists in the courts and human rights tribunals for publicly expressing their opposition to homosexual behaviour. Moral disapproval for certain sexual behaviours based on EOC/EOD positions ought not to be defined as an irrational or phobic reaction, however. Yet that is the sledgehammer those in the EOA camp have been employing with considerable success in the past decade. Currently, there is general acceptance of the term homophobia, and general agreement that it is a negative influence in public life. To this end, there is a concerted effort by gay and lesbian lobby groups, and supported by teachers?unions, to implement anti-homophobia and anti-heterosexism programming in Canadian public schools. Regrettably, there has been very little attempt to accommodate the concerns of the EOC/EOD side, resulting in divisive and expensive court battles, most notably the Trinity Western University and Surrey Book cases. ******* Those who hold EOC/EOD positions are not prepared to compromise their religious beliefs or cultural values to accept as normative, sexual behaviours condemned by tradition or holy writ. It is necessary for those in the EOA camp to understand that EOC/EOD believers may be homonegative towards certain sexual behaviours, but homopositive in affirming the inherent worth of homosexual persons. This position is affirmed by all responsible religiously based social conservative organizations, but seen as unacceptable by leaders of the EOA camp. They argue that sexual orientation and the accompanying behaviours are inextricably linked, and that to condemn the behaviour is the same as condemning the person. ******* The EOA position that sexual orientation is inherent and unchangeable is simply not supported by social science research. Indeed, even the psychiatrist most responsible for the removal of homosexuality from manual of mental disorders (the DSM) in 1973, Dr. Robert Spitzer, has published research affirming that orientation change therapy has been shown to be beneficial and effective for the majority of his study group (Can Some Gay Men and Lesbians Change Their Sexual Orientation? 200 Participants Reporting a Change from Homosexual to Heterosexual Orientation, Archives of Sexual Behavior, October 2003, 403-417). The majority of his group were motivated by desires to marry, to maintain their marriage, or to live a life consistent with their religious beliefs. ******* To that end, most major religious groups in North America have established therapeutic resources for those in their faith communities who are distressed over unwanted same sex attractions, and who are motivated to re-orient towards heterosexuality. For Jews there is JONAH, Mormons have Evergreen, Catholics call theirs Courage, and Protestants have Exodus. Furthermore, there is a network of professionals who conduct orientation change therapy collectively called NARTH (National Association for the research and Therapy of Homosexuality: see www.narth.com for more information). These organizations exist because those with unwanted same sex attractions have asked for help for dealing with their distressing symptoms. The treatment category in the DSM IV is 302.9(3) "persistent and marked distress over one�s orientation". Ironically, it is a denial of the concept of autonomy for those in the EOA camp to try to prevent these people from gaining access to these types of services. Gay and lesbian lobby groups have vigorously (but unsuccessfully) lobbied the American Psychological Association to declare orientation change therapy unethical. The personal stories of those who have undergone re-orientation therapy successfully are posted at www.peoplecanchange.com. ******* Mandatory indoctrination of all public school children with EOA ideology in the area of sexual behaviour, is profoundly disrespectful and manifestly unethical, as it violates the rights of EOC/EOD parents to transmit their values to their children. The United Nations has repeatedly affirmed that this is an inalienable right of parents. Educational authorities have delegated roles in the education of children, and do not have the right to impose an EOA value system without parental consent. Furthermore, such efforts violate the specific requirements of the BC Teachers Federation code of ethics to respect the sensibilities of their students, and to refrain from using their roles for ideological gain. ******* We live in a pluralistic society where a broad spectrum of values are cherished. It is the duty of public educators to acknowledge all three ethical positions. Denigrating those who adhere to ethics of community or ethics of divinity is no way to achieve social harmony, or even improved social conditions for sexual minorities. Let us agree on what we can agree on: affirmation of the inherent worth of everyone, non violence, eradication of harassment, bullying and name-calling, and promoting understanding of each other�s profoundly held values. Against this ethic, there can be no argument. ******* Chris Kempling is a Registered Clinical Counsellor and NARTH member living in Quesnel, BC Canada. Feedback at [email protected] is welcome. ******* A teacher and counsellor for 13 years, Chris Kempling has two Master's degrees and an almost complete Ph.D in psychology; 14 letters of commendation on his file, and not one letter of complaint. He is a community volunteer as a Big Brother, a volunteer referee for volleyball, President of the Child & Youth Support Society in Quesnel, BC for 14 years. He is also a Family Assistance Counsellor in private practice and a Registered Clinical Counsellor, and was appointed by the Minister of Health to be Chairman of the District Health Council. Chris is a past member of the Quesnel Christian Ministerial Association; and an elder, Sunday School Teacher and lay preacher of the Christian and Missionary Alliance at Quesnel. ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 28 A MESSAGE FROM CHRIS KEMPLING--December 7, 2003 ******* to British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life (BCPTL) Friends & Colleagues: ******* Last month I attended the annual convention of the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality in Salt Lake City, Utah, as one of the speakers. It was an excellent convention, with numerous presentations by various experts in their fields. While some therapists were representing various faith traditions, some were operating strictly as secular service providers. There were, however, representatives from JONAH (the orientation change program for Jews), Evergreen (Mormons), Courage (Catholics), and Exodus North American (Evangelicals). Dr. Kristl vonHoldt and a colleague travelled all the way from Germany to attend. They represent the German Institute for Youth and Society, and have requested to publish my NARTH speech, as well as my essay Sexual Orientation Curriculum: Implications for Educators, in their organization's journal (translated by Dr. vonHoldt). ******* Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, president of NARTH, gave the keynote speech, outlining his therapeutic approach to orientation change treatment. He advised us that this is difficult work for clients to do, and there needs to be strong motivation for change. He also stated that he had had only one successful case where the client was a teenager. Apparently, the ideal age for this type of therapy is early 20's to early 30's. Success rates generally fall into "thirds"--one-third completely revert to heterosexuality, one-third make significant changes in their behaviours, but still struggle with temptation and fantasies, while another third tend to drop out of therapy. ******* One of the reasons that psychology was so unsuccessful in treating homosexuality in the early years was the way psychoanalytic therapists were trained (to be emotionally detached from their clients). Nicolosi says that it is essential for men seeking orientation change to connect emotionally with a salient heterosexual man without sexual involvement. In fact, he says he rarely talks about sex with his clients--the focus is on changing cognitions and behaviours, and dealing honestly with emotions, especially their physiological component. ******* Another important speech was given by Dr. Christopher Rosik, based on an article on unwanted same sex attraction published in the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. Dr. Rosik outlined why social conservatives and social liberals are frequently at odds in areas of morality. Social liberals tend to adhere to an Ethic of Autonomy, where personal behaviours which do not "harm" others are accepted, even affirmed. Social conservatives tend to adhere to a different set of ethics: the Ethics of Community (e.g. community values, such as retention of the historical definitions of marriage), and the Ethics of Divinity, where there is a belief in an absolute standard of conduct, as revealed in divinely inspired texts. It certainly explains why we simply cannot seem to have rational discussions with those in the EOA camp. ******* In any event it was an outstanding conference, and as a result of the training I received there I have decided to begin offering orientation change therapy as part of my private counselling practice here in Quesnel. ******* Like all of you, I am anxiously awaiting Justice Ronald Holmes' judgment in my case. I appreciate of all the support you have provided me, in terms of prayers, notes of encouragement, and financial donations in the past year. May God bless you richly this Christmas and in the New Year to come. ******* Chris Kempling, Quesnel, BC ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 29 2004-02-03 BC SUPREME COURT DECISION AGAINST CHRIS KEMPLING ####### NOTE - A MORE READABLE VERSION IS THE ORIGINAL WHICH MAY STILL BE AVAILABLE AT: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/04/01/2004bcsc0133.htm ####### ******* IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA ******* Citation: Kempling v. The British Columbia College of Teachers, ******* 2004 BCSC 133 ******* Date: 2004-02-03 ******* Docket: L021838 ******* Registry: Vancouver ******* Between: Christopher Stephen Myles Kempling, Appellant, And The British Columbia College of Teachers, Respondent And The B.C. Civil Liberties Association Intervener ******* Before: The Honourable Mr. Justice Holmes ******* Reasons for Judgment ******* Counsel for the Appellant: William S. Clark ******* Counsel for the Respondent: Bruce Laughton ******* Counsel for the Intervener: Elliott M. Myers, Q.C., Craig Jones ******* Date and Place of Trial: ******* July 28-30, 2003 ******* Vancouver, B.C. ******* TABLE OF CONTENTS ******* BACKGROUND............................................................ 3 ******* ISSUES................................................................ 7 ******* 1. Procedural Fairness................................................ 7 ******* Adequacy of the reasons for the finding of conduct unbecoming.. ...... 8 ******* Use of evidence...................................................... 10 ******* 2. Approach to Standards of Review & The Charter..................... 12 ******* Standards of Review.................................................. 15 ******* The Determination of Conduct Unbecoming a BCCT Member................ 15 ******* The Standard of Review............................................... 15 ******* Application of the standard of review................................ 20 ******* 3. The Penalty Decision by the Council of the BCCT................... 31 ******* The standard of review............................................... 31 ******* Application of the standard of review................................ 35 ******* 4. Charter Issues.................................................... 38 ******* Have the Appellant's Charter Rights been Infringed?.................. 39 ******* Section 2(b)......................................................... 39 ******* Section 2(a)......................................................... 42 ******* Section 7............................................................ 44 ******* Section 15........................................................... 45 ******* If the Appellant's Charter Rights Were Infringed, is the Infringement Justified Under s. 1 of the Charter?......................................... 45 ******* Contextual factors................................................... 46 ******* Pressing and substantial objective................................... 52 ******* Rational connection.................................................. 52 ******* Minimal impairment................................................... 54 ******* Proportionality in the effects of the sanction....................... 58 ******* Conclusion on s. 1 of the Charter.................................... 59 ******* DISPOSITION.......................................................... 59 ******* BACKGROUND ******* [1] The appellant, Christopher Stephen Myles Kempling, was a secondary school teacher and counsellor employed by the Quesnel School District in Quesnel, British Columbia. The respondent, the British Columbia College of Teachers ("BCCT"), is the statutory body empowered by the Teaching Profession Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 449, to oversee the self-regulation of the teaching profession in public schools in British Columbia for the public interest. The appellant has been a BCCT member since 1980, with a long and unblemished teaching career, and a notable record of community service. The appellant is also qualified as a registered clinical counsellor. ******* [2] Between 1997 and 2000, the appellant wrote and published in the local newspaper, the Quesnel Cariboo Observer, an article and a series of letters to the editor expressing his views on homosexuals. Those writings drew a heated response from readers, some of whom wrote letters to the newspaper branding the appellant's statements as discriminatory against homosexuals. ******* [3] On May 8, 2001, the respondent issued a Citation against the appellant charging him with professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming a BCCT member, on the grounds that he had made discriminatory and derogatory statements against homosexuals in a number of published writings. The Citation was issued as part of an investigation by the respondent, prompted by a complaint against the appellant, into his public writings to the newspaper. During the investigation the appellant voluntarily produced other writings by him on the topic of homosexuality not previously known to the respondents. These other writings were two essays published for free distribution, private correspondence to city councillors, the Director of Instruction, and a private memorandum to the Director and various secondary school principals. ******* [4] A hearing was held on the charges of professional misconduct or other conduct unbecoming a BCCT member on April 15, 2002, before a Hearing Panel of the disciplinary committee of the BCCT. The respondent was represented by counsel; the appellant neither attended nor sent a Representative to the hearing. Pursuant to s. 33 of the Teaching Profession Act and Bylaw 6.J.09 of the BCCT, the hearing proceeded in the appellant's absence. ******* [5] The evidence consisted of the appellant's writings as well as written responses by others in the community to them. Based on some of this evidence, the Hearing Panel in its decision May 9, 2002, made specific findings of fact with reference to particular statements made by the appellant in his writings published in the Quesnel Cariboo Observer. The Hearing Panel found his writings to be discriminatory and demonstrated that he was not prepared to take into account the educational system's core values. Non-discrimination which includes recognizing homosexuals' right to equality, dignity, and respect, is one of the core values. ******* [6] The Panel also found that, despite the appellant's conduct occurring off-duty and the lack of direct evidence of a poisoned school environment, an inference could be drawn as to the reasonable and probable consequences of his published writings. Although the Panel did not explicitly state what those consequences were, their quotation of the following passage from Shewan v. Abbotsford School District No. 34 (1987), 47 D.L.R. (4th) 106 at 110 (B.C.C.A.), (as quoted in Ross v. New Brunswick School District No. 15, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 825 at ?4) is indicative: ******* The reason why off-the-job conduct may amount to misconduct is that a teacher holds a position of trust, confidence and responsibility. If he or she acts in an improper way, on or off the job, there may be a loss of public confidence in the teacher and in the public school system, a loss of respect by students for the teacher involved, and other teachers generally, and there may be controversy within the school and within the community which disrupts the proper carrying on of the education system. ******* The Hearing Panel found the appellant guilty of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member. ******* [7] On June 13, 2002, the appellant, represented by counsel, filed a Notice of Appeal to this Court on the Panel's finding of conduct unbecoming and for the first time claimed infringement of his rights under ss. 2(a), 2(b), and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. On November 18, 2002, the Panel held a hearing to receive submissions on an appropriate penalty for the appellant. The appellant was represented by counsel at this hearing. On December 7, 2002, the Panel recommended a one-month suspension of the appellant's teaching certificate, notification of this suspension to various licensing authorities, and publication of the appellant's name and a summary of the case to BCCT members and the public. ******* [8] On April 1, 2003, the BCCT Council held an oral hearing on the issue of the penalty, and on April 14, 2003, a majority of the Council adopted the Panel's reasons and recommendations. On April 17, 2003, the appellant filed an amended Notice of Appeal with this Court, appealing both the Panel�s finding of conduct unbecoming, and the penalty decision on the issue of suspension only. It was also that the appellant first claimed infringement of his s. 7 Charter rights. A Consent Order staying the penalty pending the outcome of this appeal was pronounced May 1, 2003 and entered May 2, 2003. ******* ISSUES ******* [9] The issues on appeal are as follows: ******* 1. Was there any procedural unfairness in the Hearing Panel's finding of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member? ******* 2. a) The appropriate standard of review for the Hearing Panel's finding of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member. ******* b) The application of that standard. ******* 3. a) The appropriate standard of review for the BCCT Council decision on the penalty. ******* b) The application of that standard. ******* 4. Charter issues ******* a) Would consideration of Charter claims raised first on appeal be prejudicial to the respondent? ******* b) Have the appellant�s Charter rights been infringed? ******* c) If so, is the infringement saved by s. 1 of the Charter? ******* 1. Procedural Fairness ******* [10] The appellant submitted that procedural fairness has been violated because the Hearing Panel gave inadequate reasons for its determination of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member on the appellant's part. It is asserted that these were inadequate because they failed to identify which of the appellant's writings and which portions thereof are the subject of the offence. These concerns have been echoed by the intervener. ******* [11] The appellant and the intervener also raise concern the Hearing Panel did not identify the particular writings which in its view constituted conduct unbecoming, and a concern whether the Panel used the appellant's private letters and memorandum in assessing his public conduct. They argue that would be an improper use of evidence, as the appellant's private (i.e. not intended for distribution) correspondence may have no bearing on the school system and the appellant�s preparedness to fulfil his professional and legal obligations as a public school teacher. ******* Adequacy of the reasons for the finding of