Turning the tables: it’s not discrimination when campus pro-life groups are denied their rights, say HRCs
Two separate human rights commission complaints launched by student pro-life groups in British Columbia have received rulings. The struggles of pro-life university students to be allowed to present their views on campus has drawn the fire of some major legal players in British Columbia.
John Hof, head of Campaign Life Coalition in the province, says student groups facing discrimination on campus should stay away from Canada’s government-appointed human rights commissions and tribunals.
However, at Capilano College in North Vancouver, a request by the college and the student union to dismiss the complaint has been denied and a ruling has come forth that the complaint can be heard by the tribunal.
Hof told LifeSiteNews.com that the entire system is corrupt and weighted against any Christian position. He said he is appalled that the human rights tribunals would bring out “big- name anti-Christian” lawyers in a case involving two small groups of students.
The lawyers in the two complaints, appointed by the tribunals, were Donald Crane, who opposed pro-life groups in all the legal wrangling over the so-called “bubble zone” protests in B.C. The other was Barbara Findlay, who represented Little Sisters, Vancouver’s lesbian bookstore that took its quest to bring homosexual pornography into Canada to the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, pro-life students at Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, Ont. are considering filing a complaint of religious discrimination at the Ontario Human Rights Commission against a student union that refused to ratify their group as an official campus club. TheNational Post quoted Francisco Gomez Jimenez, of LU Life Support, as saying, “That’s probably what’s coming.” He called the treatment of his group by the student union “thoroughly discriminatory”.
But Hof said a strategy of “turning the tables” by using human rights commissions is bound to backfire and that students seeking redress should file suits in legitimate courts, making a legal claim that their Charter-protected rights to free speech have been denied by their universities. Human rights commissions, he told LifeSiteNews.com, are designed to do the opposite of protecting freedoms. “Human rights complaints in this country are about politically correct speech and have nothing to do with human rights,” he said.
David Warren, a prominent Canadian journalist who has been observing the development of human rights commissions for decades, concurs. He warned in recent columns in theOttawa Citizen that, “Canada’s ‘human rights’ commissions were designed to be abused.” The HRCs are little more than “kangaroo courts and star chambers designed to silence the politically incorrect, without any of the inherited checks of a legitimate legal system.”
Warren relates the story of those who have attempted to use the “human rights machinery” to lodge complaints about attacks in the media on Christians and conservatives.
“Their complaints were invariably dismissed by the tribunals on sight and yet, by making them, they contributed to legitimizing the process by which free speech could be ‘reviewed,’ as a matter of course, by their most deadly enemies.”
This article originally appeared at LifeSiteNews.com Jan. 22 and is reprinted with permission.