Links to Pages in this Website

Home

Abortion

About

BCPTL
Bulletin

Contact Us

Essays

Events

Help for
Parents

Links to Other Websites

Marriage

News and Views

Opposing
Pro-
Abortion
Counsel-
ling in the
Schools

Opposing the Pro-
Homo-
sexuality
Agemda

Standing Up for the Threatened Rights of a Free Society

Take Back
the Schools
Campaign

 

 

 

 

 

Standing up for the Threatened Rights of a Free Society

Table of Contents for this Page

 

A Letter from Chris Kempling on the Latest BC College of Teachers Action Against Him  [letter of February 5, 2008]

"What I'm Not Allowed to Say"  [by Dr. Chris Kempling]

 A Summary of Events Related to the Chris Kempling Case

Bishop Henry calls for overhaul of human rights commissions

Canada Catholic League Calls for Halt to Use of Human Rights' Commissions in Free Speech Cases

Precedent-Setting Ruling Reinstates Canadian Pro-Life Activist’s Nursing License, Cancels Fine

Surprise Appointment

Ohio Teacher Doesn't Have to Pay Dues to NEA

Groups' Representatives Draw Up Statement of Principles in Response to the Corren Settlement Agreement in British Columbia

Parents to Rally in Support of Jailed Massachusetts Father    

Chris Kempling Update—September 15, 2005

"Growing Support for Alberta Pastor Facing Human Rights Hearing Over Letters Against Homosexuality"

"Dr. Kempling and the B.C. Court of Appeal"  [April 25. 2005 news release]

Teacher Suspended Three Months for Defending Traditional Marriage

A Visit to New York to Speak at the United Nations

Religious Freedom in Canada

A Message from Chris Kempling--February 4, 2004

A Message from Chris Kempling--December 7, 2003

A Message Dated August 2, 2003 from Chris Kempling Regarding His Hearing in the Supreme Court of British Columbia

Another Teacher Who Was in Trouble with the British Columbia College of Teachers 
for Opposing the Pro-Homosexuality Agenda

A Letter from Chris Kempling to His Supporters (Received June 20, 2003)

British Columbia Parents and Teachers Sends Letter May 3 (2003) Asking for Abolition of the 
British Columbia College of Teachers--and Government Replies to That Letter

British Columbia College of Teachers Sets Penalty for Chris Kempling  (See April 14th 
Kempling Message.)

A Message from Chris Kempling--April 5, 2003

Catholic Civil Rights League Letter to The Province

Vancouver  Province Runs  Kempling Article and Invites Responses on the Issue.

BC School Counsellor Found "Guilty" after Objecting to Pro-Homosexuality Agenda  including  
                            Chris Kempling's appeal

BC Parents and Teachers for Life Letter to Education Minister Regarding the Kempling Case, Teachers' Rights, and the BCCT

How to Contribute Financially to Chris Kempling's Legal Defence

A Letter from Chris Kempling Dated June 10, 2002

A Message' and Teachers' Rights Denied

Teachers' Rights To Moral Protest Threatened

Appeals Court Reasserts Rights of People of Faith

What Choices Do Parents Have?

The Escalating Attack on Parents' Rights:  The Connectedness of Things

 

We hope that not only his fellow-Christians, but all who retain a love for our basic freedoms, will respond to Chris's appeal in the letter immediately below:
A Letter from Chris Kempling 
on the Latest BC College of Teachers Action Against Him

February 5, 2008

Friends:

I regret to inform you that the BC College of Teachers has again cited me for conduct unbecoming a teacher, in a letter dated January 28, 2008. They have cited me for participating in a CBC radio interview where I quoted the Bible saying that homosexual behaviour is a barrier to salvation, for contributing an essay discussing the philosophical differences between social liberals and social conservatives (published in the Calgary Herald on December 29, 2003), for publishing a scholarly article in a German family journal on the topic of homosexuality, for offering orientation change therapy as part of my private counselling practice and mentioning this in a radio interview, and, incredibly, for "knowing" that an article written by Christian Heritage Party leader Ron Gray in support of me was posted on the party's website. They also cited me for being "the local representative of the Christian Heritage Party". This is certainly true as I was the candidate for the CHP, Canada's sixth largest registered political party, in the last federal election in the Cariboo-Prince George riding (I came 5th out of 8 candidates.) All of the items listed occurred between February, 2003 and April, 2005.

The last time I checked, we had freedom of speech and freedom of religion in Canada, and the right to join the political party of our choice. It appears to me that these rights are in jeopardy, as the BC College of Teachers has threatened to withdraw my license to teach, despite the fact that there were no complaints registered with the College as a result of any of the items they listed. I am currently working in the Quesnel school district, am abiding by my letter of direction, and have been told by my principal that he has no concerns about my conduct or my job performance, which includes working professionally with students of all orientations.

This is extremely distressing for me and my family, and I would welcome your prayers. It appears that I may have to ask those who care about freedom to help me defend myself again. The registered trust fund is called the:

Christian Public School Teachers' Legal Defense Fund, c/o Mr. Jim Sagert, Trustee, 798 Beaubien Avenue, Quesnel, BC V2J 1A6.

Letters of acknowledgement will be issued, but, as it is not a charity, there can be no tax receipts.

I am not afraid to face them but please do not leave me like Uriah to face the enemy alone. I take comfort in the words of our Lord: "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven..."

I am happy, because I know my Christian brothers and sisters will stand with me as I face this trial yet again.

Dr. Chris Kempling Psy.D. R.C.C.

Quesnel, BC

 

What I’m not Allowed to Say
-by Dr. Chris Kempling Psy.D. R.C.C. October 20, 2007
[1984 some 20 years later]
[What follows immediately below is a print version of the speech given by Dr. Kempling at the Dr. Chris Kempling Appreciation Dinner put on by British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life.  It should be noted that this was a private dinner for those who paid the fee charged.]


I am not allowed to speak publicly about homosexuality.  I’ve been banned from being a school counsellor.  I’ve been convicted of “personal harassment” because a colleague didn’t like a letter to the editor I wrote, even though I had never once communicated with that person on the matter.  I’ve served a total of four months of suspension without pay and have countless letters of discipline on my personnel file, none of which has to do with my on-the-job performance.  It’s no picnic standing up to the gay juggernaut.  But I haven’t given up yet.

