mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau attends a p***e f**g raising ceremony on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on June 20. (Photo: Patrick Doyle/ZUMA Press/Newscom)

Canada’s Supreme Court Relegates Religious Beliefs to Second-Tier Status: America, Be Warned
Emilie Kao / Spencer McCloy ~ July 03, 2018
Canada’s Supreme Court recently ruled 7-2 against Trinity Western University, prioritizing sexual orientation over the free exercise of religion. This ruling should serve as a warning f**g to U.S. citizens.

Canada was only nine years ahead of the United States in redefining marriage. If the U.S. does not change direction, we could follow in Canada’s footsteps, sacrificing religious liberty for faux-e******y and faux-diversity.

Trinity Western University, in Langley, British Columbia, is a Christian university that hoped to establish a Christian law program. The Law Society of British Columbia refused to grant Trinity Western accreditation, claiming that the university’s community covenant agreement discriminates against L**T students.

The covenant establishes a Christian community that abstains from violence, acknowledges the inherent worth of every person, prohibits c***ting, and bans alcohol. The offending clause in this case is Section 4, titled “Healthy Sexuality.”

It states: “Further, according to the Bible, sexual intimacy is reserved for marriage between one man and one woman, and within that marriage bond, it is God’s intention that it be enjoyed as a means for marital intimacy and procreation.”

The dispute over the marriage clause resulted in split rulings in Ontario and British Columbia, forcing the case to the Supreme Court, which decided that the law society possesses “an overarching interest in protecting the values of e******y and human rights.”

Although the seven judges in the majority admitted that denying Trinity Western an accredited law school because of its covenant violated its religious freedom, the judges reasoned that the school’s religious belief was of “minor significance” and that the covenant “optional” to the school’s ability to fulfill its purpose.

The court decided that any student who attended Trinity Western’s proposed law school would be so influenced by the covenant that they would be rendered unfit for legal practice.

The two dissenting judges argued that preventing Trinity Western from forming an accredited law school would undermine true diversity in the public square, contrary to the Law Society of British Columbia’s stated mission. They rightly stated, “The purpose of TWU’s admissions policy is not to exclude L***Q persons, or anybody else, but to establish a code of conduct which ensures the vitality of its religious community.”

Instead of recognizing that religious liberty should protect Trinity Western’s right to build a community that reflects its religious beliefs, the Supreme Court relegated religious freedom and religious students to second-tier status.

As Brett Harvey, senior counsel with the Alliance Defending Freedom, notes, the U.S. Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are inherently different. Whereas the U.S. Constitution places religious freedom in a pre-eminent position among rights, Canada’s Charter does not secure rights at all. Instead, as Harvey points out, it merely acts as a set of “guidelines” that judges interpret, based on their preferences.

The judges who ruled against Trinity Western did so in the name of “diversity.” In reality, the decision stifles true diversity, creating a counterfeit diversity that attacks differences of thought and religious conviction. In the name of this faux-diversity, Canada has trampled religious freedom and pushed religious believers to the outskirts of the public square unless they conform to the state’s view of sexuality.

All citizens lose when the government restricts the number of choices in the marketplace of ideas. The practical effect of Canada’s so-called “diversity” is economic discrimination against those who hold religious convictions that support marriage between one man and one woman.

Students from Christian schools like Trinity Western who are exceptionally qualified for legal practice will be forced to choose between their dreams of practicing law or their religious beliefs. They won’t be allowed to enjoy both.

The Trinity Western case is strikingly similar to recent cases in the U.S. court system. Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission allowed Christian baker Jack Phillips to work in his chosen profession without sacrificing his beliefs. But florists, photographers, videographers, and people who work outside the wedding industry face the same cultural tide that led to the abridgment of Trinity Western’s religious freedom.

Lawyers in the U.S. face a similar threat. Like the Law Society of British Columbia in Canada, the American Bar Association (ABA) is the governing body that accredits law schools and sets ethics standards for practicing lawyers. Like in Canada, the ABA passed Model Rule 8.4(g) in the name of protecting e******y and diversity, but it will actually function as a speech code.

As Amy E. Swearer, a legal-policy analyst with the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation, warned American law students, the rule could become a tool to discipline lawyers who disagree with the ABA’s views on sexuality and the family.

The U.S. Constitution accords a unique status to religious freedom, but the specter of Trinity Western should give all Americans pause. V**ers, legislators, and judges should heed the signal from our neighbor to the north that in the wake of marriage redefinition, religious freedom must be robustly protected to ensure that true diversity of thought flourishes in the public square.

PeterS

Bigotry and discrimination are a b***h. Canada simply isn't going to let you hide behind your religion when you discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation. If god didn't want gays then he shouldn't have created them. But he did which means you guys are either have to grow up or you are going to continue to be tramped down because of your bigotry towards others...

mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

God didn't create gays. We have them because of the fall of man. And when are you going to get it through your hatred-for Christians-filled skull that we don't h**e people because they're gay or t***s-g****r or wh**ever but only want them to realize that they are sinners (like you and me) that need the saving grace and mercy of what Jesus did for them on the cross? BUT we will not participate in or celebrate their sin.

