I’m not Canadian, but I’ve got friends who are, and on their behalf I think it’s time to start a genuine Internet firestorm over the attacks on freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press that are underway up North through the institution known as the Human Rights Commission. A variety of people and organizations, including conservative Christian pastors, syndicated columnist Mark Steyn, and the National Post newspaper are being sued before the HRC for “offending” homosexuals, Muslims, and perhaps others, though those two groups are by far the most prominent. In some instances, the plaintiffs appear to be trying to silence opposition; in others, they are trying to bankrupt opponents (the HRC can and does levy fines on offenders); in others, it looks like they’re trying to make a living off of repeatedly suing and getting awards. The latest appears to be a magazine called Catholic Insight, which has put out a press release about this that I found at Kathy Shaidle’s blog Five Feet of Fury:

Canada’s national Catholic magazine of news, opinion and analysis has joined a range of other, prominent publications, groups and individuals who have recently become targets of human rights-based legal attacks.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission has advised Catholic Insight magazine that Edmonton resident Rob Wells has filed a nine-point complaint against it on the grounds of offence to homosexuals. The magazine’s editor, Father Alphonse de Valk, dismisses the complaint as unfounded and says he intends to contest it vigorously. He notes his publication adheres to the teachings of the Catholic Church on homosexuality, which are clear that persons with same-sex attraction must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity and every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.

At the same time, he adds that in a democratic country respecting freedom of the press and religion, a magazine such as Catholic Insight has the right and responsibility to report on, analyze and comment on the activities of any segment of society that is involved in lobbying and activism on issues of public policy, such as changing the legal definition of marriage, adoption rights, the reallocation of social benefits and other vital questions.

Father de Valk observes the text of Mr. Wells’s complaint consists of three pages of isolated and fragmentary extracts from articles dating back as far as 1994, without any context. This creates a misleading impression of the tone of the magazine’s overall coverage of the homosexual issue.

Mr. Wells, he notes, has an additional human rights action in progress against leader Ron Gray and his Christian Heritage Party and in 2006, launched an action against three Canadian websites. Both complaints have been over the issue of homosexuality.

Catholic Insight recently dealt with an unsuccessful attempt by a Toronto resident to strip it of its funding under Heritage Canada’s Publications Assistance Program, once again over alleged offence to homosexuals. Father de Valk says the magazine considers all of the actions against it to be trumped up and made with the intent to harass. [Emphasis Kathy’s, I presume.]

I think it’s a scream that these efforts to suppress expression of viewpoints that plaintiffs don’t like is done in the name of “human rights,” the most precious of which is apparently not that of speech, religion, or press, but the right to not be offended. Or, it would be a scream, if it weren’t for the fact that one of the world’s great democracies is so drowning in political correctness that it threatens the very foundations upon which that democracy is built. I can’t do anything about it directly, but I don’t mind joining with others on the Internet in calling for all bloggers around the world, and especially in North America, to join the effort by contacting the Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, and telling him to:

stop-the-hrc-large1.gif

UPDATE: Sage advice from Mrs. Falstaff, who actually is Canadian:

I’m a Canadian who was involved in local backroom politics for a while – don’t bother emailing. If you are really upset about this, send him a hand written letter. Members of Parliament assume that each handwritten letter represents the opinions of 100 other people who didn’t bother to write. As an added bonus, you don’t have to put a stamp on a letter to a Member of Parliament. (if it’s mailed in Canada, that is).

For the curious amongst you, the text of the Canadian Human Rights act is here:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/h-6/20070213

And the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is here:

http://www.efc.ca/pages/law/charter/charter.text.html

Note that the first fundamental freedom is the freedom of conscience and religion. I will note that judges in Canada can and do throw nuisance suits out of court, and order the person sueing to pay court costs. Let’s hope this happens in this case.