On Thursday, I attended a workshop at the BC School Counsellors Conference, entitled Coming Out and Sexual Minority Students:  What’s the Big Deal?  The presenter urged us to help confused teenagers come out to their peers.  So I thought I’d inform him that there was a big deal.  I asked him if he was aware of the research done by Gary Remafidi, a homosexual pediatrician, who found in 1991 that ¾ of all first suicide attempts by gay youth followed self-labeling, and that 1/3 attempt suicide in the first year after coming out.  Dr.  Remafidi also found that in his study group, 30% admitted to prostituting themselves, 51% had been arrested for a criminal offense and 85% used illegal drugs.  Yet this is the “healthy” lifestyle the school system wants to urge our young people to embrace as “normal”.

Here is some additional data of this normal alternative lifestyle, done right here in Vancouver by Dr.  Robert Hogg, at the BC Centre of Excellence in HIV-AIDS.  He studied 700 gay men under the age of 30.  He found that the level of HIV infections increased an astonishing 300% in the previous five years and that their lifespan was being shortened by 8-20 years.  Hogg and his colleagues continue to be upset when social conservatives quote his statistics.  Yet here we are on the brink of changing the entire school curriculum in BC to teach that homosexual behaviour is safe and normal.  It is neither, and that is why I have taken the risks I have.

Perhaps I’ll briefly recap how this all got started.  On May 9th of 2002 I was convicted of conduct unbecoming a member of the BC College of Teachers . The reason was because I expressed my opinion in my local newspaper. Between April 1997 and July, 2000, I wrote one freelance column and six letters to the editor of my town’s newspaper, 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 said that many religions consider homosexuality to be immoral, that it may be caused by negative psycho-social influences, and that it was nothing to be applauded. I said that I would refuse to be a false teacher, compromising my faith to teach information which the Bible clearly says is immoral. I said this not in my classroom, or my staff room, but on the editorial pages of my local newspaper. 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 highly value the freedom of the press, and all points of view should be represented in our newspapers, including those opposed to ours.

       I appealed the conviction to the BC Supreme Court, but lost in February of 2004.  I appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and lost again in June, 2005.  I appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada but it was  rejected.  As a last resort, I sent my case to the UN Commission on Human Rights in Geneva .  I did not get any response at all.  As a result of my case, teachers are not be able to write privately to their own supervisors to question a new curriculum resource,  write privately their own elected officials on a matter of public policy, nor can they able to address the topic of homosexuality in post-graduate research papers. I was disciplined for doing all of these things.  This is an unacceptable restriction of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and freedom of intellectual expression.

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.

My school district supervisors have also decided to silence me. They have disciplined me repeatedly for speaking out, including for advertising my intention to offer orientation change therapy services through my private practice.  On March 31,  2005, I appeared before a formal hearing of the Quesnel School Board to explain why I publicly criticized the government’s same sex marriage legislation.  I was then suspended for three months without pay, even though not one homosexual person has gone on record to complain about what I wrote. I filed a Human Rights complaint against the school district for religious discrimination, but surprise, surprise, they did not even bother to investigate my complaint.    In June , 2005, I was requested by the parliamentary committee examining the same sex marriage bill to testify before them.  I agreed, but when I returned from Ottawa , I was slapped with yet another disciplinary letter.  It was only after MP’s Vic Toews and the NDP’s Bill Siksay (who happens to be gay) wrote to the school board reminding them that is a federal offense to intimidate an official witness of parliament that they backed down. 

My latest letter of discipline came last spring.  In an article discussing the proposed legislation increasing the age of consent from 14 to 16, our local Member of Parliament was quoted as saying that there was very little opposition to this bill.  But I happened to know that there was opposition to it from EGALE Canada (Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere).  They submitted a formal brief to Parliament arguing that raising the age of consent was a bad idea.  So I wrote a letter to the editor pointing out that there was opposition to the bill and it was from EGALE.  I received a letter from my Director of Instruction saying I had crossed the line again.  I then challenged my superior to defend EGALE’s wish to have continued sexual access to 14 and 15 year olds, but imagine that, he declined and backed off further discipline.

I have one more round to go with the College of Teachers , who are considering whether to discipline me again for my January 2005 letter to the editor criticizing same sex marriage.  I will likely be facing more discipline. I am a Christian seven days a week, both on the job and off the job, 
and I will not compromise my faith to teach falsehoods to children. 
As servants of the Most High God, it is our duty to speak up courageously 
for what is right.  I do not know what may become of me, 
of my career. 

But here is what the book of Ecclesiasticus says of such a situation, and this is God’s message for those of us who call Christ our Lord:  “My son, if you aspire to serve the Lord, prepare yourself for an ordeal.  Be sincere of heart, be steadfast, and do not be alarmed when disaster comes.  Cling to him and do not leave him, so that you may be honoured at the end of your days.  Whatever happens to you, accept it, and in the uncertainties of your humble state, be patient, since gold is tested in the fire, and chosen men in the furnace of humiliation.  Trust Him and he will uphold you, follow a straight path and hope in Him.  You who fear the Lord, wait for his mercy; do not turn aside in case you fall.  You who fear the Lord, trust him and you will not be bilked of your reward.  You who fear the Lord hope for good things, for everlasting happiness and mercy.  Look at the generations of old and see:  who ever trusted in the Lord and was put to shame?  Or who ever feared him steadfastly and was left forsaken?  Or who ever called out to him, and was ignored?  For the Lord is compassionate and merciful, he forgives sins, and saves in days of distress.  Woe to faint hearts and listless hands…Woe to the listless heart that has no faith, for such will have no protection.  Woe to you who have lost the will to endure; what will you do at the Lord’s visitation?  Those who fear the Lord do not disdain his words, and those who love him keep his ways.  Those who fear the Lord do their best to please him, and those who love him find satisfaction in his Law.  Those who fear the Lord keep their hearts prepared and humble themselves in his presence.  Let us fall into the hands of the Lord, not into the hands of men; for as His majesty is, so too is His mercy.”

My friends, the fate of our children rests with you, because the secular humanists who control our school systems are bent on imposing their worldview on all Canadian children, no matter what their sincere religious beliefs may be.  And if that conflicts with their parent’s beliefs—well too bad.  You can just keep quiet while we indoctrinate your children.  But here is what Abraham Kuyper, the great Dutch statesman who believed that Christian principles and civil politics were not incompatible:  “When the principles that run against your deepest convictions begin to win the day, then the battle is your calling, and peace has become sin.  You must, at the price of dearest peace, lay your convictions bare before friend and enemy with all the fire of your faith.”  Godless principles are now winning the day, and now is the time to go to battle for the lives of our children and our children’s children.