Manning345 Loc: Richmond, Virginia

I have several comments to make on this subject:
1. I do not see why it is that student lawyers can't be trained in both L**T matters and Non-L**T matters, just as L**T students can be trained in both L**T matters and Non-L**T matters;
2. Non-Discrimination or ND is a principal hallmark of liberal thought;
3. The idea of ND has been stretched to cover practically every action and thought in this life, and that is far, far too extreme for me.

PeterS

What a bunch of BS. Do you think homosexuals CHOOSE to be homosexuals? Tell me, when you masturbate do you think of a woman or a man? Which ever it is tells you what sexual orientation you are. So did you choose to think of wh**ever sex you masturbated to or was it simply part of your nature? When you look at all the crap that homosexuals are put through no one in their right mind would choose all that pain as a way of life. So if your god didn't make homosexual the way that they are then you are simply saying that your god doesn't exist.

And again, it's not Christianity that I have a problem with but those who use Christianity to discriminate against other's with. Your love of Christ has nothing to do with his teachings but because you think you can hide behind Christianity to discriminate against others.

And you won't participate or celebrate others sin!!! Trump is a serial adulterer who stated publicly that he had nothing to repent for. That means in v****g for him you are participating in and celebrating his sin. You are a typical CC and you have no problem in celebrating someone else's sin so long as you think there is political benefit for you. That you then choose to discriminate against homosexuals only shows your bigotry and nothing more.

PeterS

1) Their application was to establish a Christian Law program. How can a school dev**ed to Christian Law establish a program opposite to it?
2) This has nothing to do with liberalism but Canada's SC applying law according to their particular constitution.
3) It's Christians who are using their religion to discriminate against the LBGT community. If Canadian Christians would stop using their religion to discriminate against others with there would be no ND to stretch over others...

Manning345 Loc: Richmond, Virginia

=======================================
'That means in v****g for him you are participating in and celebrating his sin.'
So for every politico I v**e for, I need to know each and every sin he or she has committed in his or her entire life, or even just one sin does it. Are multiple sins that more objectionable than one biggie? There goes our Republic! Let he who is without sin come forth.

Manning345 Loc: Richmond, Virginia

The answer is obvious, since it is a matter of viewpoint from a legal perspective, putting Christian misgivings aside for the nonce to teach or practice from that legal perspective, but not necessarily to accept the L**T way of life . Done all the time. But then, I am not Canadian and do not know their system.

So Canadian Christians must adopt the liberal non-discrimination tenets they oppose to satisfy their version of a constitution? There went religious freedom.

PeterS

Trump was very open with his adultery--he even boasted of it on Howard Stern. And of course, if you ever listen to mainstream media you would have heard him interviewed where he said he had never done anything to repent for. Now I take that to mean the he unrepentant--which was a deal breaker with homosexuals--so if you don't want to burn in hell for participating in someone else's sin then it would have at least served you well to listen to what trump was saying in all of his interviews.

PeterS

Oh I don't know their system either but in our system we aren't allowed to extend our religious beliefs over someone else--or at least we weren't until you packed the court. What you wonderful Christians are doing is saying that if homosexuals will repent and fly according to your belief system then you will treat them like human beings. That doesn't, or shouldn't, work in our system because they have been human beings all along an have deserved to be treated as so.

And what you guys don't get is that it's not a matter of accepting anything. As you pointed out you didn't accept any of Trumps sins simply because you supported him. Well, you aren't accepting a homosexuals sins simply because you are selling them the same product you sell to others. But hey, you got the court to buy it, you even got a couple liberals to see things your way, so the more power to you. Of course our country suffers because we are that much further from greatness but clearly that's in the eye of the beholder so I guess we all just get to move on...

Crayons Loc: St Jo, Texas

Trudy is Pro Islam...Islamist's throw q***rbaits off roof's, And worse

mwdegutis Loc: Illinois

In our day and age, there are many who want to drive the name and message of Christ completely out of the public arena. V****g is an opportunity to promote, protect, and preserve godly government. Passing up that opportunity means letting those who would denigrate the name of Christ have their way in our lives. The leaders we elect—or do nothing to remove—have great influence on our freedoms. Trump has promoted and proven his support to Israel, protecting our first amendment right to religious freedom and the right to spread the gospel, protecting the rights of unborn human beings, etc., issues that we as Christians support from a biblical perspective. Although he is far from perfect—no one is Pete—Trump is attempting to lead our nation toward righteousness and the delay of globalism and as a follower of Jesus Christ, I fully support him and I am not participating in or celebrating his sinful nature by doing so Pete. And it is your reprobate mind that is preventing you from understanding this.

Manning345 Loc: Richmond, Virginia

Several points come to mind: 1) I practice a live and let live policy; 2) each person on the planet has his or her own bucket full of sin to carry or dump; 3) each person has his or her own religious belief to follow or not; and, 4) no one should force another to adopt an alien religion or non-religious religion.

The key tenet for all must be a standard set of personal morals that are the foundation of society. If one or so moral tenets are bent that do no harm to others, well, one could wish it to be otherwise, but tolerance is a virtue too, along with fortitude, temperance, prudence, justice and a bunch more!

Fortunately, our Constitution allows us all the freedom to follow these tenets. That is very great in my philosophy. MAGA