conduct unbecoming ******* [12] Both the appellant and the intervener submit that the Hearing Panel's reasons for decision are inadequate because they do not identify which particular writings or portions thereof formed the gravamen of the finding of conduct unbecoming. In my view, that is not supported by the record. The ******* Hearing Panel in its reasons: ******* 1. listed the exhibits presented before it, ******* 2. set out submissions made by counsel before the Panel, ******* 3. made findings of fact with reference to particular passages in specific published newspaper writings of the appellant. ******* The Panel concluded on the basis of those facts that the appellant's writings were discriminatory and found that the appellant's conduct was contrary to the core values of the educational system. The Panel found that Kempling's conduct, despite having occurred off-duty, amounted to conduct unbecoming because an inference can be drawn as to the reasonable and probable consequences of his discriminatory comments. The inferences include an adverse impact on student and public confidence in the school system, loss of respect for the appellant as a teacher and other teachers, and controversy in the school and community disruptive of the proper carrying on of the education system. The Panel found that Mr. Kempling's freedom of expression did not entitle him to act on his beliefs while a BCCT member. ******* [13] I am satisfied the Hearing Panel's reasons sufficiently indicate the evidence and reasoning on which the decision was based. ******* Use of evidence ******* [14] Unlike courts of law, administrative tribunals are not strictly bound by the rules of evidence. The fact that the appellant's private correspondence was presented to the Hearing Panel does not itself lead to a finding of procedural unfairness. He chose not to attend or send a representative to the hearing on the charges of professional misconduct or conduct unbecoming, or to challenge any evidence put forward. The transcript of the subsequent hearing by the Panel on recommending a penalty offer no explanation as to why he did not do so. It should be noted that the appellant�s private writings are non-conscriptive evidence, because as mentioned earlier, they were submitted on the appellant's own initiative. ******* [15] In any case, the real danger of procedural unfairness would lie in what use, if any, was made by the Panel of the appellant's private correspondence. If such correspondence was indeed part of the grounds for the finding of conduct unbecoming or was used to assess the appellant's public writings or other public conduct, there could be unfairness as such evidence may be irrelevant and likely prejudicial. ******* [16] In finding the appellant guilty of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member, the Panel quoted exclusively from and relied upon documents published in the local newspaper. The Panel in its reasons made no mention of his two essays marked for free distribution. As for his private letters to city councillors and the Director of Instruction, and private memorandum to the Director and various secondary school principals, the Panel stated only that "this was other correspondence in which the appellant expressed his views on sexual orientation". The Panel does not appear to have relied upon or assessed the value and content of these documents in any way. Thus I do not conclude that there was improper use of the appellant's private correspondence in finding him guilty of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member. ******* [17] There is also no evidence that the Hearing Panel in its subsequent decision on recommendations for a penalty gave any weight to the appellant's private correspondent. With regard to the Panel's use of evidence at the penalty stage, the only discernible difference from the earlier decision on the merits of the appellant's conduct was that Panel also relied upon the two essays marked for free distribution in deciding on a penalty. Although one of the essays (dated December 2000) may have technically fallen outside of the temporal scope of the Citation (July 1997 ?August 2000), its use by the Panel at that stage was not inappropriate, as the Panel was no longer assessing the merits of the Citation but rather looking at the appellant's public conduct in a broader context, as well as other factors relevant to sentencing. ******* 2. Approach to Standards of Review & The Charter ******* [18] This case involves three separate administrative decisions: ******* 1. the Hearing Panel's finding of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member (May 9, 2002), ******* 2. the Hearing Panel's subsequent recommendations on penalty (December 7, 2002), and ******* 3. the BCCT Council's decision to adopt the Panel's reasons and recommendations for penalty (April 14, 2003), issued along with supplementary majority, concurring and dissenting opinions by individual Council members. ******* Technically it is the first and last decisions that are on appeal, though it may be argued the second and last decisions are the same. Both the appellant and the respondent assumed that there could only be one standard of review for all of the decisions below, or alternatively treated the decisions as one for the purposes of this appeal. ******* [19] The appellant further submitted that because his Charter rights are engaged, the standard of review for the entirety of this case must be correctness. In reply, the respondent submitted that because Charter arguments were raised only on appeal, to consider them at this point would be prejudicial, and that the proper standard of review for the whole of this case, absent Charter issues, is reasonableness simpliciter. ******* [20] With respect, neither of the approaches suggested are suitable for this case. Because of their considerable separation in time, the difference in subject matter and in determination of elements of the offence as opposed to determination of appropriate sanction and the fact that they were not made by the same decision-making bodies, it would be unwise to treat the three decisions as one. The affirmation or overturning of one of the decisions under review does not necessarily dictate that the same result would be appropriate for the entire case. A more cautious and preferable approach is to separately review the finding of conduct unbecoming and the penalty decision, with an individual review of the appropriate standard of review for each decision. ******* [21] As for the impact of Charter issues on selecting the appropriate standard of review, the appellant is correct in saying that determinations made by administrative decision-makers on constitutional issues are reviewable on a standard of correctness. A leading authority for this principle is Cuddy Chicks Ltd. v. Ontario (Labour Relations Board), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 5 at ?7. ******* [22] However, the fact that Charter issues may be implicated in one or more aspects of a decision does not automatically lead to the conclusion that the entire decision will be reviewed on the same correctness standard. Here, Cuddy Chicks is authority only for the proposition that administrative decision-makers can expect no curial deference with respect to deciding constitutional issues. ******* [23] It is preferable to determine whether each decision under appeal would in any event be overturned as a matter of administrative law before considering Charter issues. The following approach is appropriate for review of the two decisions under appeal, namely the conduct unbecoming and consequent penalty decisions: ******* 1. determine the appropriate standard of review for each decision, absent Charter issues ******* 2. apply that standard ******* 3. if there are no grounds to disturb either decision based on the applicable standard of review, consider if the appellant's Charter rights would nevertheless be infringed ******* 4. if there is infringement, is it justified under s. 1? ******* [24] The earlier noted concerns of BCCT over the potential prejudice of raising Charter arguments at a late stage will be dealt with together with all Charter issues in this case. ******* Standards of Review ******* [25] The Supreme Court of Canada�s pragmatic and functional approach in Pushpanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 982, for determining appropriate standards of judicial review was affirmed in the recent case of Dr. Q v. College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia, [2003] 1 S.C.R. 226 ["Dr. Q"]. The pragmatic and functional approach factors are fourfold: ******* 1. the presence or absence of a privative clause, or a statutory right of appeal; ******* 2. the relative expertise of the administrative decision-maker vis-?vis the court's, with regard to the specific issue in question ******* 3. the purpose of the statute as a whole and of the provision in particular; and ******* 4. the nature of the problem, i.e. whether it is a question of fact, law, or mixed fact and law ******* The Determination of Conduct Unbecoming a BCCT Member ******* The Standard of Review ******* [26] Applying the pragmatic and functional approach to the Hearing Panel's finding of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member, the first factor militates against deference towards the Panel. There is no privative clause, and there is a broad statutory right of appeal to this Court under s. 40 of the Teaching Profession Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 449 ["the Act"]: ******* Appeals ******* 40 A member may appeal to the Supreme Court any decision, determination or order of the qualifications committee, discipline committee, a subcommittee of either, or the council that affects the member, and from a decision, determination or order of the Supreme Court, may appeal to the Court of Appeal with leave of a justice of that court. ******* [27] The determination of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member is a decision involving the setting and enforcement of standards of professional responsibility for the teaching profession. This is clearly an area in which the Panel has specialized and greater expertise than the Court; thus the second pragmatic and functional factor militates in favour of greater deference to the Panel's decision. ******* [28] With regard to the third factor, the purpose of the statute as a whole and the provision in particular, the relevant parts of the Act are as follows: ******* Object ******* 4 It is the object of the college [i.e. the BCCT] to establish, having regard to the public interest, standards for the education, professional responsibility and competence of its members, persons who hold certificates of qualification and applicants for membership and, consistent with that object, to encourage the professional interest of its members in those matters. ******* Discipline committee and inquiry ******* 28 (4) if the college receives ******* (a) in respect of a member, a report from a board under section 16 or 166.28 of the School Act, ******* (b) in respect of a member or other person, a report from an authority under section 7 of the Independent School Act, ******* (c) a complaint in writing signed by 5 members about the conduct of a member, or ******* (d) a report from the registrar relating to the conduct of a member, ******* the council or discipline committee may, after considering the report or complaint, make or cause to be made a preliminary investigation into the conduct or competence of the member in respect of whom the report or complaint is made. ******* Citation ******* 30 (1) An inquiry under section 28 or 29 must be commenced by a citation issued at the direction of any 3 elected council members or the chair of the discipline committee, and for the purposes of the inquiry the council or the discipline committee must hold a hearing. ******* Action after hearing ******* 34 The council or the discipline committee, if authorized by the bylaws under section 23, may after a hearing, and for the purpose of determining whether to take action in respect of the member under section 35, ******* (a) dismiss the citation ******* (b) determine whether a member has been guilty of professional misconduct or other conduct unbecoming of a member ******* [29] The purpose of the Act as a whole, as stated in s. 4, is that the respondent is to set and enforce its own standards of training, professional conduct, and competence for the teaching profession in British Columbia, having regard to protecting and upholding the public interest. Sections 28, 30, and 34 specifically deal with making individual determinations of whether a particular BCCT member's conduct meets those standards. The remarks of the Supreme Court of Canada in Dr. Q, supra at ?7 are apposite here: ******* On the one hand, the legislature's intent for the legislation as a whole was to assign to the College the role of balancing competing interests and multiple policy objectives, like the protection of the public, education and qualification of members, the setting of standards of ethics and practice�This purpose suggests considerable deference. However, the discrete issue of adjudicating a claim of professional misconduct -?the particular issue that the statute puts before the Committee ? is quasi-judicial in nature, and therefore militates against deference. In the result, the purpose analysis counsels neither for great deference, nor for exacting scrutiny. ******* [30] Finally, with regard to the fourth factor, the appellant suggests that the questions before the Hearing Panel at that stage of the proceedings (i.e. whether the appellant made discriminatory and derogatory statements against homosexuals and whether, in the context and capacity that he made them, that amounts to conduct unbecoming a BCCT member) were purely questions of law. However, it is appropriate instead to characterize the former as a question of fact, and the latter as a question of mixed law and fact, specifically a "fact-intensive" question to use the terminology of Dr. Q (at ?4), warranting more deference. ******* [31] As both the appellant and the respondent pointed out correctly, the Act does not define "conduct unbecoming a member". Conduct by a member that may be acceptable in one set of circumstances or done in one capacity may not be acceptable in another -?this determination would necessarily be fact-driven, and depend considerably on a recognition of the public interest and on the teaching profession's specialized expertise and understanding of the role of a teacher. The fourth factor thus calls for considerable deference in this case. Balancing the four factors of the pragmatic and functional approach, the appropriate standard of review for the determination of conduct unbecoming a member is, absent Charter issues, reasonableness simpliciter. ******* Application of the standard of review ******* [32] On applying the reasonableness standard of review, the Supreme Court of Canada in Law Society of New Brunswick v. Ryan (2003), 223 D.L.R. (4th) 577, 2003 SCC 20 at ?6-47 and 55-56 ["Ryan"]: ******* Judicial review of administrative action on a standard of reasonableness involves deferential self-discipline. A court will often be forced to accept that a decision is reasonable even if it is unlikely that the court would have reasoned or decided as the tribunal did?******* The standard of reasonableness basically involves asking "after a somewhat probing examination", can the reasons given, when taken as a whole, support the decision? ?it requires that the reviewing court assess whether a decision is basically supported by the reasoning of the tribunal or decision-maker, rather than inviting the court to engage de novo in its own reasoning on the matter ?******* A decision will be unreasonable only if there is no line of analysis within the given reasons that could reasonably lead the tribunal from the evidence before it to the conclusion at which it arrived. If any of the reasons that are sufficient to support the conclusion are tenable in the sense that they can stand up to a somewhat probing examination, then the decision will not be unreasonable and a reviewing court must not interfere ? ******* This does not mean that every element of the reasoning given must independently pass a test for reasonableness. The question is rather whether the reasons, taken as a whole, are tenable as support for the decision. At all times, a court applying a standard of reasonableness must assess the basic adequacy of a reasoned decision remembering that the issue under review does not compel one specific result. Moreover, a reviewing court should not seize on one or more mistakes or elements of the decision which do not affect the decision as a whole. ******* [33] I find that applying a "somewhat probing examination" leads to the conclusion that the Hearing Panel's finding of conduct unbecoming is reasonable. Although both the appellant and the respondent agreed that the standard of proof to be applied by the Hearing Panel was that of "clear and cogent evidence" enunciated in Jory v. College of Physicians and Surgeons, [1985] B.C.J. No. 320 (S.C.) and affirmed in Dr. Q, supra, at ?1, it is not the task of the Court to re-evaluate the evidence according to that standard (Dr. Q, supra, at ?9). The Court's task is strictly to scrutinize the decision according the appropriate standard of judicial review. As the standard here is reasonableness, the Court is to look to see whether the Panel's findings and conclusions had some basis in the evidence (Dr. Q, supra, at ?1) and whether the reasons as a whole are tenable as support for the decision (Ryan, supra). ******* [34] The appellant's published writings provided ample evidence that could reasonably support the finding that he made and published discriminatory and derogatory statements against homosexuals. In particular, in his letters and article to the local newspaper, the Quesnel Cariboo Observer, the appellant consistently associated homosexuals with immorality, abnormality, perversion, and promiscuity. Examples of such statements include: ******* "Thus my main concern with giving same sex couples legal rights in child custody issues is due to the obvious instability and short term nature of gay relationships ? My second concern is how can children develop a concept of normal sexuality, when their prime care-givers have rejected the other gender entirely?" ******* [July 27, 1997, Quesnel Cariboo Observer, guest editorial by Chris Kempling] ******* "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 attempt to promote monogamous, long lasting relationships and to combat sexual addictions." ******* [August 10, 1997, Quesnel Cariboo Observer, response letter to the editor] ******* "The majority of religions consider [homosexual] behaviour to be immoral, and many mental health professionals, including myself, believe homosexuality to be the result of abnormal psycho-social influences. ?Homosexuality is not something to be applauded." ******* [July 1, 2000, Quesnel Cariboo Observer, letter to the editor] ******* [After relating statements by others asserting that homosexuals are promiscuous] "I refuse to be a false teacher saying that promiscuity is acceptable, perversion is normal, and immorality is simply 'cultural diversity' of which we should be proud." ******* [July 19, 2000, Quesnel Cariboo Observer, letter to the editor] ******* [35] The appellant's writings in the newspaper alone were sufficient evidence for a finding that he made and published discriminatory statements, and it was on this evidence that the Panel made that finding. ******* [36] Although the Panel made no mention of them in its reasons for decision, the appellant's two papers published for free distribution, while having an overall less inflammatory tone, also contain content that could reasonably be characterized as discriminatory. In his paper entitled "Sexual Orientation Curricula: Implications for Educators" (March 14, 2000), the appellant claims that the "gay lifestyle" is characterized by promiscuity and suggests that teaching about homosexuality in a way that does not paint it as unhealthy or immoral is tantamount to teaching falsehood. Readers of this paper might reasonably apprehend the appellant as insinuating that homosexuals are