 Thank you for inviting me to speak, and may God bless you all.


 Dr.  Chris Kempling Psy.D. R.C.C. Registered Clinical Counsellor 250-983-3949 Quesnel , BC V2J 5R5 Kempling@telus.net

A Summary of Events Related to the Chris Kempling Case

(last updated February 12, 2008)

  So much time has elapsed since we first learned of Chris Kempling's situation, and the actions of the British Columbia College of Teachers have been so complex that it is easy to become confused about the sequence of events related to this case which is so crucial for education and for the right of free speech.  Reviewing the events affecting Chris may be useful and instructive for all of us.   

  The British Columbia College of Teachers (BCCT), in May of 2002, pronounced Kempling, a public-school teacher and counsellor, guilty of "conduct unbecoming a member."  His "offence"?  Criticizing aspects of the pro-homosexuality program of the British Columbia Teachers' Federation.  This criticizing had been done in his own time outside of the school setting.

In a “sentencing” session, a BC College of Teachers hearing panel in November 18th recommended that Chris be given a one-month suspension without pay.  (The panel did not actually hear Chris speak—only his lawyer.  Chris had not attended the hearing in May due to concerns about conflict of interest.) This recommendation was to be ratified (or modified) by the entire Council.   Later, since Chris had already appealed the original BCCT verdict of “conduct unbecoming” to the BC Supreme Court, an understanding was communicated to Chris that the BCCT would not ask that the penalty be served until after the BC Supreme Court decision (and then, of course, it would only be if the Court found in favour of the BCCT.)

In February of 2003 it was learned that the BCCT would not pronounce Chris’s penalty till later than expected, but that the BCCT (which is not bound by the recommendations of its own penalty panel) would consider a more severe penalty than the panel had recommended.

  Later he heard that the BCCT had agreed to the request that they hear Chris Kempling in person.  We interpreted their intentions as being to actually hear Chris speak.   But at the April 1st hearing, when Chris Kempling appeared before them, the members of that body apparently did not have the curiosity or the interest to avail themselves of that opportunity, and only heard Chris’s lawyer.

  Chris did not hear the BCCT verdict for some days, but in a message of April 14th Chris wrote:  “The College has decided that my penalty is to be one month’s suspension (the original recommendation of their own committee in November . . . .)  It is to commence on  May 1st unless they agree to suspend it until after the court renders its decision.”

On July 28th to 30th, Chris Kempling’s appeal of the BCCT ruling was heard in BC Supreme Court.  Judge Holmes reserved decision.  On February 3, 2004, after over six months of waiting, Chris learned that the judge had ruled against him, siding with the BC College of Teachers.   In a message dated February 4th, Chris announced his intention to appeal the ruling of the British Columbia Court of Appeal.*   This appeal was made.
   
Kempling and his legal team faced off against the College of Teachers and their allies on April 21st and 22nd in the British Columbia Court of Appeal.  

Even before his Appeals Court hearing in Vancouver, Chris had been dealt yet another blow.  In a decision handed down on April 4, 2005, Quesnel School District Superintendent Ed Napier suspended  Chris Kempling for three months.  Dr. Kempling 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.  [Click here to go to this letter.] They also ignored over a dozen letters of reference from supervisors and community members written in support of Dr. Kempling.  

           On June 13, 2005, in a decision that was unexpectedly fast--for the courts--the BC Appeals Court released its ruling regarding Chris Kempling's appeal of a BC Supreme Court decision.  The Appeals Court ruling supported the imposition on Dr. Chris Kempling of a one-month suspension from his teaching and counselling position in Quesnel School District.

   
Chris Kempling appealed the British Columbia Court of Appeal’s decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.  His new lawyer, David Brown of Stikeman Elliott in Toronto, filed leave to appeal on September 9th.    However, in January of 2006 the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear his case.

      In July of 2005 Chris learned that he was facing more discipline. In June he had been invited to appear before the Parliamentary committee examining Bill C-38 (same sex marriage bill).  He had flown to Ottawa at their expense and testified as requested, representing the views of evangelical Christians, and as an official representative of the Christian Heritage Party.  In July he received a disciplinary letter for doing this.  

In March of 2006 Chris Kempling served the one-month suspension imposed by the British Columbia College of Teachers.   Chris has continued to be employed by Quesnel School District, and began work in September of 2006 as a "behaviour resource teacher." 

    On May 29, 2006 Chris received a letter from the College notifying him that they were putting him under investigation for his Christian Heritage Party letter of January (the one he had already served a 3 month suspension for).  They did so because the BCTF had abandoned his grievance over the issue.   In February of 2008 Chris received notice that the BC College of Teachers was citing him for conduct unbecoming a teacher.  Chris writes:   "They have cited me for participating in a CBC radio interview where I quoted the Bible saying that homosexual behaviour is a barrier to salvation, for contributing an essay discussing the philosophical differences between social liberals and social conservatives . . ., for publishing a scholarly article in a German family journal on the topic of homosexuality, for offering orientation change therapy as part of my private counselling practice and mentioning this in a radio interview, and, incredibly, for 'knowing' that an article written by Christian Heritage Party leader Ron Gray in support of me was posted on the party's website. They also cited me for being 'the local representative of the Christian Heritage Party. ' "

   
Endnote:

* Note that this is the correct term.  The appeal was from the BC Supreme Court to the BC Court of Appeal, which is a higher court than the BC Supreme Court.  Our apologies for getting this wrong on an earlier posting.

n

Continue to check this BC Parents and Teachers for Life website to learn of further developments in Chris Kempling's case.

 

Bishop Henry calls for overhaul of human rights commissions

By Deborah Gyapong
Canadian Catholic News
[excerpt from article as posted by canadianchristianity.com]

CALGARY Bishop Fred Henry is calling for an overhaul of legislation governing human rights commissions.

"Human rights laws, designed as a shield, are now being used as a sword," Henry wrote in a December 31 email from Calgary, in what he described as an increasingly "bizarre" series of events.

The recent filing of human rights complaints against Maclean's magazine for an excerpt of Mark Steyn's bestselling book America Alone, and against Catholic Insight magazine for articles outlining Catholic teaching on homosexuality, are only the latest in a series of cases that have highlighted freedom of speech and religious freedom.

The Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL) described the Steyn and Catholic Insight cases as part of an "ongoing pattern in the use of human rights commissions to penalize the expression of unpopular opinions," in a December 31 alert to members entitled, 'Stop the use of human rights commissions in free speech cases.'

"The League is concerned about this disturbing trend, since it often involves opinions based on religious beliefs," said CCRL executive director Joanne McGarry.

Henry agrees, stating: "The issue is rarely true discrimination but rather censorship and enshrinement of a particular ideology through threats, sanctions and punitive measures."

In 2005, Henry faced two separate complaints to the Alberta Human Rights Commission (AHRC) for allegedly discriminatory comments in a pastoral letter on marriage. "I challenged one by one the standard arguments used to support same sex unions as the equivalent of traditional marriage," Henry stated.

Though the complaints were eventually dropped, Henry described the process as "fundamentally flawed," and closely resembling "kangaroo courts." Among those flaws, he maintained, were the "presumption of guilt until you can prove your innocence; the open ended time lines for dealing with a complaint; and unjust incurring of financial expenditures for the defendant in the simple event of a complaint being lodged."

The AHRC covers the complainants' costs. . . . .

The CCRL does not want to see HRCs involved in freedom of speech issues at all.

"The League has refrained from making hate speech complaints to any courts or commission, even though some of the anti-Catholic content we address, and the remarks directed at us in the course of our work, could certainly be described as demeaning if not downright hateful," McGarry said in the alert. "In our view, the importance of free speech supersedes whether we agree with what others are saying."

"As a civil rights organization, we recognize that freedom expression and freedom of religious expression two the most important values for Canadians," she said in an interview from Toronto. "We think the use of human rights tribunals to penalize the peaceable expression of religious viewpoints is a misuse of their original purpose."

Freedom of expression, she said, "is an important enough value that any curtailment of it must be held to the much higher standard required by a court." That standard, she said, includes the presumption of innocence, both parties facing equal costs, and the possibility that frivolous complaints could result in the complainant picking up the defendants court costs.

McGarry said the best way to address these issues is through dialogue, especially through the media. She said it is in the give and take of debate that most people learn about acceptable speech. "Politeness is not something that needs to be judicially imposed," she said.

McGarry's alert lists 11 examples, including Christian Heritage Party Leader Ron Gray, brought before the Canadian HRC and the Ontario HRC for a website article critical of homosexual conduct. The list can be read at their website.

-- Copyright Canadian Catholic News. Please do not reprint without permission.

Related stories:

Liberalism its own worst enemy
"The Blood Runs Cold" is the headline of Melanie Phillips' piece in the current issue of the British Spectator. "The lights are going out on liberal society," her column begins, "and it is the most liberal societies with their fingers on the switch." Canada's, for one. What makes Ms. Phillips' blood run cold is Human Rights Commissions in this country summoning Maclean's magazine and columnist Mark Steyn into their inquisitorial chambers to answer for their misdeeds.
George Jonas, CanWest Publications, December 20

Human Rights Commissions just like Hydra
Canada's Human Rights Commissars usually keep low in their swamp of political correctness, but this time they decided to stick their necks out. Perhaps it's a good thing. If Greek mythology is a guide, sticking one's neck out is a frequent prelude to getting one's head cut off. It happened to Hydra, the multi-headed monster of poisonous breath, the mythical beast our federal and provincial Human Rights bureaucracies most closely resemble. True, it required Hercules to finish off Hydra; it was the second of his twelve labours. Does the Herculean presence of Mark Steyn augur well for slaying Hydra's modern edition? I'd like to think so, especially with Maclean's editor Kenneth Whyte ably performing the role of Iolaus, cauterizing the hideous neck-stumps with journalistic firebrands so the decapitated monster can't grow them back.
George Jonas, CanWest Publications, December 27

It's a human right to be an idiot
Human rights laws and tribunals are based on the notion that being hired, promoted, serviced and esteemed is a human right. It isn't. Being hired, promoted, serviced and esteemed is a human ambition. It's a justifiable ambition, but still just an ambition.
George Jonas, National Post, January 5

Case by Muslim group against Maclean's tests limits of press freedom
Publisher says he would rather go bankrupt than cede editorial control to Islamic congress
Reuters, January 7


Canada Catholic League Calls for Halt to Use of Human Rights' Commissions in Free Speech Cases

List of Recent Cases

 

TORONTO, January 2, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The news in early December that Mark Steyn and Macleans Magazine are the subject of a complaint to the B.C. and federal Human Rights Commissions because of an article the magazine published, excerpted from Mr. Steyn's book "America Alone", is a higher-profile example of an ongoing pattern in the use of human rights' commissions to penalize the expression of unpopular opinions, says the Catholic League in a press release. 

The League is concerned about the disturbing trend, since it often involves opinions based on religious beliefs. In several cases, some of which has seen the League participate as an intervenor, attempts have been made to characterize scriptural passages as hate literature. While these commissions and their tribunals have generally been sympathetic to complaints of "offended feelings" brought by homosexual rights activists, those brought by Christians seeking support for their right to freedom of religion or religious expression have been less successful.

In fact, in two recent cases people applying to human rights commissions to have their religious rights respected in freedom of speech issues have received a poor response from the human rights commissions. One has been refused and there have been strong indications of disinterest on the other.

Susan Comstock and Dave MacDonald sought to have their union dues diverted to charitable organizations in protest of the union's use of their dues for political activism and anti-Catholic activity. In refusing, the commission noted in Mrs. Comstock's case that "no prohibited ground of discrimination was established."

David McDonald advised LifeSiteNews today that his case has not been dropped but the Canadian Human Rights Commission has still not communicated its final decision to him. An official with the commission left a Nov. 22 telephone message indicating the commission would not take the case because it involved religion and they lacked jurisdiction to hear religion cases. MacDonald was told he would receive a written report sent out the next day. However, he states he immediately sent a letter to the commission and has not yet received the promised written report or any other communications.

The League believes that the continued incursion of human rights' commissions in matters of peaceable free speech will have a chilling effect on freedom of expression. "When someone's words are disagreeable or contentious, the normal give-and-take of human discourse should be all the regulation that peaceable free speech requires," says the League.

The League provided a list of recent cases where human rights tribunal were used to quash or attempt to quash free speech:  [bold-facing by editor of this BCPTL website]

- As noted above, Mark Steyn and Maclean's magazine for the publisher's reprinting of a chapter of Steyn's book "America Alone," Complaint brought in November by the Canadian Islamic Congress, which said the article subjects Canadian Muslims to discrimination, hatred and contempt.

- Ron Gray, leader of the CHP, brought before the Ontario and Canadian HRCs by Edmonton activist Rob Wells for an article on the party's website critical of homosexual conduct. Among other things, Mr. Gray was told by a HRC mediator that "freedom of expression is an American concept."

- Catholic Insight magazine is the subject of a complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission due to material on its website critical of homosexual conduct. The passages of articles in question were written in the context of speaking out against the activists who agitated for adding so-called sexual orientation to the Hate Crimes Act in 2003, and the legalization of same-sex "marriage" in 2005.

- Steven Boissoin, a Christian pastor who faces punishment by the Alberta Human Rights Commission for a letter published in the Red Deer Advocate. (Case brought by University of Calgary professor Darren Lund.) The judge claimed a "circumstantial causal connection" could be made between the letter and an attack on a homosexual teenager in that city.

- John Di Cecco, a Kamloops, BC city councilor, fined $1,000 for by the BC Human Rights Tribunal when a complaint was brought in response to comments he made about homosexual conduct.

- Knights of Columbus of Port Coquitlam, BC, fined by the BC Human Rights Tribunal in December, 2005 for how they handled their refusal of the use of their hall for a lesbian "wedding" reception.

- Bishop Fred Henry in 2005 was on the receiving end of a human rights complaint for articulating the Church's teachings on same-sex marriage in a pastoral letter. (The complaint was later withdrawn after a meeting with the complainants, and substantial expense.)

- In 2002, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ordered the Saskatoon Star Phoenix and Hugh Owens to each pay $1,500 to three complainants because of the publication of an advertisement that quoted Bible verses on homosexuality. Four years later, this was overturned by the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal after the court ruled that the message, though offensive, didn't reach the level of inciting hatred. The League was part of an intervention to protest the labeling of Scriptural passages as hate speech.

- Bill Whatcott, charged with spreading hate against homosexual persons for the distribution of material objecting to an advertisement that ran in Saskatchewan's largest newspaper for homosexuals, Perceptions, seeking boys for activities that specifically mentioned that their age was "….not so relevant".  The material distributed by Mr. Whatcott also objected to material promoting "gay" culture and beliefs entering into the Saskatoon Public School System and the University of Saskatchewan. The appeal by Mr. Whatcott to the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench from his conviction and fine of $17,500.00 by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal was denied by the Judgment of Mr. Justice F. Kovatch in a decision received on December 11, 2007.

- In British Columbia, Chris Kempling, a teacher at a public high school, was cited in May 2001 for professional misconduct by the BC College of Teachers (BCCT) for letters published in a local newspaper. As punishment he was suspended from teaching for one month. He appealed his suspension all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, which finally refused to hear the appeal in 2006.

When some CBC interviews in 2004 became the basis for a formal reprimand by the Quesnel School District, Kempling complained to the BC Human Rights Tribunal on the grounds that his religious freedom was being infringed, a complaint that the Tribunal rejected in November 2005.

- In 1999, Toronto printer Scott Brockie was ordered by the Ontario commission to pay a gay activist group $5,000 for refusing to print their letterhead.


"The League has refrained from making hate speech complaints to any courts or commissions, even though some of the anti-Catholic content we address, and the remarks directed at us in the course of our work, could certainly be described as demeaning if not downright hateful," said the League. "In our view, the importance of free speech supersedes whether we agree with what others are saying. That is why we have supported people in their right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression, particularly religious expression, in various court and tribunal cases. When we protest anti-Catholic defamation in the media, we do so pointedly, but we have never once said that such content should be illegal. Our hope, rather, is that a spirit of true dialogue will help make defamation rare."

Precedent-Setting Ruling Reinstates Canadian Pro-Life Activist’s Nursing License, Cancels Fine


By Hilary White

REGINA, January 18, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A Saskatchewan Court of Appeals has ruled that the suspension of a pro-life protester’s nursing license by the Saskatchewan Association of Licensed Practical Nurses (SALPN) was unconstitutional.

In 2002, Bill Whatcott, a licensed practical nurse, participated in a protest outside the Regina Planned Parenthood offices. The Association judged Whatcott’s protest to have constituted “professional misconduct” and suspended his nursing license and fined him $15,000.

Whatcott admitted in a court hearing to having carried signs with pictures of foetuses and captions saying “Planned Parenthood Aborts Babies” and “Planned Parenthood refers for abortions," "God's gift of life" and “choice is abortion”. Whatcott lost his initial case at the Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench and his appeal was later dismissed.

Court documents in the appeal note that the SALPN disciplinary committee did not address constitutional issues of Whatcott’s freedom of expression. Whatcott’s appeal was upheld by the court that said the case raised “constitutional law issues pertaining to freedom of expression”.

The ruling said, “The Discipline Committee did not engage in any of the balancing necessary to weigh Mr. Whatcott’s right to work, the high standards to which nurses must aspire and free speech. Given the existence of the interim injunction and the means to enforce it, one would not think the Discipline Committee’s decision was a proportionate response.”

The justices wrote that SALPN had failed to demonstrate that the restriction on Whatcott’s freedom of expression was reasonable “and the decision is thus unconstitutional.”

Whatcott praised the court decision, not only on his own behalf, but because it sets a precedent for other health care professionals who conscientiously object to abortion.

He wrote, “Christians and other moral Canadians, Dentists, Teachers, Doctors, Lawyers as well as Nurses can reference my case if they are bullied by their professional organizations as a result of a stand they take on a moral issue during their time off work.”

The ruling can be viewed online .

 

Surprise Appointment

Evangelical leader named to U.K commission upholding equal rights.

The appointment of Joel Edwards, general director of the U.K.'s Evangelical Alliance, as a commissioner to the nation's Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has drawn complaints from gay activists.

Formed to enforce legislation guaranteeing age, ethnic, disability, gender, and sexual preference equality, the EHRC brings together the U.K.'s three previous equality commissions. The Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007, which went into effect on January 1, added prohibitions against treating anyone "less favorably than he treats or would treat others" on the grounds of sexual orientation. However, concessions within the act allow religious organizations to define standards of sexual behavior for their members and leaders.
[Click here to read the whole article on the Christianity Today website.]