pedophiles or become homosexual as a result of pedophilia. Similar statements are made in his second paper entitled, "HOPE versus PRIDE: Moderate Homosexual Opposition to Gay Extremism", (December 22, 2000). ******* [37] It is true that on one occasion the appellant did write a letter to the editor of the Quesnel Cariboo Observer (April 12, 2000) in support of legislation extending some legal rights to homosexuals, and that in one of his papers ("HOPE versus PRIDE: Moderate Homosexual Opposition to Gay Extremism", December 22, 2000), the appellant did write, in a qualified fashion, of the need for tolerance for homosexuals. However, this does not change the overall thrust of the bulk of his published writings. ******* [38] I do not accept the appellant's submissions that speech cannot constitute discrimination as a matter of law, and that conduct must be directed against a particular individual in order to constitute discrimination. Sections 1 and 7(1) of the Human Rights Code, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 211 make it abundantly clear that speech can constitute discrimination, whether or not it is directed against a particular individual: ******* Definitions ******* 1. In this Code: ******* "discrimination" includes the conduct described in section 7, 8 (1) (a), 9 (a) or (b), 10 (1) (a), 11, 13 (1) (a) or (2), 14 (a) or (b) or 43; ******* Discriminatory publication ******* 7(1) A person must not publish, issue or display, or cause to be published, issued or displayed, any statement, publication, notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation that ******* (a) indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate against a person or a group or class of persons, or ******* (b) is likely to expose a person or group or class of persons to hatred or contempt ******* because of the race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, religion, marital status, family status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation or age of that person or that group or class of persons. ******* [39] In any event, the question to be determined by the Panel was not whether the appellant's published writings would attract liability as a human rights violation. The question before the Panel was whether the making and publication of those statements in the circumstances and context in which it was done fell below acceptable standards of professional conduct. Because non-discrimination is a core value of the educational system, a finding that those writings were of a discriminatory and derogatory nature can properly form part of the basis of a determination of conduct unbecoming. ******* [40] The conduct for which the appellant is being sanctioned occurred off-duty. However, where that off-duty conduct negatively impacts the school system or on the appellant's ability to carry out his professional and legal obligations as a teacher fully and fairly, he can properly be disciplined for that conduct. In Ross v. New Brunswick School District No. 15, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 825 at ?4 it was noted that: ******* By their conduct, teachers as "medium" must be perceived to uphold the values, beliefs and knowledge sought to be transmitted by the school system. The conduct of a teacher is evaluated on the basis of his or her position, rather than whether the conduct occurs within the classroom or beyond. Teachers are seen by the community to be the medium for the educational message and because of the community position they occupy, they are not able to "choose which hat they will wear on what occasion" (see Re Cromer and British Columbia Teachers' Federation (1986), 29 D.L.R. (4th) 641 (B.C.C.A.) at p. 660); teachers do not necessarily check their teaching hats at the school yard gate and may be perceived to be wearing their teaching hats even off duty. Reyes affirms this point in her article, supra at p. 37: ******* The integrity of the education system also depends to a great extent upon the perceived integrity of teachers. It is to this extent that expression outside the classroom becomes relevant. While the activities of teachers outside the classroom do not seem to impact directly on their ability to teach, they may conflict with the values which the education system perpetuates. ******* [Emphasis in original] ******* [41] In this case no evidence was led of a "poisoned" school environment or specific complaints against the appellant as in Ross. However, I do not consider in Ross or in Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 772 ["TWU"], upon which the appellant relied, that the Supreme Court of Canada required the facts in future cases must always rise to the same level for a teacher to be disciplined. In TWU there was no evidence that TWU graduates had engaged in discriminatory speech or other discriminatory conduct after securing employment as public school teachers, unlike in the case at bar. ******* [42] The harm visited on the public school system by the appellant�s published writings is of two types: harm per se, and harm that could be inferred as the reasonable and probable consequences of that conduct [Ross, supra, at 859-60]. In my view, the appellant's published writings were harmful to the public school system per se, not only because of their discriminatory content, but also because he explicitly linked that content to his position as a teacher and counsellor. ******* [43] Beginning in August 1997 through to July 2000, the appellant in his writings to the local newspaper publicly identified himself on three separate occasions as a teacher and counsellor, and explicitly linked what were personal views to his professional standing as a teacher and counsellor: ******* "Some readers may be wondering why I am putting my professional reputation on the line over the homosexuality issue, and some are questioning my competence to counsel ?******* Sexual orientations can be changed and the success rate for those who seek help is high. My hope is that students who are confused over their sexual orientation will come to see me." ******* [August 27, 1997, Quesnel Cariboo Observer] ******* "The majority of religions consider [homosexual] behaviour to be immoral, and many mental health professionals, including myself, believe homosexuality to be the result of abnormal psycho-sexual influences." ******* [July 1, 2000, Quesnel Cariboo Observer] ******* "I refuse to be a false teacher saying that promiscuity is acceptable, perversion is normal, and immorality is simply 'cultural diversity' of which we should be proud. ******* Section 95(2) of the School Act states that teachers must 'inculcate the highest moral standards'." ******* [July 19, 2000, Quesnel Cariboo Observer] ******* [44] In those pieces he was no longer writing qua private citizen, but advancing his views qua secondary school teacher and counsellor. The fact that he made the explicit link between his professional status and those views early in his published writings would taint all of them in the eyes of students and the public. ******* [45] Even if he had not made that explicit link, the fact remains that the appellant identified himself by name in all of his published writings. Quesnel is a small community; the appellant was one of only four secondary school counsellors in Quesnel's two public secondary schools and was active in community service, so that he was well-known in the community before this matter arose. It would thus have been reasonable to assume that students and the public would identify the appellant and draw a link between those "off-duty" writings on the one hand and his teaching and school counselling position on the other. ******* [46] By publicly linking his private, discriminatory views of homosexuality with his status and professional judgment as a teacher and secondary school counsellor, the appellant called into question his own preparedness to be impartial in the fulfilment of his professional and legal obligations to all students, as well as the impartiality of the school system. That in itself is a harmful impact on the school system as a non-discriminatory entity. ******* [47] As for harms that could be inferred as reasonable and probable consequences of the appellant's off-duty conduct, these were, in the Hearing Panel's reasons: a loss of public confidence in the appellant as a teacher and in the public school system, a loss of respect by the students for the teacher involved, and other teachers generally, and controversy within the school and the community which disrupts the proper carrying on of the education system. ******* [48] It was reasonable for the Panel to draw these inferences. From the appellant's published writings and his publicly linking them to his teaching and school counselling position, a negative inference could reasonably be drawn as to the appellant's ability to be impartial as a teacher. It would be reasonable to expect that student and public confidence in the appellant and the public school system would be undermined. It would also be reasonable to anticipate that homosexual students would generally be reluctant to approach him for guidance counselling, which would impair his ability to fully carry out his professional duties in fact. ******* [49] As well, there was some evidence of controversy in the community stemming from the appellant's published writings, such as letters to the local newspaper branding his views as intolerant and discriminatory, and letters from the Presidents of the Quesnel School Counsellors' Association and Quesnel District Teachers' Association disassociating themselves from the appellant's views. ******* [50] The harm, whether per se or inferred, to the school system, the teaching profession, and student and public confidence in them, resulting from the appellant's writings published off-duty warrant a finding that his conduct was unbecoming a BCCT member. ******* [51] I do not accept the appellant's submission that the Hearing Panel should not have found the appellant's conduct unbecoming because it is markedly different, and thus less serious, than in disciplinary proceedings involving lawyers and teachers' sexually inappropriate behaviour or criminal conduct, was held to be unbecoming of their professions. ******* [52] There is no authority that only sexual or criminal conduct can be found unbecoming of a profession, or that conduct of a publicly discriminatory nature similar to the appellant's is necessarily less serious. Discrimination is a serious issue in public schools and in the larger society. Given the notoriety of the appellant and his published writings in the community, a failure by the Hearing Panel to find his conduct unbecoming would amount to a public condonation of discrimination by a member of the teaching profession, done ostensibly in his professional capacity. ******* [53] I find that absent Charter issues, the Hearing Panel's finding that the appellant is guilty of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member is reasonable, and should not be disturbed by this Court. ******* 3. The Penalty Decision by the Council of the BCCT ******* The standard of review ******* [54] The absence of a privative clause and the existence of a broad statutory right of appeal under s. 40 of the Teaching Profession Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 449 (reproduced supra) would militate against deference. However, the other three pragmatic and functional factors call for considerable deference by the Court. ******* [55] Here, there is reason to expect that the BCCT Council, and the Hearing Panel of the Disciplinary Committee that recommended the penalty adopted by the Council, had superior expertise relative to the courts. Applying the reasoning in Ryan, supra, at ?1-34, the Panel and the Council had greater expertise than courts in the choice of sanction for breaches of professional standards. The Panel and the majority of Council members were subject to the same standards of professional practice as the teachers who came before them. Practicing teachers are uniquely positioned to identify conduct unbecoming a teacher and to appreciate its severity. ******* [56] In addition, the Discipline Committee and the Council have relative expertise generated by repeated application of the objectives of professional regulation set out in the Teaching Profession Act to specific cases in which conduct unbecoming is alleged. In each case, the Committee and the Council will have been called on to interpret those objectives in the factual context. This would tend to generate a relatively superior capacity to draw inferences from facts related to professional practice and also to assess the frequency and level of threat to the public and the teaching profession posed by certain forms of behaviour. As well, the Committee and the Council's expertise are in a specialized area of teaching in public schools and outside the general knowledge of most. In any case, owing to their composition and familiarity with the particular issue of imposing a sanction for conduct unbecoming in a variety of settings, the Committee and the Council arguably have more expertise than courts on the appropriate sanction to apply. ******* [57] Turning to the third pragmatic and functional factor, the purpose of the Teaching Profession Act and the disciplinary process also suggest considerable deference. As noted earlier, pursuant to s. 4 of the Act the object of the BCCT is self-regulation of the teaching profession with regard to protecting the public interest, including setting and enforcement of standards of professional practice. In any disciplinary proceeding, the BCCT Council has discretion in the sanctions it may apply to meet the objectives of the Act: ******* Action by council ******* [35] (1) If an adverse determination respecting a member is made under section 34(b), the council may, by a resolution passed by the votes of a majority of the council members present at a duly constituted meeting of the council, ******* (a) reprimand the member, ******* (b) suspend the membership and certificate of qualification of the member for a fixed or indeterminate period, or ******* (c) terminate the membership of the member in the college and cancel his or her certificate of qualification. ******* [58] In Dr. Q, supra, at ?1, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed earlier jurisprudence holding that: ******* A statutory purpose that requires a tribunal to select from a range of remedial choices or administrative responses, is concerned with the protection of the public, engages policy issues, or involves the balancing of multiple sets of interests or considerations will demand greater deference from a reviewing court. ******* Sections 4 and 35 of the Act clearly direct the BCCT Council to undertake a balancing exercise and require it to choose among a range of remedial choices. Taken as a whole, the legislative purpose of the Act suggests a higher degree of deference to penalty decisions of the Council than the standard of correctness. ******* [59] Turning to the final pragmatic and functional factor, the nature of the question here is one of mixed fact and law since it involves the application of general principles of the Act to the specific circumstances of this case. The Council�s decision to largely adopt the Panel's recommendations on the penalty is intricately bound to factual findings and inferences about the appellant's unbecoming conduct, as well as considerations of the interests of the public and the teaching profession. This would again suggest a higher degree of deference towards the Council's penalty decision. ******* [60] Balancing the four pragmatic and functional factors, the appropriate standard of review for the penalty decision, absent Charter issues, is reasonableness simpliciter. ******* Application of the standard of review ******* [61] I find upon the mandated, somewhat probing examination of the Panel's reasons and recommendations, adopted and quoted by the Council in its written decision, and the Council's own additional reasons, the Council decision emerges as a reasonable one. ******* [62] In deciding on the penalty, the Council considered the appellant's professional background and circumstances, the nature and gravity of the appellant's conduct, the need for protection of the public and the integrity of the profession, deterrence, and the presence of aggravating/mitigating circumstances. There is no evidence to support the appellant's submission that the Council did not properly consider Mr. Kempling's background and circumstances. ******* [63] With regard to the appellant's circumstances, the Panel and the Council took into account the appellant�s long and unblemished teaching career, and his notable record of community service, and support shown in numerous letters of reference by professional and community members. The Panel and the Council did not specifically refer to the fact that he had no previous record of disciplinary offences before the BCCT, but this is to be reasonably inferred by their noting that his career was "unblemished". ******* [64] I do not accept that the Council erred in its decision on the penalty on grounds there is no issue of public protection and because the Council failed to ensure that the penalty imposed is within the range imposed in similar cases. ******* [65] There is a public protection issue here. The appellant does not appreciate that harm has been done to the general student body, homosexual students, the school system, and the teaching profession by publishing his discriminatory writings qua public school teacher and counsellor. The fact that there was no evidence of specific complainants is not determinative. Indeed, one reason that no one came forward with a complaint could be because the group that his public statements were targeted against is vulnerable, generally kept invisible and less likely to come forward with complaints than members of the general population. Realistically, most homosexual students would be most reticent to challenge a teacher and counsellor who is otherwise held in high regard, while placing themselves at risk in disclosing their sexual orientation to the public. ******* [66] As to the range imposed in similar cases, I was referred to no truly comparable cases other than Ross. Though the appellant seeks to rely on Ross for the issue of penalty, it is not of assistance as the part of the penalty struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada was termination for any future publication of anti-Jewish statements. The rest of the penalty in Ross, including a leave of absence without pay for eighteen months and a ban from occupying teaching positions with the school board, was upheld. The penalty imposed here is not nearly as drastic. ******* [67] Open discrimination by a public school teacher as seen in Ross is serious, particularly where inaction or a mere reprimand by the teaching profession and the school system could be seen as condonation. ******* [68] At any rate, judicial review on a reasonableness standard does not entitle a court to substitute its own opinion for the administrative decision-maker's. Regardless of what sanction this Court might have imposed, in my view there is nothing in the circumstances of the case and the appellant, or in the Council's reasons which, absent Charter issues, suggests that the penalty imposed is unreasonable. Absent a finding that the appellant's Charter rights were infringed and that such infringement is not justified under s. 1 of the Charter, the penalty imposed by the BCCT Council should not be disturbed. ******* 4. Charter Issues ******* Raising Charter Claims Only on Appeal ?Potential Prejudice? ******* [69] The appellant did not allege infringement of his rights under ss. 2(a), 2(b), 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms until he launched an appeal against the finding of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member. The respondent argues that entertaining his Charter claims at this stage of the proceedings would be prejudicial to the respondent. ******* [70] While it would have been ideal for the appellant to have raised Charter issues before the decision-makers below prior to the rendering of their decisions, there is no undue prejudice to the respondent here for the appellant to raise Charter claims only on appeal. This is because before any of the decisions were issued, it would have been difficult to ascertain whether any Charter rights were infringed by those decisions. Since there is no undue prejudice, there is no bar to the Court adjudicating the appellant's Charter claims. ******* [71] The Hearing Panel in its reasons for the finding of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member concluded that infringement of the appellant's freedom of expression occasioned by disciplinary action against him would be justified. The Panel and the BCCT Council did not appear to consider other Charter rights in any of the decisions ?this was likely due to the fact that the appellant only raised Charter issues on appeal. ******* [72] As noted earlier, the standard of review for decisions by administrative bodies on Charter issues is correctness. As such, the Court is entitled to undertake its own analysis of those issues to decide if the result is correct (Ryan, supra, at ?0), in this case determining whether the appellant's ss. 2(a), 2(b), 7 and 15 rights have been infringed. ******* Have the Appellant's Charter Rights been Infringed? ******* Section 2(b) ******* [73] Using the test for protected expression in Irwin Toy Ltd. v. Quebec (A.G.), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927, the expression of the appellant�s views on homosexuality is protected under s. 2(b). The content conveys meaning (that homosexuality is abnormal, immoral, and the like), and the form of expression, in published writings is non-violent. What s. 2(b) does not protect is the appellant�s right to express or to purport to express strictly personally-held, discriminatory views with the authority of or in the capacity of a public school teacher/counsellor. ******* [74] In Walker v. Prince Edward Island, 107 D.L.R. (4th) 69 (P.E.I.S.C. ?A.D.)