 

CitizenLink, June 26, 2007

Ohio Teacher Doesn't Have to Pay Dues to NEA

Carol Katter, an Ohio teacher, no longer has to send her dues to the pro-abortion National Education Association, according to a ruling by U.S. District Judge Gregory Frost.

"I know where NEA money goes, and I knew I never wanted to be part of that," Katter told CNS News.

The NEA's Ohio affiliate argued that a religious-exemption law applied only to certain denominations. Katter is Catholic. The decision means Katter will be allowed to send her dues elsewhere.

Note by editor of BCPTL website:  This is an issue two of our BCPTL members fought and lost over in British Columbia many years ago.  Perhaps some BC teacher will be inspired to follow Carol Katter's example, and challenge the non-relevant uses of teachers' dues in this province.

 

 

 

Groups' Representatives Draw Up Statement of Principles in Response to the Corren Settlement Agreement in British Columbia
On September 23rd (2006), representatives from a number of groups, including British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life, agreed to a "A Statement of Principles of Fairness for Students and Parents and of How They Can be Used to Remedy the Injustices of the Corren Settlement Agreement."  Among the other groups whose representatives agreed to the statement were REAL Women of British Columbia, Christian Social Fellowship, Catholic Civil Rights League, and Christian Coalition.  Below we give the whole "Statement,"  including the four general principles, together with supporting citations and and bv a list showing how the principles "can be used to remedv the inequity of the Corren Settlement Agreement." 

A Statement of Principles of Fairness for Students and Parents and of

How They Can be Used to Remedy the Injustices of the Corren

Settlement Agreement

Principles

1. We affirm our common desire to see established within the schools of British Columbia an atmosphere in which harassment or abusive conduct directed at any student is not acceptable, regardless of their actual or apparent association or identification with any group.

2. Access to the means of influencing the development of curriculum for all subjects in British Columbia public schools should be open to all citizens without discrimination.  No special rights of access or influence should be given to particular private citizens or groups.

 

"Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability." Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms 15 (1)

 

3. Parents have the right to educate children in conformity with their moral and religious convictions. Public schools must be transparent and accountable to parents about what is taught to students. Teaching materials should be open to examination by parents, and particular care should be taken that parents are directly advised, well in advance, when sexuality or other controversial or sensitive topics are to be discussed.

 

"Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that should be

given to their children." From Article 26 - United Nations, 'Universal

Declaration on Human Rights' – 1948

 

"The best interests of the child shall be the guiding principle of those

responsible for his education and guidance; that responsibility lies in the

first place with his parents."

From the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child, Principle 7

 

4. Nothing in the curriculum or practice of British Columbia public schools should denigrate the legally protected moral and religious beliefs of parents and children.

 

How the above principles can be used to remedv the inequity of the Corren Settlement Agreement

 

Preamble: Because it unfairly gives privileged procedural access to Peter Corren and Murray Corren, the Corren Settlement Agreement has created a dangerous precedent in the curriculum review process. We ask for recognition of the 'prior right’ of parents to choose the kind of education their children receive. We request that the Minister extend full consultation to parents and other stakeholders.

 

I. New Internal Review Guidelines for the development of IRPs ("Integrated Resource Packages") must be drawn up with input from all interested parties, as identified in the Charter Article 15 (1).

2. Similarly, input from all interested parties should be welcomed in finalizing each IRP.

3. The Social Justice 12 Course provided for in Section 3 of the Corren Settlement Agreement should be balanced with respect to Charter Article 15 (1) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

4. Delivery guidelines to assist teachers in delivering the Kindergarten to Grade Twelve curriculum should be developed openly with recognition given to the prior right of parents to choose the kind of education their children receive.

5. Parents of students should be permitted to make arrangements for Alternative Delivery of sensitive topics in a manner that respects the individual needs and interests of their children.

6. Any further changes in matters covered in the Corren Settlement should arrived at by a regular democratic process in a manner authorized by the legislature and subject to alteration by that body.

7. The Ministry of Education should send a letter to the parties named in the Corren Settlement Agreement (Section IB) affirming the prior right of parents and stating  policy of openness in the development of curriculum.

 

 

 

1  UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights  -- Article 26

 

 

 




In the United States:
Parents to Rally in Support of Jailed Massachusetts Father    
 9/4/2005
From an article by Robert Knight



Lexington Green, where Massachusetts colonists confronted the British in the opening battle of the American Revolution, will be the site for a rally to support a father who was arrested for questioning pro-homosexual materials at his children’s school.

Slated from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. on Tuesday, September 6, the rally will feature David Parker and his wife Tonia.

David Parker was arrested on April 27 at Joseph Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington after refusing to leave when school officials declined to show him materials related to the promotion of homosexuality in the school. He had been alerted to the school’s materials when his child brought home some books, one of which celebrates “gay parenting.”

Massachusetts state law mandates notifying parents before discussing issues of human sexuality in the classroom.

In the wake of the British Columbia Supreme Court's ruling against him, Dr. Kempling has appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which may or may not agree to hear the case.  In addition to the other persecution he has faced, Chris Kempling is now facing discipline for his testimony before a parliamentary committee.

Chris Kempling Update—September 15, 2005

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.  It is not known when the Supreme Court will make a decision on whether or not to hear the case—they only hear 15% of the cases referred to them.  If they choose not to hear it, I have will have to serve another one month’s suspension, and pay my opponents prior legal costs of over $23,000.  My lawyer has told me I have to pay their costs now, even if the Supreme Court chooses to hear the case.  This will deplete my legal defense fund entirely, leaving me without funds to proceed with the Supreme Court case or the Human Rights Tribunal case.  My lawyer feels that at least $50,000 will be needed for that, and a similar amount for the Human Rights case.

Note:  Chris's lawyer has informed him that he thinks the Supreme Court of Canada will make a decision by late January or early February on whether to hear his case, and that if they accept it, it will be 2007 before the case is heard.

My Human Rights Tribunal case against the Quesnel School Board for religious discrimination is still on-going.  I was disciplined for speaking with a CBC radio reporter about the orientation change services of my private Christian counseling practice.  They provided no evidence that anyone was concerned about this interview—they feel it is acceptable to prevent me from telling people that orientation change is possible.  I made it clear that most of my clients would be Christians, who know that acting on same sex attraction is sinful behaviour, and thus are more motivated to seek professional assistance.  I am currently providing treatment to a Christian client for this purpose, so I find it entirely unacceptable for my school district employer to interfere with a service offered by a Christian counselor to Christian people.  I was to have had a two day hearing in October, but my lawyer feels it will take 7-10 days and involve over a dozen witnesses.  A new date has yet to be scheduled.

 I’m hoping my employer will acknowledge that official witnesses of Parliament have special protection from harassment.

There is some good news to report, however.  Rev. Tristan Emmanuel of Equipping Christians for the Public Square held a fund-raising banquet for me in June in Hamilton, Ontario and presented me with a cheque for $18,000.  I have already given the entire amount to Mr. Brown as a down payment for the Supreme Court appeal.  God has supplied all my needs up to now—I’m just going to keep trusting Him for what it is still needed.  I’m very grateful for all of you who have generously given so far.  I would appreciate your prayers as I face the upcoming struggles.  Jesus warned us that we would face persecution for standing up for him.  He was right.
Note:  Chris Kempling sent us an addition to the above update.   In it he informed us that his lawyer told him that he thought the Supreme Court of Canada would make a decision by late January or early February on whether to hear his case, and that if they accepted it, it would be 2007 before the case was heard.

"Growing Support for Alberta Pastor Facing Human Rights Hearing Over Letters Against Homosexuality"


CALGARY, Alberta, September 14, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The case against Stephen Boissoin, a young Alberta pastor facing an Alberta Human Rights tribunal over letters he wrote on the issue of homosexuality, has received widespread publicity which is generating a growing wave of support for the Christian pastor, even from homosexuals.

In an interview with LifeSiteNews.com last night Boissoin revealed that he has received a barrage of phone calls from the US and Canada since the publication of the Sept. 2nd LifeSiteNews.com story on his case. A US organization is even seriously considering funding his legal defense.

All afternoon yesterday Boissoin sat with three homosexuals who came to him concerned about the charges. He says they "were disgusted" that his right to freedom of speech was being impinged upon and that they wanted to speak out on his behalf even though they did not necessarily agree with what he said. Stephen believes that after their lengthy discussions the three men experienced that he sincerely cares about homosexual persons.

A web page presenting documents and details on the case and background on the two principal persons has been set up on the web site of the Concerned Christians organization for which Boissoin was at one time the Executive Director. The page reproduces the original letter by Boissoin to the Red Deer advocate on June 17, 2002 (see Lund complaint) as well as subsequent letters and the detailed full complaint by University of Calgary assistant professor Darren Lund. The page also offers an opportunity for supporters to donate to Pastor Boissoin's legal expenses. See http://www.concernedchristians.ca/pages/campaigns/hrCommision/index.htm.

Concerned Christians is co-accused in the case since pastor Boissoin was in their employ at the time the letter was published and he signed it in his capacity as the central Alberta chairman of the organization. However, Boissoin told LifeSiteNews.com he believes the case against the organization is weak.

A large Free to Speak dinner is scheduled for October 29 at the Coast Plaza Hotel in Calgary. This awareness and fundraising benefit will have as speakers Calgary Bishop Fred Henry, Western Standard magazine publisher Ezra Levant, Dr. Chris Kempling and other prominent speakers. The dinner and the issue will have their own website in the next few days at http://www.freetospeak.ca. Comments on the controversy and its free speech aspects will also be able to be posted to the site.

 Dr. Kempling & the BC Court of Appeal

 

April 25, 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 public 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.

Teacher Suspended Three Months for Defending Traditional Marriage

[Please note that the action of this local bureaucrat and the school board are quite separate from the actions of the BC College of Teachers in seeking to have Chris Kempling punished for earlier public statements.  The audacity of the local superintendent of schools in joining in the persecution of Dr. Kempling may well have been encouraged by the climate of opinion created by the successful passing of Sven Robinson's bill limiting free speech and by some of the statements coming from ministers of the federal government. --editor of this website.]

News Release:

April 4, 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.  n

This is probably a good time to repeat the information found elsewhere on this 
website:
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

Letter Chris Kempling Wrote Posted on This Website
Dr.  Chris Kempling's letter of January 8, 2005,to the Quesnel Cariboo Observer is posted immediately below: 

January 8, 2005


Editor
Quesnel Cariboo Observer
Quesnel, BC

Sir:

The letters published in the January 9, 2005 edition of the Observer regarding
same sex marriage have highlighted the arrogance of the Liberal government, to
foist a monumental change to our social fabric by changing the definition of
marriage.  The Conservatives are dithering over how to deal with matter, while
the Liberals, NDP, Bloc and Greens are all in favour.  The Christian Heritage
Party, which I represent locally, is actively working to maintain the
traditional definition of marriage (which, ironically, a majority of Liberals
including Martin voted to sustain less than six years ago).  I have personally
read editorials in gay publications which decry the push for marriage, calling
it a "straight" institution that they had little interest in. 

In Massachusetts, two-thirds of the same sex marriages are lesbians, even
though gay men outnumber lesbians two to one.  And when two researchers
(McWhirter and Madison) surveyed 236 men for their book, The Male Couple, they were unable to find a single couple who had remained faithful to one another. 
In other words, infidelity (and now adultery I suppose) is the norm, not the
exception for gay couples.  And it causes as much emotional heartache and
relationship break-ups as it does for heterosexual couples.  Is this the kind
of relationship we want to give official blessing to?

There's another problem.  Now that our liberal social activist courts
have "read" sexual orientation into the Charter, and mandated same sex
marriage, there is no logical reason to prohibit bisexuals or polyamorists
(which are both orientations) from demanding the right to marry as many people
as they want.  To forbid them would be discrimination based on sexual
orientation.  Coming soon to a court room near you.

Marriage is not a human "right".  It is an institution with obligations, for
fidelity, for raising children, and for ensuring social stability, that was
established long before government decided to get involved.  Not everyone is
currently allowed to marry (we have restrictions against those too young, blood
relatives, already married, etc.).  Furthermore, there were no discriminatory
prohibitions against same sex couples co-habiting, willing their estates to
partners and so on.  This whole affair has been orchestrated by a tiny minority
of activists with good connections, who don't even have the mandate to
represent their own social group.