["Walker"], the court held that a legislative provision restricting the ability of anyone other than public accountants to engage in public accounting and auditing did not infringe s. 2(b) of the Charter. This is because the provision did not prohibit anyone from expressing themselves about any accounting matter, but only restricted the capacity in which they could do so, i.e. not with the authority, or in the capacity, of a public accountant unless so qualified or authorized. This decision was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada [[1995] 2 S.C.R. 407]. ******* [75] Applying Walker to the case at bar, there has been no infringement, by purpose or effect, of the appellant's s. 2(b) Charter rights. The appellant was at all times free and remains free to express his views on homosexuality in a non-violent manner qua private citizen. What the appellant is being sanctioned for is not the expression of any particular view per se. The purpose and effect of the disciplinary action taken against the appellant is to sanction him for his off-duty expression of personally-held discriminatory views purportedly with the authority or in the capacity of a public secondary school teacher and counsellor, which resulted in harm to the school system. ******* [76] Counsel for the appellant argues that the conduct for which the appellant is being sanctioned fell within the scope of s. 2(b) protection. He relies on Morin v. Prince Edward Island Regional Administrative Unit No. 3 School Board (2002), 213 D.L.R. (4th) 17 (S.C. ?A.D.) ["Morin"]. In Morin, a teacher was prohibited by the school principal for showing a film on religious fundamentalism to his Grade 9 class. The court in that case held that this was an infringement on the teacher's s. 2(b) rights. ******* [77] In Morin, the prohibition was on the showing of the film itself to the students. Here, the sanction by the BCCT goes really to the appellant's wrongful public linking of his professional position to the off-duty expression of personally-held discriminatory views in order to lend credibility to those views, as well as addressing the resulting harm to the school system. The evidence and record do not show that any of the administrative decision-makers attempted to restrain or burden the expression of anti-homosexual views per se. ******* [78] As a result, there has been no infringement of the appellant's rights under s. 2(b) of the Charter. ******* Section 2(a) ******* [79] For similar reasons, there has also been no infringement of the appellant's s. 2(a) rights. The publication of views informed by sincerely held religious beliefs is protected by s. 2(a), and the Court may not question the validity of those views (R. v. Jones, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 284). ******* [80] The Supreme Court of Canada has consistently refrained from formulating internal limits to the scope of freedom of religion; see R. v. Jones, supra, R. v. Edwards Books and Arts Ltd., [1986] 2 S.C.R. 713, and B.(R.) v. Children�s Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto, [1995] 1 S.C.R. 315. While the Supreme Court of Canada has taken a large and liberal approach to interpreting the scope of s. 2(a), as it has with other Charter rights, in none of these cases has the scope of s. 2(a) been extended beyond its exercise by citizens in their personal capacity. In other words, there is no authority for the proposition that s. 2(a) guarantees freedom to state or manifest one's strictly personal beliefs with the purported authority or capacity of one's professional status. ******* [81] Although they deal with s. 2(b) rather than 2(a), because of the similarity in the approaches taken by the Supreme Court of Canada to interpreting the scope of the rights protected therein, Morin and Walker are instructive for the purposes of comparison and contrast to this case. In Morin, though religion was part of the content of the expression, there was no attempt to link the validity of any of that content to the teacher's professional status and thus lend credibility to any particular religious view, unlike in this case. ******* [82] In Walker, the court made it very clear that the Charter does not protect the right to speak in any given capacity, other than one�s own personal capacity, when one is not authorized to do so. As the appellant was espousing views informed in part by his private religious beliefs while off-duty, surely he could not have been authorized to speak qua public school teacher and counsellor in that context, yet he purported to do so anyway. Logically, it would seem that s. 2(a) does not go so far as to protect freedom of religious expression in a capacity that one has no proper authority to speak in. The conduct for which the appellant is being sanctioned is not protected by s. 2(a) and therefore there is no infringement of his s. 2(a) rights. ******* Section 7 ******* [83] The crux of appellant's s. 7 argument is stated by his counsel as follows: "he can be silenced or lose his chosen profession". As such, the appellant has no basis for making a s. 7 claim ?Lamer J. held in Reference re: ss. 193 and 195.1(1)(c) of the Criminal Code (Man.), [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1123 (also known as the Prostitution Reference) at 1179: ******* The rights under s. 7 do not extend to the right to exercise [one's] chosen profession?I reach this conclusion based on a reading of the cases decided by this and other courts dealing with s. 7 and "economic liberty", and on a reading of the text of the Charter. ******* Nor can it be accepted that the right to practice as a teacher rises to the level of a "fundamental personal choice" going to the root of a person's dignity as contemplated in Blencoe v. British Columbia (Human Rights Commission), [2000] 2 S.C.R. 307 at ?9-54 (e.g. abortion, right to obtain medical treatment, choosing where to establish one's home, or whether to testify in court). The s. 7 claim is dismissed. ******* Section 15 ******* [84] The appellant submits that his s. 15 rights have been ignored; he claims social and political disadvantage in that by virtue of the decision to discipline him and the penalty imposed, he no longer enjoys the same liberty interests as the general population because of the fact that he is a public school teacher. However, the respondent has jurisdiction to enforce its standards and take disciplinary action against its members only. Moreover, it is entirely appropriate that the teaching profession, like any profession, be held to more stringent standards of conduct than the lay public. As such, the appropriate comparator group for a s. 15 analysis is not, as suggested by counsel, the general public, but other public school teachers who are also BCCT members and have been or are being disciplined for similar conduct. The appellant has neither alleged, nor provided any evidence of, differential treatment when compared to this set of teachers, and so his s. 15 claim must be dismissed. ******* If the Appellant's Charter Rights Were Infringed, is the Infringement Justified Under s. 1 of the Charter? ******* [85] If the appellant's Charter rights were indeed infringed, such infringement can only be saved if it is justified under s. 1 of the Charter. ******* Section 1 provides as follows: ******* The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. ******* [86] It was not argued that the penalty was not prescribed by law. In order for the penalty to be reasonably and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society, it must meet the test set out in R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103. That is, in imposing the penalty, there must be: ******* 1. a pressing and substantial objective of sufficient importance to warrant overriding a constitutionally protected right or freedom ******* 2. the impugned measure must be proportionate to the achievement of that objective, i.e. ******* a) there should be a rational connection between the measure and the objective ******* b) there should be minimal impairment of the Charter rights and freedoms in question ******* c) there should be proportionality between the objective and the effects of the measure, i.e. the objective and the positive effects outweigh the deleterious effects of the measure (Dagenais v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 835). ******* Contextual factors ******* [87] The Oakes test should be applied flexibly so as to achieve a proper balance between individual rights and community needs; to do so, close attention must be paid to contextual factors (Ross, supra, at ?8). Consideration of contextual factors assists in determining the degree of deference owed to governmental action by the court in applying the Oakes test in the particular circumstances of the case. ******* [88] One important contextual factor is that the disciplinary action against the appellant was aimed at protecting a vulnerable group ?children. The remarks of the Supreme Court of Canada in Ross at ?2-83 are particularly apposite: ******* Young children are especially vulnerable to the messages conveyed by their teachers. They are less likely to make an intellectual distinction between comments a teacher makes in the school and those the teacher makes outside the school. They are therefore, more likely to feel threatened and isolated by a teacher who makes comments that denigrate personal characteristics of a group to which they belong. Furthermore, they are unlikely to distinguish between falsehoods and truth and more likely to accept derogatory views espoused by a teacher. The importance of ensuring an equal and discrimination free educational environment, and the perception of fairness and tolerance in the classroom are paramount in the education of young children. This helps foster self-respect and acceptance by others. ******* It is this context that must be invoked when balancing the [teacher's] freedom to make discriminatory statements against the right of the children. "to be educated in a school system that is free from bias, prejudice and intolerance", a right that is?entrenched in s. 15 of the Charter. ******* [89] That is a contextual factor which would indicate that deference to the BCCT and therefore a less stringent application of the Oakes test may be warranted. ******* [90] Another contextual factor militating in favour of a less stringent application of the Oakes test is where the state action is directed at protecting an historically disadvantaged group or at ameliorating the disadvantage suffered by that group. That contextual factor is clearly at play here. ******* [91] It is not disputed that discrimination against homosexuals is a serious problem in public schools and the larger society. The appellant himself acknowledged that there is a problem in public schools of harassment of students presumed to be homosexual, with sometimes fatal consequences. The appellant also acknowledged that harassment in the larger community has caused some homosexuals to leave Quesnel. In taking disciplinary action against the appellant, the BCCT was attempting in part to remedy the discrimination against homosexuals manifest in public schools to which the appellant contributed, and as stated in Ross, supra, at ?6, the appellant must not be permitted to use the exercise of his Charter rights to roll back advances made against discrimination. ******* [92] It is true that as a statutorily appointed body whose powers are delegated to it by the Legislature and whose expertise is confined to matters of teacher education, training, qualification and professional conduct, the BCCT neither has a representative mandate from the people nor is particularly qualified to adjudicate on Charter and human rights issues. As such, this would militate against deference to the BCCT and in favour of a more stringent application of the Oakes test. ******* [93] However, it should be remembered that sanctioning the appellant is about enforcing professional standards of conduct among public school teachers rather than imposing liability for conduct that would constitute a human rights violation. As the statutory body empowered to regulate the teaching profession in the public interest, the BCCT has a duty to ensure that the fulfilment of public school teaching functions is undertaken in a manner that does not undermine public trust and confidence. The standard of behaviour required of a teacher is greater than the minimum standard otherwise tolerated of individual members of the lay public, given the responsibilities which a teacher must fulfil and the expectations which the community holds for the educational system (Ross, supra, at ?4). ******* [94] That is another contextual factor in favour of a less stringent application of the Oakes test. The disciplinary action taken by the BCCT was in fulfilment of its duty to the public, because the actions for which the appellant is being sanctioned fell far below professional standards of conduct. ******* [95] Finally, the specific nature of the Charter rights allegedly infringed in the circumstances of this case must be examined. In this case, the appellant's discriminatory expression is of low value, being in conflict with the core values behind the s. 2(b) guarantee of freedom of expression. Those values are the search for truth, the protection of individual autonomy and self-development, and the promotion of public participation in social and political decision-making (Irwin Toy, supra, at 976). ******* [96] Discriminatory speech is incompatible with the search for truth. In addition, the appellant's publicly discriminatory writings undermine the ability of members of the targeted group, homosexuals, to attain individual self-fulfilment. This is particularly true as the appellant publicly declares, with the ostensible authority or capacity of a teacher and secondary school counsellor, that which defines homosexuals as a group is abnormal, immoral or perverted. ******* [97] As well, discriminatory speech stifles the speech and societal participation of others, in particular members of the targeted group. This is especially true in the case at bar, as the appellant used his status as a teacher and secondary school counsellor to lend credibility to his discriminatory views. In light of that fact, and given the small size of the community and the appellant's considerable influence within it, particularly with public school officials and local politicians, homosexual students would likely be deterred from openly espousing opposing views or being public about their sexual orientation. ******* [98] The low value of the appellant's expression is a factor militating in favour of a less stringent application of the Oakes test. The fact that the content of the expression is informed by sincerely held religious beliefs and therefore triggers s. 2(a) does not militate in favour of less deference toward the administrative decision-makers below, because freedom of religion is not absolute and must be balanced with other Charter rights and values (TWU, supra, at ?9-30). Section 2(a) rights, particularly where the claimant holds discriminatory beliefs as in the case at bar, cannot be used to ignore the rights and legitimate interests of others. As for the appellant's s. 7 and 15 rights, there is no need to consider these under the Oakes test because as noted earlier there was no basis for him to claim infringement of those rights in the circumstances. ******* [99] In light of all of the contextual factors at play in this case, I find considerable deference should be shown to the BCCT and a less stringent application of the Oakes test is warranted. ******* Pressing and substantial objective ******* [100] The BCCT had several pressing and substantial objectives that would justify overriding the appellant's exercise of his Charter rights in this case. These were: 1. to ensure an equal, tolerant, discrimination-free school environment; 2. to protect students, in particular gay and lesbian students, from the appellant's anti-homosexual discrimination; and 3. to restore and uphold the integrity of, and student and public confidence in, the public school system and the teaching profession as non-discriminatory entities. ******* Rational connection ******* [101] In order to show a rational connection between the BCCT's objectives and the disciplinary action taken against the appellant, the BCCT must demonstrate that there is a rational connection between the appellant's published writings and the ensuing harm to students, the school system and the teaching profession. As for the standard of proof to which the BCCT is to be held, the Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly stated that scientific proof based on concrete evidence is not required (RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (A.G.), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 199 at ?2 and 137, Ross, supra, at ?01, R. v. Sharpe, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 45 at ?5). Instead, "a reasoned apprehension of harm" is sufficient (Sharpe, supra.; R. v. Butler, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 452 at 504). ******* [102] As indicated earlier, the publication of the appellant's writings was harmful per se, and further harm resulting from their publication could be reasonably apprehended. Because of their discriminatory content, the appellant's public writings were harmful per se to the student body at large, homosexual students, the public school system and the teaching profession. Those writings were also harmful per se because the appellant's public linking of that content to his professional position called into question the impartiality of the public school system and teaching profession. ******* [103] As well, as stated earlier, it could be reasonably inferred that the appellant's writings undermined student and public confidence in the public school system and teaching profession. The appellant's ability to be impartial as a teacher was impaired. Homosexual students would as a result of the writings be reluctant to approach him for guidance or counselling. The writings generated controversy in the community that was disruptive to the proper carrying on of the educational system. ******* [104] As such, there are grounds for a reasoned apprehension that the appellant's public writings engendered harm to students, the public school system and the teaching profession. ******* [105] There is a rational connection between the BCCT's objectives and the means chosen to achieve those objectives. Sanctioning the appellant for publishing discriminatory statements and for publicly linking them to his professional status as teacher, is a statement that the teaching profession does not condone discrimination. It tells students and the public that what the appellant did was discriminatory and wrong, and helps to repair the damage done to the integrity of, and student and public confidence in, public schools and the teaching profession as non-discriminatory entities. ******* Minimal impairment ******* [106] In deciding on a means that would minimally impair the appellant�s Charter rights, the BCCT did not have to choose the least restrictive means of achieving its objectives. The means chosen need only fall within a range of reasonable choices and be reasonably tailored to the objectives (Sharpe, supra, at ?6; RJR-MacDonald, supra, at ?60). However, the means must impair Charter rights no more than reasonably necessary (Sharpe, supra), and may not pass the minimal impairment test if the state actor fails to explain why a significantly less intrusive and equally effective measure was not chosen (RJR-MacDonald, supra). ******* [107] The means chosen by the BCCT fell within a range of reasonable alternatives, was reasonably tailored to the underlying objectives, and would impair the appellant's Charter rights no more than reasonably necessary. The appellant is to have his teaching certificate suspended for one month. He is not being terminated or permanently disqualified from teaching ?he can still teach after serving his penalty, and given the high regard in which he is held by some public school administrators in Quesnel in light of the letters of reference they wrote on his behalf, he should have no difficulty maintaining employment. Publication of the appellant's name and incident description by the BCCT, especially at this point, will not do any additional harm, given the notoriety of this case already in Quesnel and beyond. The public will be aware the actions and conduct in question were not ignored. ******* [108] The means chosen by the BCCT are even more reasonable when compared to that part of the sanction in Ross found by the Supreme Court of Canada to withstand constitutional scrutiny. Unlike the appellant, Malcolm Ross was placed immediately on a leave of absence without pay for a period of eighteen months, and was permanently banned from working as a teacher for the school board. That is a much more drastic measure than that chosen by the BCCT. ******* [109] Anything less restrictive than the sanction chosen by the BCCT (e.g. by issuing a reprimand only or no penalty at all) would not be an effective measure and might reasonably give rise to the perception that both the school system and the teaching profession condone the appellant's publicly discriminatory conduct, or think little of it. This community feeling may be heightened by the failure of the school's principal and vice-principals as well as the school district to sanction Mr. Kempling. ******* [110] The intervener agreed that the appellant was indeed guilty of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member, although it submitted that the appellant should be sanctioned for his writings to the local newspaper only. The intervener pointed out that no evidence was led that the appellant's two essays were in fact distributed to anyone other than the BCCT. It was submitted that the sanction might thus be overbroad, producing a chilling effect on written expression that may not have actually been distributed. ******* [111] I appreciate the intervener's concern, but do not feel the sanction exceeds the public distribution of materials at issue. The appellant's writings to the local newspaper were the only ones authored by him that the Hearing Panel relied upon for its finding of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member. The Panel made no mention of the two essays, other than to say that they were submitted to the Panel, until the penalty stage. Still, for the essays to have formed part of the Panel and Council decisions at the penalty stage, was not unreasonable and does not offend the minimal impairment test. ******* [112] Although no evidence was led as to the actual distribution of the two essays, the fact remains that they were intended for distribution and apparently intended to be available to members of the public. The essays are not analogously private in nature, for example, to the private expression exempted by the Supreme Court of Canada from the application of the child pornography law in Sharpe, where the expressive material was privately held and intended exclusively for personal use. As such there is no chilling effect on private expression. ******* [113] In overview, I find the sanction imposed by the BCCT on the appellant minimally impairs his Charter rights. ******* Proportionality in the effects of the sanction ******* [114] The deleterious effects of the sanction imposed by the BCCT Council are limited to the extent necessary for its objectives. The appellant is free to exercise his freedoms of religion and expression in a manner that is unrestricted by the penalty, should he choose not to remain a BCCT member and not teach in public schools in British Columbia. If he chooses to remain a BCCT member, he is still free to exercise those freedoms, so long as he does not publicly do so in a manner that is discriminatory and would allow students or the public to reasonably perceive that he is doing so with the authority or in the capacity of a public school teacher or counsellor. ******* [115] The salutary effects of the sanction are that the teaching profession publicly reaffirms that discrimination is not condoned in public schools. Students and the community are told that what the appellant did was wrong, and the damage done to the integrity of, and student and public confidence in, public schools and the teaching profession as non-discriminatory entities is remedied. In my view, the objectives and salutary effects of the penalty outweigh its deleterious effects. There is proportionality between the objectives and the effects of the means chosen to achieve those objectives. ******* Conclusion on s. 1 of the Charter ******* [116] If the appellant's Charter rights have been infringed, the infringement is saved by s. 1 of the Charter. ******* DISPOSITION ******* [117] The finding by the BCCT Disciplinary Committee Hearing Panel that the appellant is guilty of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member is reasonable, and is affirmed by this Court. The penalty imposed by the BCCT Council upon the appellant for such conduct is also reasonable, and is hereby affirmed. ******* [118] I find there is no infringement of the appellant's Charter rights and if any such infringement did occur in the decisions challenged by the appellant, they would be justified under s. 1 of the Charter. ******* [119] The appeal is dismissed, with costs to the respondent. ******* �R.R. Holmes, J.?******* The Honourable Mr. Justice R.R. Holmes ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 30 2004-02-04 LETTER FROM CHRIS KEMPLING RE; BC COLLEGE OF TEACHERS VERSUS CHRIS KEMPLING DECISION ******* From: "Robert A Jason" ******* Friends: ******* It is a black day for religious freedom in Canada. Yesterday, Justice Ronald Holmes of the BC Supreme Court ruled that the BC College of Teachers was correct in suspending me for one month for letters to the editor written on my own time in my off the job capacity. He stated that my comments were discriminatory and could reasonably cause disruption to the school system. He implied that homosexual students would be unwilling to speak to me in my role as a school counsellor. Justice Holmes asserted that my published comments reduced my credibility as a teacher in the eyes of students, and the public. ******* There was no evidence presented that this was true. No evidence of a disrupted school environment was found. There were no complaints from students, parents, or my supervisors. All of my former administrators wrote letters stating that my public comments had no discernible impact on the operation of the school. ******* In fact, three former students interviewed by the CBC at the University of British Columbia said they weren't even aware that there was a controversy at that time. Furthermore, Justice Holmes ignored the evidence before him that homosexual students received impartial service from me. In fact, a prominent homosexual interviewed by College investigators offered no opinion that what I had written pubicly was upsetting to homosexual people. Justice Holmes ignored evidence that my credibility as a teacher and community leader were not impaired, such as the fact that I was appointed to be Chair of the Community Health Council by the Minister of Health during this period, the highest non- elected appointment in our city, with responsibility for over 500 employees and a $22 million budget. ******* What does this mean? It means that teachers who happen to be Christians or who belong to other religions proscribing homosexuality may not comment publicly on this issue. It means that disciplinary bodies do not need to provide any evidence of impairment or harm at a professional's workplace if they exercise their right to free speech in their off the job capacity. Inference of harm is sufficient to remove a teacher from his job. It is a serious blow to freedom of speech and freedom of religion. ******* I intend to appeal this ruling to the BC Court of Appeal. But I cannot do this alone as the College of Teachers has unlimited funds at their disposal. Most importantly, I need your prayers as I continue this fight for religious freedom and freedom of speech. Donations can be made to the Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defence Fund c/o Mr. Jim Sagert, Trustee 798 Beaubien Ave, Quesnel, BC V2J 1A6, or at any branch of the Royal Bank, Transit #4720, Account #101-030-5. ******* I thank you for those who have already donated or sent messages of support and encouragement. Believe me, they have been much appreciated as it has been quite hard on my family in the past four years. But I am determined to see this through. I am a Christian first and a teacher second, and I will not compromise my faith or keep silent about what I believe. ******* Chris Kempling, Quesnel, BC, [email protected] ************************************************************************************************************************ ******* item 31 2004-02-04 LETTER TO CHRIS KEMPLING FROM FRANK WAGNER ******* One has to ask: How could this have happened? ******* This is certainly political correctness gone mad. ******* Chris, have you thought of running for the Christian Heritage party in the next election? The campaign would provide a good opportunity to publicise your plight. ******* Keep the faith. ******* Frank *********************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 32 2004-02-04 NEWS OF CHRIS ******* From: "Ted Hewlett" ******* I had a phone call from Chris today and published this on the BCPTL website: Justice Denied: British Columbia Supreme Court Rules Against Chris Kempling February 3rd, 2004: After six months of waiting, Chris Kempling today learned that the BC Supreme Court has sided with the BC College of Teachers and has denied his appeal of the College's finding against him and punishment meted out to him. This teacher and school counsellor's offence, as our regular readers will well know, was simply to speak out--in his own time--against the pro-homosexuality program endorsed by the BC Teachers' Federation. For background information on the Chris Kempling case go to Further details to follow on this website. ********************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 33 BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS ******* From: "Robert A Jason" ******* Subject: Fw: Worldnetdaily article on CHRIS KEMPLING ******* Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 18:00:57 -0500 ******* From: Robert A Jason ******* Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 ******* Subject: Worldnetdaily article on CHRIS KEMPLING ******* To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36939 ******* Suspension for 'anti-gay' opinion upheld ******* Teacher's letters-to-editor 'poisoned' classroom environment ******* ?2004 WorldNetDaily.com A teacher suspended because he wrote published letters critical of homosexual behavior was properly punished with a one-month suspension, the British Columbia Supreme Court ruled. ******* As WorldNetDaily reported, Chris Kempling of Quesnel, British Columbia, was found guilty of unbecoming conduct by the B.C. College of Teachers. The panel asserted his letters to the editor, a research paper and other correspondence contained "discriminatory and derogatory statements against homosexuals." ******* Teacher Chris Kempling (Vancouver Sun) ******* Though none of the statements in question were made in class, the panel said the writings indicated the veteran teacher's attitude could poison the class environment. ******* One Kempling letter cited by the panel said: "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." ******* Justice Ronald Holmes of the B.C. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday Kempling's comments were discriminatory and could reasonably cause disruption to the school system. ******* In a letter to supporters yesterday, Kempling said, "It is a black day for religious freedom in Canada." ******* According to Kempling, Holmes implied homosexual students would be unwilling to speak to him in his role as a school counselor, asserting the published comments reduced his credibility as a teacher in the eyes of students and the public. ******* "There was no evidence presented that this was true," Kempling said. "No evidence of a disrupted school environment was found. There were no complaints from students, parents or my supervisors." ******* He noted all of his former administrators wrote letters stating his public comments had no discernible impact on the operation of the school. ******* According to its rules, the teacher's panel does not need to find direct evidence of a poisoned school environment to determine that a member is guilty of conduct unbecoming. The panel said, "It is sufficient that an inference can be drawn as to the reasonable and probable consequences of the discriminatory comments of a teacher." ******* The teachers said they were disturbed by Kempling's statements that homosexual relationships are unstable, 'gay' sex poses health risks and many religions consider homosexuality immoral. ******* In his letter yesterday, Kempling pointed out three former students interviewed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation at the University of British Columbia said they were not even aware that there was a controversy at that time. ******* He insists Justice Holmes ignored evidence that homosexual students received impartial service from him. ******* "In fact, a prominent homosexual interviewed by college investigators offered no opinion that what I had written publicly was upsetting to homosexual people," Kempling said. ******* He argued that the fact he was appointed to be chair of the Community Health Council by the Minister of Health during this period showed his credibility as a teacher and community leader were not impaired. ******* The post is the highest non-elected appointment in his city, with responsibility for over 500 employees and a $22 million budget. ******* Kempling said the ruling "means that teachers who happen to be Christians or who belong to other religions proscribing homosexuality may not comment publicly on this issue." ******* "It means that disciplinary bodies do not need to provide any evidence of impairment or harm at a professional's workplace if they exercise their right to free speech in their off-the-job capacity," he said. "Inference of harm is sufficient to remove a teacher from his job. It is a serious blow to freedom of speech and freedom of religion." ******* Kempling said he will appeal the decision to the B.C. Court of Appeal, although the four-year battle has been tough on him and his family. ******* "But I am determined to see this through," he said. "I am a Christian first and a teacher second, and I will not compromise my faith or keep silent about what I believe." ******* Kempling appealed to the B.C. Supreme Court on the grounds that the decision violates Canadian Charter of Rights protections of freedom of _expression and religion. ******* He argued no professional regulatory body had ever punished members for off-site conduct that had no demonstrable impact on their work. ******* Kempling insists a one-month suspension was particularly harsh since teachers convicted of threats, assault, theft and flashing have received only letters of reprimand. ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 34 LETTER RE: CHRIS KEMPLING, AND LIBERTY AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH... ******* From: "words that WORK by Gloria Poole" ******* To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] ******* Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 11:05:55 -0700 ******* Hello, I am writing to all the people involved in this fiasco of punishing a citizen in a supposedly free nation because he expressed an opinion unpopular with the wicked. If your schools in Canada only intend to brainwash, then you made the right decision to suspend and therefore punish him for daring to think for himself and believe the words of God to be true. The words of God against homosexuality are true and time will reveal that to all of you. God does not condone and never condoned rampant homosexuality in any place. He called it an abomination and He totally destroyed Sodom and Gomorrha in the Bible by burning them to the ground with fire from heaven. Read those words for yourself--you don't have to take my word or Chris's for the truth. John 8:32 is written, "and ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." Romans Ch describes all the wickedness and results of "refusing to acknowledge God as God" (King James Holy Bible) and homosexuality is one of those results, but it ends by saying they are "worthy of death". Does your School or nation do good for students to promote as righteousness a lifestyle that has connected with it Karposi sarcoma, AIDS, rectal tears, and a multitude of sickness and perversion? This is medical fact and is well documented in medical textbooks. For the school to promote a deadly lifestyle as a "right' shows you how off target they are. They are now in the pockets of the homosexual activists who demand the "right" to be evil. God gave them the right to be evil in this verse, "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you. That I have set before you life and death; blessing and cursing; therefore choose life that both thou and thy seed may live, that thou mayest love the Lord thy God and that thou mayest obey His voice and that thou mayest cleave unto Him, for He is thy life and the length of thy days." Deuteronomy 30:19-20. However, Jesus warns about the consequences to those who deliberately lead astray those who believe: "But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe unto the world because of offenses!for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh!" Matthew 18:14. Teaching and/or forcing the teaching upon captive audiences like students is wickedness and wickedness which God will punish. "Be not deceived. God is not mocked.For whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." Galatians 6:7. As you "agents of change" (the UN word for teachers of wickedness) try to take away the liberties of men who speak the truth like Chris Kempling, so shall your liberties be taken away when your rottenness, corruption and bribe taking is discovered by the public. ******* As for Chris, remember the words of Jesus in the sermon on the Mount: Blessed are you when shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice! and be exceeding glad,for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost its savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing but to be cast out and to be trodden under foot by men. Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle and set it under a bushel but on a candlestick and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." Matthew 5:11-16 My question is, why would a superior teacher like you, Chris, want to work for such an abominable school as the BC one? You can do better! There are righteous schools everywhere. Any school that would suspend you for teaching the truth of God in accordance with Proverbs 9:10 is not worth your time or effort. Those people are on the way to hell and you did what God sent you there to do i.e. promote the truth. Proverbs 9:10 is written, "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of THE HOLY is understanding." God will uphold you and furthermore, He will repay 100 times over the lost salary that they caused you, according to scripture which says anything you sacrifice for God's sake is repaid 100 fold in this life and the world to come. God's blessings on you, Chris. May you go on to become the Prime Minister of Canada and lead that nation back to God! Also, I would love to interview you on the tv. Let me know if interested. Gloria ******* Gloria Poole aka Gloria Poole Pappas ******* www.home.earthlink.net/~gloria.poole.pappas_reg.nurse/ ******* www.home.earthlink.net/~words.that.work/ ******* www.home.earthlink.net/~tapestry.of.life.tv/ ******* http://mysite.freeserve.com/do_not_abort/ ******* www.home.earthlink.net/~gloria.poole/ ******* www.geocities.com/gloriapooleRN/ChooseLife.html/ ******* http://mysite.freeserve.com/salvation_is_free/ ******* PO Box 46017, Denver, Colorado, 80201 USA ******* 303-861-4027 ******* [email protected] ******* Why Wait? Move to EarthLink. ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 35 FRANK WAGNER'S RESPONSE TO GLORIA POOLE ******* from "Frank Wagner" ******* to [email protected] ******* re: Chris Kempling, and liberty and freedom of speech... ******* Dear Gloria, ******* Thank you for your support for Chris Kempling. Chris did what all teachers worthy of the name should be doing. He told the truth and he's being punished for it. I think today men prefer darkness to light. ******* You said: ******* "The innocent creations of God in their mother's wombs are "dumb" in the old fashioned sense of that word, meaning that they are unable to speak for themselves at that point in time. If they could speak, and if they could defend themselves, they would choose life." ******* What you said is true. However, in 1974 God gave the children who had been aborted at the Vancouver (Canada) General Hospital an opportunity to speak and He let me hear what they said. ******* At that time I was given the following message: ******* Listen to the cry of the aborted children. Their cry is no. Their cry is a cry of terror. Heed their cry. ******* If you're interested in details please go to my website which is listed at the end of this email. ******* For Life ******* Frank Wagner ******* P.S. The BC College of Teachers is also charging me with conduct unbecoming a member. If you're interested in details on this as well please let me know. ******* LISTEN TO THE CRY OF THE ABORTED CHILDREN. THEIR CRY IS NO. THEIR CRY IS A CRY OF TERROR. HEED THEIR CRY. ******* Check out my web site http://ca.geocities.com/fwagner4 ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 36 A BLACK DAY FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN CANADA ******* The London Free Press ******* Tuesday, February 17, 2004 ******* By Rory Leishman ******* In an indignant response to an outrageous ruling by the British Columbia Supreme Court, Chris Kempling of Quesnel, British Columbia, has declared: "It is a black day for religious freedom in Canada." That's no exaggeration. ******* Kempling is a high school teacher in Quesnel, British Columbia. He is embroiled in litigation over the decision of British Columbia College of Teachers (BCCT) to suspend his teaching licence because he expressed his honestly held views on homosexuality in an article and a series of letters to the editor in the Quesnel Cariboo Record. ******* Kempling appealed the BCCT ruling on the grounds that it violated his rights to freedom of thought, belief, opinion and _expression in section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. On Feb. 3, Mr. Justice Ronald Holmes of the British Columbia Supreme Court rejected the appeal. ******* Holmes acknowledged in his ruling that Kempling, "has been a BCCT member since 1980, with a long and unblemished teaching career, and a notable record of community service." In fact, despite the controversy with the BCCT, the Ministry of Health appointed Kempling to serve as the voluntary head of the Quesnel Community Health Council. ******* What, then, could this model citizen and teacher have written in his local newspaper to warrant suspension of his teaching licence? Holmes explains: "The appellant consistently associated homosexuals with immorality, abnormality, perversion, and promiscuity. Examples of such statements include: 'Thus my main concern with giving same sex couples legal rights in child custody issues is due to the obvious instability and short term nature of gay relationships'My second concern is how can children develop a concept of normal sexuality, when their prime care-givers have rejected the other gender entirely?'" ******* On the basis of this and other similar statements, the BCCT convicted Kempling of professional misconduct for making "discriminatory and derogatory statements against homosexuals." In his defence, Kempling submitted that only discriminatory actions, not speech, can count as unprofessional conduct within the meaning of the law. ******* Holmes disagreed. He pointed out that under the rubric of "discriminatory publication," section 7(1) of the British Columbia Human Rights Code bans the issuing of any statement that is likely to expose a group or class or persons to contempt because of their sexual orientation. ******* The BCCT cited no evidence of a "poisoned school environment" or specific complaints against Kempling. Regardless, Holmes concluded: "In my view, the appellant's published writings were harmful to the public school system ?because of their discriminatory content." ******* Note the general implications of this finding: Holmes implies that it's a human rights offence for anyone, not just teachers, to lament sexual promiscuity among homosexuals in a letter to the editor of a newspaper. ******* Yet homosexual promiscuity is a notorious fact. However, such considerations are of no account in a human rights proceeding. In the 1990 Keegstra case, the Supreme Court of Canada decreed that truth is not a defence against a charge of discrimination under a human right code. ******* As for Kempling's right to freedom of _expression under s. 2 of the Charter, that, too, was of no account to Holmes. He stated as his view that the Charter does not protect, "the appellant�s right to express ?strictly personally-held, discriminatory views with the authority of or in the capacity of a public school teacher/counsellor." ******* Kempling is a Christian. What about his right under section 15 of the Charter to the equal protection of the law without discrimination on the basis of religion? Holmes dismissed this argument on the specious ground that all teachers, not just those who are Christians, are required by law not to discriminate against homosexuals. ******* Kempling plans a further appeal. That's a forlorn hope. Former prime ministers Brian Mulroney and Jean Chretien have stacked the appeal courts with so many dogmatic gay-rights ideologues that it's practically impossible for a Christian in a case like Kempling's to get a fair hearing. ******* Rory Leishman, 836 Wellington St., London, Ontario, Canada N6A 3S7 ******* Home/Office Phone: 519-439-2676 ******* Home Page: www.roryleishman.com ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 37 UPDATES ON CHRIS KEMPLING(from the BCPTL website www.bcptl.org) ******* from February 2004 BC Parents and Teachers for Life Email Bulletin ******* Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 ******* British Columbia Supreme Court Rules Against Chris Kempling February 3rd, 2004 ******* After six months of waiting, Chris Kempling learned that the BC Supreme Court has sided with the BC College of Teachers and has denied his appeal of the College's finding against him and punishment meted out to him. ******* Chris Kempling Intends to Appeal the BC Supreme Court Ruling Read a letter from Chris Kempling, dated February 4, 2004. Chris states his intention to appeal the BC Supreme Court's unjust ruling. ******* [See also, the first article below, in "News and Views from the Internet."] ******* News and Views from the Internet ******* [Note: We pass on the items of news and opinion in this section for your information. Not every opinion expressed will necessarily coincide with those of BC Parents and Teachers for Life, the publishers of this E-Mail Bulletin.] ******* Canadian Teacher's Suspension Upheld by Court ******* A high price is paid for a letter-to-the-editor The following announcement by NARTH member Chris Kempling explains the result of his appeal of an earlier suspension by his professional governing body, The College of Teachers. ******* On February 3, 2004, I finally received the judgment in my case with the British Columbia College of Teachers. ******* http://www.narth.com/docs/upheld.html ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 38 GOOD NEWS: DR. CHRIS KEMPLING HAS NEW WEBSITE ******* From: "Robert A Jason" ******* Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 ******* by Chris Kempling ******* Robert: I decided to try a website of my own. You can check it out at www.drkempling.com. Not much news on the trial front. I go back to the BC Court of Appeal some time in the winter. Unfortunately, I now am battling my own employer as well, who has disciplined me because I spoke with a radio reporter about my intention to offer orientation change services through my private practice. My union is waiting until the outcome of the College of Teachers court case before deciding whether or not to press for arbitration in the matter, which could take over a year. In the meantime, I am being threatened with dismissal if I speak out again. My website could lead to more discipline, but I thought I'd take the risk. I still cling to the faint hope that we actually have freedom of speech in this country. ******* I sure enjoy your postings. God bless. ******* Dr. Chris Kempling Psy.D. R.C.C., Registered Clinical Counsellor Quesnel, BC ******************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 39 UPDATED VERSIONS OF 2 ARTICLES BY DR. CHRIS KEMPLING ******* From: "Robert A Jason" ******* Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 08:15:40 -0400 ******* Dr. Chris Kempling said to Robert Jason "Robert: Attached are two research essays, both of which are updated versions of the essays the College of Teachers cited me for "conduct unbecoming". They never did tell me why, other than to say they were "derogatory and discriminatory in their entirety". What do you think?" ******* Robert Jason said "What do I think? WOW! That's what I think, in a word." ******* Robert goes on to say "These two research papers by Dr. Chris Kempling should be required reading for all thoughtful, concerned human beings. Being research papers, they are well documented but written in a clear, fluid, easy to understand language. ******* Chris Kempling has become a household name in Canada. For my American friends: Chris Kempling, Ph.D, is a Christian teacher in a public school in the province of British Columbia who was cited by his College of Teachers for "conduct unbecoming" a teacher and was punished with loss of pay and threats of losing his job etc. And what was his crime, pray tell? Why, he was exercising his right of free speech and religion guaranteed by the Canadian constitution by writing letters to local papers challenging the totalitarian imposition of homosexuality & homosexual agenda in public schools in a free & democratic society." ******* The 2 essays will follow when available. ******* ESSAY 1 ******* ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 40 NOTE FROM CHRIS KEMPLING RE HIS CASE ******* From: "Robert Jason" ******* Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 ******* Just to inform you that the BC Court of Appeal will hear my case against the BC College of Teachers on April 21 and 22, 2005, with the BC Civil "Liberties" association intervening on the side of the College (YEP, THIS IS OUR UPSIDE-DOWN CANADA WHERE A CIVIL "LIBERTIES" ASSOCIATION IS ACTUALLY FOR SUPPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH - RJ) , and the BC Teachers Federation and the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance intervening on my behalf. - Chris Kempling ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 41 CHRIS KEMPLING SUSPENDED ******* From: RealWomen of BC via "Rod & Elaine Taylor" ******* Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 ******* REAL Women of BC - *Realistic *Equal *Active *for Life A pro-life, pro-family, non-denominational, non-profit, non-partisan, grassroots women' ******* Dr. Chris Kempling, a well qualified school counsellor from Quesnel is being targeted for unconstitutional and punitive action by the Trustees of his School District. The action comes as a result of a letter to the editor written for Kempling’s volunteer position as spokesperson for a federal political party. ******* Dr. Kempling stated that, as a Canadian, he has a right to be a spokesperson for the political party of his choice. He did not identify himself as a teacher in his letter, nor did he bring the issue into the school. ******* The School Trustees decided, however, that he is not free to express his opinion in a public forum and have suspended Dr. Kempling for three months from his job. The School District did not provide a single example of disruption to the school system, nor cit! e any negative effect of the letter. The Trustees also ignored over a dozen letters of reference from supervisors and community members written in support of Dr. Kempling. ******* The letter to the editor was published in a local paper on January 12, 2005 criticizing Bill C-38, the Liberal government's same sex marriage legislation and calling for a national referendum. ******* "It is truly unfortunate that the Quesnel School Board believes that only those who support same sex marriage are able to comment publicly on a matter of national importance. It is a sad day for freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and freedom of political affiliation," stated Dr. Kempling. "But more significantly, I am most concerned about the young children with serious emotional needs, who will be deprived of their counselor at a time when they need help most. Counseling, much more than teaching, involves a close personal relationship where trust develops over time. I'm really very worr! ied about their well-being," ******* Dr. Kempling has been forbidden t o communicate in public (effectively muzzled for life) on the subject of homosexuality as an outcome of a previous disciplinary action, for which Kempling received international media attention and for which he has been punished. ******* Dr. Kempling plans to fight the suspension through the grievance process, as well as through the BC Human Rights Tribunal under the category of political discrimination. ******* This is a chilling event in BC's political history. We should all be very concerned about our freedoms of conscience, thought, political affiliation and religion in our province. ******* Laurie Geschke, Past President, REAL Women 604.463.1611 ******* Dr. Chris Kempling 250-747-3239 [email protected] ******* [email protected] ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 42 STAND OF BC TEACHERS COLLEGE ON HOMOSEXUALITY "HYPOCRITICAL" ******* From: LifeSite Daily News - Friday April 25, 2003 via "D.Fernandes" ******* CALGARY, April 25, 2003 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Canada Family Action Coalition (CFAC) has exposed the hypocrisy of the British Columbia College of Teachers (BCCT) in their action against a Christian teacher who objected to the pro-homosexual agenda being fostered in the classroom. "The Code of conduct espoused by the BC College of Teachers apparently does not apply to the College elite, but only to the teachers over whom they 'rule'", says a CFAC release. ******* BCCT Registrar Doug Smart has made critical comments to the media about teacher Chris Kempling, because Kempling expressed his views in letters to the editor. Smart said, "... the College intended to send a message to him (Kempling), to other teachers and to society at large that is not okay to be intolerant of homosexuality." ******* Brian Rushfeldt, Executive Director of CFAC said, "The College of Teachers has appointed itself judge and jury of society, telling us what we should think about homosexuality and sodomy. Smart uses the term 'homophobic' - a derogatory and intolerant term used to silence anyone who disagrees with homosexual behaviour. Why would a code of conduct for public discourse apply to Chris Kempling in his local newspaper but not to the 'College' dictators in public interviews with provincial and national media?" ******* "It seems that the BC College of Teachers is advancing an agenda, wielding their powers unethically and perhaps illegally in persecuting someone whom they deem "politically incorrect." Rushfeldt says , "If citizens who happen to be teachers by profession are not permitted to publicly express their beliefs or opinions about a subject, how is it that the College echelon can express theirs? This is hypocritical and intolerant." ******* See related LifeSite coverage: TEACHER TO BE SUSPENDED ONE MONTH WITHOUT PAY FOR WRITING AGAINST HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA IN SCHOOLS http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/apr/03041603.html ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 43 FROM DR. CHRIS KEMPLING VIA ROBERT JASON ******* From: [email protected] ******* Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 ******* GOOD NEWS: DR. CHRIS KEMPLING HAS NEW WEBSITE ******* By Chris Kempling ******* Robert: I decided to try a website of my own. You can check it out at www.drkempling.com. Not much news on the trial front. I go back to the BC Court of Appeal some time in the winter. Unfortunately, I now am battling my own employer as well, who has disciplined me because I spoke with a radio reporter about my intention to offer orientation change services through my private practice. My union is waiting until the outcome of the College of Teachers court case before deciding whether or not to press for arbitration in the matter, which could take over a year. In the meantime, I am being threatened with dismissal if I speak out again. My website could lead to more discipline, but I thought I'd take the risk. I still cling to the faint hope that we actually have freedom of speech in this country. ******* I sure enjoy your postings. God bless. ******* Dr. Chris Kempling Psy.D. R.C.C., Registered Clinical Counsellor, Quesnel, BC (Canada) ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 44 FROM FRANK WAGNER TO CHRIS KEMPLING ******* Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 ******* From: "Frank Wagner" To: [email protected] ******* Subject: Congratulations ******* Hi Chris, ******* Congratulations on getting your doctorate. It seems our opposition knows no bounds and will stop at nothing in order to impose their immorality. Have you thought of suing your employer for harassment? ******* I've listed your web site on one of my folders. You can see it at http://www.geocities.com/fwagner4/A4e2a1c1_BCCTvsC_Kempling.html ******* It appears the BC College of Teachers and I may have come to an agreement. They won't take me to court if I hand in my teaching license and membership card in the BCCT. The deal isn't finalized yet, so if you have any advice please send it my way. ******* I hope I did the right thing by agreeing to this. Time will tell. ******* Frank ****************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 45 THE LATEST NEWS IN THE ONGOING SAGA OF THE CHRIS KEMPLING CASE ******* From: Robert A Jason ******* Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 ******* Five Organizations Apply for Intervenor Status in the Kempling v. BC College of Teachers BC Court of Appeal Case ******* Four Christian organizations, under the umbrella title of the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance, have applied to the BC Court of Appeal for intervenor status in Dr. Chris Kempling's freedom of speech and religion case against the BC College of Teachers. The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, the Christian Teachers Association, the Christian Legal Fellowship, and the Catholic Civil Rights League have formed a coalition to combat the erosion of the civil rights of professionals who happen to be Christian. Kuhn and Company's Kevin Boonstra, instrumental in Trinity Western University's successful Supreme Court victory over the College of Teachers, is representing the Alliance locally in conjunction with David M. Brown of Stikemann Elliott firm of Toronto. The Alliance will argue that the freedom to engage in religously based _expression is guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that the judgment of the lower court is seriously out of line with those guarantees. ******* In addition, the BC Teachers Federation has formally applied for intervenor status as well, arguing that the freedom of teachers to engage in public discourse is a Charter Right that should not be infringed by the BC College of Teachers. ******* To date, only the BC Civil Liberties Association has been granted intervenor status. The BCCLA is supporting the College of Teachers and has argued that Dr. Kempling is not entitled to work as a public school teacher as long as he holds controversial views. They agreed with the College of Teachers that no evidence of harm is needed to remove a Christian teacher from his job. ******* It is not certain if the court will agree to allow the five new applicants to intervene in this case, which should be heard some time this winter. In the meantime, Dr. Kempling continues to work as an elementary school counsellor, children's therapist and marriage and family counsellor in private practice. ****************************************************************************************************************** ******* item 46 FROM CHRIS KEMPLING TO FRANK WAGNER ******* Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 ******* From: [email protected] ******* To: "Frank Wagner" ******* Subject: Re: Congratulations ******* Frank: I did try filing a harassment complaint. The harassment investigator investigated, wrote his report, and concluded I wasn't being harassed. Except he never once talked to me. I protested to the uperintendent to no avail. So now I'm going to try the Human Rights Tribunal. ******* It sounds like you have an opportunity to be rid of the College forever, with their offer. Seems to make sense to me. God bless, and enjoy your retirement. ******* Chris Kempling ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 47 DR. CHRIS KEMPLING SUSPENDED 3 MONTHS FOR DEFENDING TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE ******* From: Chris Kempling via Robert A Jason ******* Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 ******* In a decision handed down today, Quesnel School District Superintendent Ed Napier suspended school counsellor Dr. Chris Kempling for three months. Dr. Kempling has been employed as a counsellor since 1990, and has been active in a wide variety of volunteer positions in the community. He is also the local spokesperson of the federal Christian Heritage Party, and had written a letter to the editor of the local newspaper on behalf of his party, criticizing the Liberal government's same sex marriage legislation. The school district did not provide a single example of disruption to the school system, or any negative effect of the letter. They also ignored over a dozen letters of reference from supervisors and community members written in support of Dr. Kempling. ******* "It is truly unfortunate that the Quesnel School Board believes that only those who support same sex marriage are able to comment publicly on a matter of national importance, " stated Dr. Kempling. "It is a sad day for freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and freedom of political affiliation. But more significantly, I am most concerned about the young children with serious emotional needs, who will be deprived of their counsellor at a time when they need help most. Counselling, much more than teaching, involves a close personal relationship where trust develops over time. I'm really very worried about their well-being." ******* Dr. Kempling plans to fight the suspension through the grievance process, as well as through the BC Human Rights Tribunal under the category of political discrimination. ******* How to Contribute Financially to Chris Kempling's Legal Defence A trust fund has been set up. It is the "Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund." Money contributed to this fund will help Christopher Kempling with the expenses of his legal defence. Subsequently, money in the fund after Chris's defence can be used to help other Christian teachers who may find themselves in a similar position. ******* If you would like to contribute to the trust fund, you may make a contribution at any Royal Bank branch. The transit number is 4720. The account number is 101-030-5. ******* If you prefer to contribute by cheque, send your contribution to: Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund, c/o Jim Sagert, 798 Beaubien Ave., Quesnel, BC V2J 1S5 ******************************************************************************************************************* ******* item 48 PERSECUTION OF CHRISTIANS IN CANADA - DR. KEMPLING AND THE BC COURT OF APPEALS - the latest case on Dr. Kempling ******* From: Robert A Jason ******* Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 ******* The final bell on "round two" has rung in the long-running match between Dr. Chris Kempling and the British Columbia College of Teachers, but it will likely be several months before the judges release their decision. The case will decide whether Christian teachers have freedom of speech and the freedom to express their religious beliefs on their own time. Dr. Kempling is appealing a decision of the College which suspended him for one month for writing letters to the editor objecting to the promotion of homosexuality in the public school system. Dr. Kempling and his legal team faced off against the College of Teachers and their allies on April 21st and 22nd in Vancouver’s Court of Appeal. The case arose out of a complaint filed with the College in July, 2000. ******* Dr. Kempling’s team consisted of William Clark of Harper Grey law firm, plus three lawyers from the intervenors: J. Rogers for the BC Teachers’ Federation, and Kevin Boonstra (Kuehn and Company, Abbotsford) and David Brown (Stikeman Brown of Toronto), who represented the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance. (The CRFA is comprised of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, the Catholic Civil Rights League, the Christian Legal Fellowship, and the Christian Teachers Association of BC.) ******* The BC College of Teachers was represented by Mr. Bruce Laughton, who has handled the case from the outset. Intervenors for the College included Elliot Myers of the BC Civil Liberties Association and Judith Anderson of the BC Public School Employers Association. Hearing the case were Madam Justice Huddart, Mr. Justice Lowry, and Head Justice Ian Donald. The only media in attendance was Frank Stirk of Christian Week. ******* The bulk of first day of the case was occupied by the Mr. Clark’s presentation. He argued that Dr. Kempling’s Charter rights of freedom of speech were definitely violated by the College, and given that no evidence of "harm" was presented, the "inference of harm" was not enough to impose discipline. Furthermore, the one month penalty was excessive given Dr. Kempling’s unblemished teaching record, extensive community service, and numerous character references from a wide variety of supervisors and community leaders. Mr. Clark noted that all other freedoms are an extension of freedom of _expression, and that even if speech is "unpopular" it is worthy of protection in a free and democratic society. ******* David Brown had just 30 minutes to present his argument on behalf of the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance, but he gave an outstanding oration. He argued that, in the absence of "harm" in the school community, the speaker should receive the benefit of the doubt. Moreover, characterizing speech as "discriminatory" is a "show-stopper", i.e. it has the effect of shutting down debate by labeling unpopular speech as inherently harmful. Brown posited that there should be an analysis of the difference between critical speech and discriminatory speech, which was not done in this case. Brown noted that it is quite possible to believe in the inherent dignity of a person while concurrently holding that certain behaviours practiced by that person are immoral. Furthermore, tolerance ought not to mean "mandated approval". Though his time was short, Mr. Brown captured the essential elements of the case in a brilliant presentation. ******* Mr. Laughton took up the bulk of the second day, presenting the College’s case. He stated that it wasn’t necessary for anyone inside the school system to complain, nor was it necessary to call any witnesses to prove their case. The College was well within its authority to suspend a member for speech it had determined was discriminatory-the harm could be inferred. He also stated that it was improper to present a "freedom of religion" defense, since the College didn’t know what religion Dr. Kempling belonged to. That was a remarkable statement considering Dr. Kempling’s writings are full of Christian references and Bible citations. ******* Elliot Myers of the BC Civil Liberties Association stated that the BCCLA agrees that the College made the right decision, but for the wrong reasons. They felt it was improper for the College to base its decision on private memos written to a superior, private letters to elected officials, and unpublished research essays. Their main concern was that Dr. Kempling identified himself as a teacher in his letters to the editor. They were particularly upset by Dr. Kempling’s statement that he would refuse to be a false teacher, teaching information that was morally questionable, and that he would encourage those who were confused about their orientation to come and see him, as it could save their life. Mr. Myers asserted that Dr. Kempling had "announced his intention to discriminate" by making these statements. Even though no evidence was presented he actually did discriminate against anyone, the possibility he might was enough to impose the suspension. ******* The lawyers for the BC Teachers Federation and the BC Public School Employers Association made no oral submissions, and merely submitted their written briefs due to time constraints. ******* Mr. Clark is actually not too hopeful of a positive outcome in the trial, and believes it will be necessary to carry on to the Supreme Court of Canada. It is doubly difficult at this time since Dr. Kempling is currently enduring an additional three month suspension without pay for publicly objecting to the Liberal’s same sex marriage legislation as a spokesman for his political party. ******* But, as Paul urged Timothy: "I solemnly urge you to preach the message, to insist upon proclaiming it (whether the time is right or not), to convince, reproach, and encourage, as you teach with all patience. The time will come when people will not listen to sound doctrine, but will follow their own desires and will collect for themselves more and more teachers who will tell them what they are itching to hear. They will turn away from listening to the truth and give their attention to legends. But you must keep control of yourself in all circumstances; endure suffering, do the work of a preacher of the Good News, and perform your whole duty as a servant of God." (2 Timothy 4:1-5) ******* The children of this land deserve to be presented with balanced information on same sex issues, so that they can avoid putting their lives at risk. Without the freedom to present the Christian perspective in a public venue like the editorial page of a local newspaper, the safety of our children, and the freedom of all Canadians is at stake. ******************************************************************************* ******* item 49 CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP RESPONSE - KEMPLING v. BC COLLEGE OF TEACHERS DECISION by Elizabeth F.C. Davis, J.D. [email protected] www.christianlegalfellowship.org ******* From: Christian Legal Fellowship (CLF) via Robert A Jason ******* Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 ******* The Christian Legal Fellowship is a national not-for-profit association of legal professionals in Canada. The association, among other functions, explores the complex interrelationships between the practice and theory of law and Christian faith. The Fellowship has some 450 active members from several dozen Christian denominations working together to integrate Christian faith with law. ******* The Christian Legal Fellowship is disappointed with the Kempling v. BC College of Teachers decision handed down yesterday (June 13.05) by the British Columbia Court of Appeal. ******* Justice Lowry, writing on behalf of the court, asserted that Mr. Kempling's newspaper editorials articulating his religious beliefs on the homosexual lifestyle were not deserving of Charter protection because the court considered them discriminatory and damaging to the integrity of the public school system as a whole. ******* Christian Legal Fellowship, along with other members of Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance (Alliance), intervened on behalf of Mr. Kempling in his appeal for constitutional protection of his right to express deeply held religious beliefs restrained by the Supreme Court of BC & Disciplinary Committee of the BC College of Teachers. Mr. Kempling's argument is that he is disadvantaged in that he is precluded from contributing to public debate on an issue of importance to him because he is a teacher in the public school system. ******* Kevin Boonstra, co-counsel for the Alliance, responded to the court's decision, "We are disappointed that Mr. Kempling did not succeed in his appeal and are concerned about the Court's conclusion that his statements do not deserve a high level of constitutional protection. The Court drew a distinction between 'reasoned debate' and 'discriminatory rhetoric'. It will be very difficult for people to distinguish between these when speaking publicly about controversial topics on sexual morality and the result will be a chill on free debate and expression." ******* Of paramount concern to the Christian Legal Fellowship is the protection of freedom of professionals to contribute to public debate on controversial religious issues. On appeal, the Alliance argued that there should be an analysis of the difference between critical speech and discriminatory speech, which was not done in this case. ******* Furthermore, the BC Court of Appeal's analysis of "harm" in this situation was disappointing. ******* According to Ruth Ross, Executive Director of Christian Legal Fellowship, "In the absence of proof of harm to the school, a student or parent, the court concluded that the harm was to the integrity of the school system as a whole. This is a dangerous precedent to set," stated Ruth Ross. "All professionals will be extremely cautious in speaking out on matters of public interest especially if they wish to speak out on the unpopular or �politically incorrect� side of an issue, for fear of being cited for �conduct unbecoming a professional��. ******* The Alliance, which is comprised of the Christian Legal Fellowship, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, the Catholic Civil Rights League, and the Christian Teachers Association, is represented by co-counsel Kevin L. Boonstra of Abbotsford and David M. Brown of Toronto. ******* The full text of the decision can be viewed at: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/Jdb-txt/CA/05/03/2005BCCA0327.htm ******* For further information or to arrange an interview, please contact: Elizabeth Davis [email protected] ******* CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP l�Alliance des chr�tiens en droit 1673 Richmond Street Suite # 140 London, ON N6G 2N3 ******* Phone: (519) 641-8850 Fax: (519) 641-8866 www.christianlegalfellowship.org ******* The Christian Legal Fellowship is a national not-for-profit association of legal professionals in Canada. The association, among other functions, explores the complex interrelationships between the practice and theory of law and Christian faith. The Fellowship has some 450 active members from several dozen Christian denominations working together to integrate Christian faith with law. ******************************************************************************* ******* item 50 DR. CHRIS KEMPLING'S STATEMENT ON SUPREME COURT DECISION ******* From: "CHP National Campaign Manager" ******* Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 ******* The Supreme Court of Canada today refused to hear a freedom of speech case brought by Quesnel, BC teacher Dr. Chris Kempling in a dispute with the British Columbia College of Teachers. The case stemmed from letters to the editor written to the Quesnel Cariboo Observer newspaper between 1997 and 2000 questioning the wisdom of promoting the homosexual agenda. ******* Stated Kempling: "This is a victory for the enemies of free speech and a sad day for all Canadians who value the free exchange of ideas in the public square. ******* Everything I have publicly written about homosexuality is backed up by solid research data. I stand by what I have written. People need to remember that I have never been asked to retract any of my public statements, nor has any human rights complaint ever been laid against me. I was simply expressing a social conservative point of view shared by millions of Canadians. ******* "It is my intention to keep on fighting by filing a formal complaint with the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. While that won't affect today's court decision it may embarrass Canada into reviewing its alleged commitment to free speech rights for religious minorities. Many people have urged me to write a book about my experience and I will now seriously consider doing that. I have no regrets about what I have done in the past 10 years in defence of children. As U.S. President Teddy Roosevelt once said, 'It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred with dust and sweat and blood...and who...if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.' ******* "I am a servant of the King of Kings, and there is no such thing as permanent defeat." ******* Chris Kempling ************************************************************************************** item 51 CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP response - KEMPLING v. BC COLLEGE OF TEACHERS Decision ******* From: Elizabeth F.C. Davis, J.D., Christian Legal Fellowship, [email protected], www.christianlegalfellowship.org via Robert A Jason ******* Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 ******* The Christian Legal Fellowship is a national not-for-profit association of legal professionals in Canada. The association, among other functions, explores the complex interrelationships between the practice and theory of law and Christian faith. The Fellowship has some 450 active members from several dozen Christian denominations working together to integrate Christian faith with law. ******* The Christian Legal Fellowship is disappointed with the Kempling v. BC College of Teachers decision handed down yesterday (June 13.05) by the British Columbia Court of Appeal. Justice Lowry, writing on behalf of the court, asserted that Mr. Kempling's newspaper editorials articulating his religious beliefs on the homosexual lifestyle were not deserving of Charter protection because the court considered them discriminatory and damaging to the integrity of the public school system as a whole. Christian Legal Fellowship, along with other members of Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance (Alliance), intervened on behalf of Mr. Kempling in his appeal for constitutional protection of his right to express deeply held religious beliefs restrained by the Supreme Court of BC & Disciplinary Committee of the BC College of Teachers. Mr. Kempling's argument is that he is disadvantaged in that he is precluded from contributing to public debate on an issue of importance to him because he is a teacher in the public school system. Kevin Boonstra, co-counsel for the Alliance, responded to the court's decision, "We are disappointed that Mr. Kempling did not succeed in his appeal and are concerned about the Court's conclusion that his statements do not deserve a high level of constitutional protection. The Court drew a distinction between 'reasoned debate' and 'discriminatory rhetoric'. It will be very difficult for people to distinguish between these when speaking publicly about controversial topics on sexual morality and the result will be a chill on free debate and _expression." Of paramount concern to the Christian Legal Fellowship is the protection of freedom of professionals to contribute to public debate on controversial religious issues. On appeal, the Alliance argued that there should be an analysis of the difference between critical speech and discriminatory speech, which was not done in this case. Furthermore, the BC Court of Appeal's analysis of "harm" in this situation was disappointing. According to Ruth Ross, Executive Director of Christian Legal Fellowship, "In the absence of proof of harm to the school, a student or parent, the court concluded that the harm was to the integrity of the school system as a whole. This is a dangerous precedent to set," stated Ruth Ross. "All professionals will be extremely cautious in speaking out on matters of public interest especially if they wish to speak out on the unpopular or �politically incorrect� side of an issue, for fear of being cited for �conduct unbecoming a professional��. The Alliance, which is comprised of the Christian Legal Fellowship, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, the Catholic Civil Rights League, and the Christian Teachers Association, is represented by co-counsel Kevin L. Boonstra of Abbotsford and David M. Brown of Toronto. Click here for the Coalition intervention factum and related materials on CLF's website. The full text of the decision can be viewed at: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/Jdb-txt/CA/05/03/2005BCCA0327.htm For further information or to arrange an interview, please contact: Elizabeth Davis [email protected] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP l�Alliance des chr�tiens en droit 1673 Richmond Street Suite # 140 London, ON N6G 2N3 Phone: (519) 641-8850 Fax: (519) 641-8866 www.christianlegalfellowship.org The Christian Legal Fellowship is a national not-for-profit association of legal professionals in Canada. The association, among other functions, explores the complex interrelationships between the practice and theory of law and Christian faith. The Fellowship has some 450 active members from several dozen Christian denominations working together to integrate Christian faith with law. ***************************************************************************** ******* item 52 CHRIS KEMPLING'S CASE POINTS TO A HOST OF THREATENED FREEDOMS ******* From: BCPTL ListMaster via Robert Jason ******* Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 ******* just this month we learned that teacher and counsellor Dr.Chris Kempling is now facing discipline from a tyrant in the administration of his local school district because of Chris's testimony before a parliamentary committee. Most people would have thought that, whatever the limitations that have been put on the speech of others, witnesses before such a committee would still have their freedom of speech protected, in view of the fact that the purpose of such committees is to enable our legislators to obtain information. But this attempted infringement of Chris Kempling's liberty is just the latest in a list of actions against him which have threatened freedoms which we would at one time have thought secure because they are essential to a free society. ******* We might have thought that the public school system was open to public scrutiny. But this scrutiny is impossible if teachers, who know what is going on in the school system, are not free to publicly reveal the facts and to challenge what is being done if they feel it is against the welfare of students. Yet punishment was pronounced on Chris for writing a letter to the editor on his own time, challenging the pro-homosexuality program being initiated in the public schools. ******* We might have thought that it was essential for political parties and their representatives to be able to state their positions prior to an election and to criticize the positions of the government if they opposed them. Yet Chris was suspended from teaching for three months when he wrote a letter to the editor of a local newspaper explaining his own party's position and criticizing the federal government. ******* We might have thought that when a matter as important as the nature of marriage was being debated on the national scene, it would have been essential to have free debate. Yet this was the subject which Chris was addressing in the letter which cost him the loss of three months teacher's wages. ******* Again, we might have thought that a witness before a parliamentary committee would, of all people, have his freedom of speech protected. But even this has been challenged by the local tyrant who would deny Chris the right to speak publicly in almost any venue on any subject which has to do in some way with homosexuality. ******* Ron Gray has aptly described Chris Kempling as our canary in the coal mine. (At one time canaries were taken into coal mines to test for poisonous gas.) The treatment of Chris Kempling would indicate that in Canada there are some gases which are noxious indeed, threatening the most basic of the freedoms we have depended on. ****************************************************************************** ******* item 53 CHRIS KEMPLING UPDATE, SEPTEMBER 15, 2005 ******* From: BCPTL ListMaster, BCPTL:E-Mail Bulletin--September, 2005 via Robert Jason ******* In my . . . update in April, I related that I had been suspended for three months without pay for writing a letter to the editor opposing same sex marriage. I have now served the suspension and am back teaching (after working as a dump truck driver in the summer to make ends meet). Unfortunately, my struggle continues. In early June, the BC Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the College of Teachers, saying that although there was no evidence of harm or disruption to the school system, it was appropriate for the College of Teachers to discipline me for expressing my opinion off the job in letters to the editor. For this reason I have appealed the Court of Appeal's decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. My new lawyer, David Brown of Stikeman Elliott in Toronto, filed leave to appeal on September 9th. [Read the whole of Chris Kempling's September 15th Update.] ******************************************************************************* ******* item 54 HOW TO CONTRIBUTE FINANCIALLY TO CHRIS KEMPLING'S LEGAL DEFENCE FUND ******* From: BCPTL ListMaster, BCPTL:E-Mail Bulletin--September, 2005 via Robert Jason ******* [We have given the following information previously, but now is probably a good time to repeat it.] ******* A trust fund has been set up. It is the "Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund." Money contributed to this fund will help Christopher Kempling with the expenses of his legal defence. Subsequently, money in the fund after Chris's defence can be used to help other Christian teachers who may find themselves in a similar position. ******* If you would like to contribute to the trust fund, you may make a contribution at any Royal Bank branch. The transit number is 4720. The account number is 101-030-5. ******* If you prefer to contribute by cheque, send your contribution to: Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund, c/o Jim Sagert, 798 Beaubien Ave., Quesnel, BC V2J 1S5 ****************************************************************************** ******* item 55 CHRISTIAN TEACHER DENIED HUMAN RIGHTS HEARING ******* From: Robert A. Jason ******* In a decision released November 15, 2005 Christian teacher Chris Kempling was denied the right to present his religious discrimination case against the Quesnel School Board to the BC Human Rights Tribunal. Kempling brought the case after he was disciplined by the board for granting an interview to CBC Radio in December, 2003. In the interview, which was conducted by phone on his Christmas vacation, Kempling explained the orientation change therapy services which he offers as part of his private counselling practice. Kempling, who holds two masters degrees and a doctorate in psychology, is a Registered Clinical Counsellor, and a clinical member of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. ******* "It seems to me that it's open season on Christians," stated Kempling. "If I can't discuss the services of my private Christian counselling practice on my own time, where is the freedom of speech that is supposed to be guaranteed by the Charter? The school board presented no evidence whatsoever that anyone from the public had complained about the broadcast. And now I can't even argue my case or present any witnesses to support my claim of discrimination. It's very frustrating." ******* The Tribunal's decision stated that the case had "no chance of success" based on the recent BC Court of Appeal decision against Kempling in June of this year. That decision, in a related case against the BC College of Teachers, is now being reviewed by the Supreme Court of Canada, who will decide early next year whether or not to hear the case. ******* Kempling intends to keep fighting for the rights of Christians to participate freely in public debate. He intends to run for parliament in the upcoming federal election as a candidate for the Christian Heritage Party of Canada in the Cariboo-Prince George federal riding. "It appears to that this may be the last way for Christians to be allowed to exercise free speech in this country," stated Kempling. "When we can't even argue our case before a Human Rights Tribunal, and the courts state that no evidence is necessary to discipline an employee, what recourse do we have left?" Kempling can be reached at [email protected] for comment or clarification. ****************************************************************************** ******* item 56 LETTER TO B.C HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL RE KEMPLING By Stephen Gray To Heather MacNaughton, Chair: B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, (BCHRT) [email protected] ******* From: Robert A. Jason ******* Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 ******* It is an affront to democracy in our so called “free country�? that an organization calling itself a: “Human Rights Tribunal�? would ignore the truth of the harassment and subversion of the free speech of Mr. Chris Kempling. This is abominable discrimination against his Charter rights of freedom of religion, conscience and speech. Only in a dictatorship would a person be subjected to such indignities and punished for stating the truth. Now it appears it is happening in Canada by your actions on this matter. Please prove me wrong and that you really are a Human Rights Tribunal by admitting you erred when you refused to accept the truth of Mr. Kempling’s complaint. ******* Stephen Gray, Chilliwack, B.C. ******************************************************************************** ******* item 57 ACTION ALERT - BC HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL ******* From: RealWomen of BC via "Robert A. Jason" ******* Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 ******* Real Women BC (*Realistic *Equal *Active *for Life - A pro-life, pro-family, non-denominational, non-profit, non-partisan, grassroots women's advocate organization) ******* Burlington, ON - ECP Centre executive director, Rev. Tristan Emmanuel, is calling upon his supporters and all people of good will to begin a campaign of "jamming" against the BC Human Rights Tribunal. ******* "We need to jam their phone lines and their fax lines, and fill up their email and snail mail boxes with messages of outrage - how dare they refer to themselves as a 'human rights tribunal,' yet refuse to hear the legitimate grievances of Dr. Chris Kempling," said Rev. Emmanuel. ******* The tribunal refused to hear Chris's case on the grounds that he had no chance of "success." This assertion was based on two BC court rulings against Chris and did not take into consideration the fact that Chris has appealed the last court decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. "The arrogance of that kind of attitude ! disqualifies every commissioner from a post that supposedly advances human rights," said Rev. Emmanuel. ******* Dr. Kempling has been disciplined for publically stating his concerns about the homosexual lifestyle. His school board violated his charter rights by removing him from school without pay and demanding that he cease speaking publically about homosexuality. ******* To start this campaign, the ECP Centre is urging you to contact the BC Human Rights Tribunal today. ******* Please phone, email, fax and write to all the members of the tribunal. ******* Tell them that they have a responsibility to hear Chris Kempling's case of discrimination against his freedom of speech and religion. ******* Tell them that they have no right to prejudge the case as having no chance of success when Chris also has an appeal on file to the Supreme Court of Canada. ******* Urge them to re-examine Chris's complaint and accept it. When St. Paul was being persecuted, he took advant! age of his Roman citizenship and appealed to Caesar. "This is not the time to allow Canada's secularist establishment have the last word," said Rev. Emmanuel. I urge you to support your persecuted brother and let your voice be heard." ******* You can contact all the BC Human Rights Tribunal members at: ******* British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, www.bchrt.bc.ca, 1170 - 605 Robson Street, Vancouver, B.C. V6B 5J3, (604) 775-2000 phone, (604) 775-2020 fax, 1-888-440-8844 toll free (in B.C.), Email: [email protected] ******* BCHRT Chair - Heather MacNaughton ******* Full-time Members ******* Tonie Beharrell, Barbara Humphreys, Barbara Junker, Lindsay Lyster, Diane MacLean, Ana Mohammed, Kurt Neuenfeldt, Abraham Okazaki, Judith Parrack ******* For more information, contact Rev. Tristan Emmanuel at [email protected] or visit our website at www.ecpcentre.org ********************************************************************************* ******* item 58 MESSAGE FROM CHRIS KEMPLING to "Robert A. Jason" ******* Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 ******* Robert: Next Thursday, January 19, the Supreme Court will release their decision on whether or not to hear my case. If they decide to hear it, I need to ask for the prayers of God's people and their financial support. If they choose not to hear it, I will serving another one month's suspension (basically a $7000 fine) and the state of freedom of speech for Christians will have been dealt another devastating blow. Thank you for your prayers and for your unflagging support in the past. ******* Yours in Christ, Chris Kempling ******************************************************************************** ******* item 59 KEMPLING STATEMENT ON SUPREME COURT DECISION ******* From: via Robert A. Jason ******* Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 11:18 AM ******* The Supreme Court of Canada today refused to hear a freedom of speech case brought by Quesnel, BC teacher Dr. Chris Kempling in a dispute with the British Columbia College of Teachers. The case stemmed from letters to the editor written to the Quesnel Cariboo Observer newspaper between 1997 and 2000 questioning the wisdom of promoting the homosexual agenda. Stated Kempling: "This is a victory for the enemies of free speech and a sad day for all Canadians who value the free exchange of ideas in the public square. Everything I have publicly written about homosexuality is backed up by solid research data. I stand by what I have written. People need to remember that I have never been asked to retract any of my public statements, nor has any human rights complaint ever been laid against me. I was simply expressing a social conservative point of view shared by millions of Canadians. It is my intention to keep on fighting by filing a formal complaint with the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. While that won't affect today's court decision it may embarrass Canada into reviewing its alleged commitment to free speech rights for religious minorities. Many people have urged me to write a book about my experience and I will now seriously consider doing that. I have no regrets about what I have done in the past 10 years in defence of children. As U.S. President Teddy Roosevelt once said, 'It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belings to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred with dust and sweat and blood...and who...if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.' I am a servant of the King of Kings, and there is no such thing as permanent defeat." ********************************************************************************************************* ******* item 60 MORE HARSH PUNISHMENT FOR DR. CHRIS KEMPLING - a good, conscientious Christian persecuted in liberal Canada ******* From: via Robert A. Jason ******* Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 ******* Robert: I wish I could write some good news to you but it is getting very difficult for me to remain positive. This week, in response to a counsellor's job I had applied for, I received a letter from my superior, stating that although I was the senior most qualified applicant, I was permanently banned from any counselling jobs in my school district. This is not based on any new offense on my part. I have a very strict letter of direction which muzzles me quite thoroughly, and I have been abiding by it. ******* Furthermore, with 25 years of counselling experience(sixteen in private practice), many letters of commendation, and not a single complaint from anyone over my counselling abilities (including those of alternate orientations) I cannot fathom why I am no longer qualified to be a counsellor. This action has effectively blackballed me from my chosen profession, and makes it very unlikely that I would be able to find another school counselling job anywhere (one must have good references for this sort of work). ******* I also received notice (the same day actually), that the College of Teachers has commenced a disciplinary investigation of me for a letter to the editor I wrote last January (it outlined my political party's reasons for opposing the same sex marriage legislation--I was the official spokesperson in my riding, and ran as the candidate in the last federal election). I served a three month suspension for that "offense" already, imposed by my superiors, but the College has the authority to punish me a second time. ******* I would welcome your prayers as this is a very difficult time for me. ******* Dr. Chris Kempling M.Ed. M.A. Psy.D., Registered Clinical Counsellor ********************************************************************************************************* *********************************************************************************************************

Links to other sites on the Web

(A4e2b3a1d2b1a) articles by Dr. Chris Kempling
(A4e2b3a1d2b1b) British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life (BCPTL) web site (contains numerous articles by and about Dr. Kempling)
(A4e2b3a1d2b1c) Opposing the Pro-Homosexuality Agenda (BCPTL) article
(A4e2b3a1d2b1d) REAL Women of BC
(A4e2b3a1d2b1e) Dr. Chris Kempling's web site
(A4e2b3a1d2b1f) (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] ***