We need to demand that our government allow a referendum on this radical change
to a basic social institution.  Canadians are smart enough to weigh both sides
of the argument and render a decision.  And the Christian Heritage Party will
lobby hard to help make that happen.

Chris Kempling
Quesnel

 

A Visit to New York to Speak at the United Nations

by Dr. Chris Kempling

Early in February, 2005, I received a surprising call from Anna Marie White of Focus on the Family Canada. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights was holding a Delegates' Briefing on March 4, and she was hoping I could represent Canadian Christians by speaking on the topic of religious freedom in Canada. Anna Marie explained that UN ambassadors and NGO (non-government organizations) representatives were aware of the official Canadian government position on religious freedom, but that the delegates wanted to hear from someone who had actually been subjected to persecution because of their religious beliefs. They were preparing for a major Human Rights conference to be held in Geneva in April.

I readily agreed and started making travel arrangements. I had never been to New York City and was delighted when Anna Marie stated that Focus would be happy to cover my hotel costs for an extra day if I wanted to do a little sight-seeing.

I flew on Cathay Pacific Airlines for the five hour flight and booked into the Grand Hyatt Hotel on 42nd and Lexington Streets, just a few blocks from the United Nations. On Friday morning, I met with American Focus on the Family officials, who were the hosts of the briefing, in the Helmsley Hotel. Two of the other speakers, constitutional lawyer Gerry Chipeur of Calgary, and lawyer Pers Karlson of Sweden, also attended. We then headed as a group to get our security passes in a separate building not far from the UN. Security is very tight at public facilities in New York. Thomas Jacobson, Focus on the Family's UN representative (Focus is an accredited NGO to the UN) was pulling a small rack with a couple of boxes of hand-outs. He was stopped by security, who radioed for the bomb detection unit to check his boxes.

The UN building is situated on the riverfront, with an adjacent park holding several impressive sculptures. The building itself was crowded with school tour groups, plus 6000 delegates attending a UN Women's conference. There were many delegates in their colorful national costumes walking the hallways and speaking a cornucopia of exotic languages. The Africans and South American delegates were quite flamboyant in their flowing robes and distinctive headgear.

We peeked into the General Assembly room and saw where the Canadian delegation was sitting. It looks pretty much like it does on TV. Our guide explained that simultaneous translation is done in the six official UN languages, but all UN delegates must have a working knowledge of English to be posted to the UN.

At the breakfast, Thomas Jacobsen said they were delighted to learn that they had received 98 confirmations of delegates wishing to attend the luncheon, three times what they were expecting. Furthermore, one-third were full rank ambassadors to the UN. They didn't invite the Canadian representatives, who are very strident in their support of abortion and gay rights causes. I spent the morning fine tuning my speech with Anna Marie White, Focus'  representative for Family Policy and Community Impact, and the representative from the British Focus equivalent, which is called CARE.

I was seated next to the Korean ambassador.  Sichan Siv, who just finished his term as the US ambassador to the UN, was also at the table, along with the ambassadors from Ireland, and an NGO representative from Belgium. The food was excellent and included Mesculn Salad in a basil lime vinagrette, with Sugar Cane and Cocoanut Glazed Chilean Sea Bass, Malanga Puree with Mango Salsa as the entrée. Dessert was a Chocolate Raspberry Ganache. (They gave us a souvenir menu, which is why I have all the details.)

Ambassador Siv spoke first, and related his very impressive "rags to riches" story as a Cambodian refugee who escaped the Pol Pot's killing fields in the 70's. His first job was picking apples in Connecticut, followed by a stint as a New York City cab driver. He eventually became the first Asian American refugee to join the American administration as part of President Bush Sr.'s cabinet, and finished his career as the Ambassador to the United Nations.

Gerry Chipeur spoke next, highlighting the various constitutional cases that he has been involved with at the Supreme Court level, including the Vriend and Egan cases. He told me privately that the only way to reverse Canadian policies is to defeat the Liberals in the next election.

I spoke next, outlining my particular struggles with the BC College of Teachers and my efforts to defend freedom of speech and freedom of religion for public school teachers. My talk was well received as there was a standing ovation. Janet Parshall, who hosts a national US radio talk show, invited me to speak on her show, while another woman, a Canadian lawyer working in Manhattan, said she was so upset at my treatment she wanted to return home to practice human rights law in Canada.

Pers Karlson, the Swedish lawyer, detailed the Ake Green case. Pastor Green was arrested and sentenced to one month in prison for preaching a sermon outlining what the Bible says about homosexuality. The Swedish Court of Appeal overturned that sentence, stating that the Swedish law forbidding any criticism of homosexuality went too far in penalizing pastors who perform their religious duties by explaining what the Scriptures say about behaviours deemed to be sinful. Mr. Karlson stated that Swedish embassies around the world had been flooded with protests. Nevertheless, Swedish prosecutors have now appealed the case to the Swedish Supreme Court.  Pastor Green has been invited to speak at the UN Human Rights conference in Geneva.

Overall, it was an excellent experience, and an honour to be invited to speak at the UN. The following day, I spent seven hours at the very impressive Metropolitan Museum situated in Central Park. I wasn't able to see it all, despite my best efforts, and missed the entire Egyptian wing. The medieval armor and Renaissance art was most impressive. On Sunday, I had the privilege of worshipping with the First Alliance Church congregation. This church is descended from the original Christian and Missionary Alliance Church founded in Manhattan in 1888 by A.B. Simpson (a Canadian from Prince Edward Island). They meet on the second floor of a commercial building on E26th Ave, and share space with a Messianic Jewish congregation.

Afterward, I took the bus towards Wall Street and boarded the ferry to Liberty Island. The ferry terminal is in Battery Park and houses an old fort, the original immigrant screening facility prior to the establishment of Ellis Island. It would have been the facility my great grandfather Joseph Kempling passed through in 1879. Security was intense, as all passengers were required to remove watches, belts, shoes, and jackets, plus pass through bag inspections and metal detectors. But I wanted to see the statue which is the worldwide symbol for freedom, something which we in Canada are beginning to lose a grip on. Unfortunately, it was not possible to climb up inside the interior of the statue, but it was pretty impressive just seeing it up close.

I'll close with a quote from Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920), a Dutch Christian politician who founded the Christian Democratic Party in that country: "When the principles that run against your deepest convictions begin to win the day, then the battle is your calling, and peace has become sin. You must, at the price of dearest peace, lay your convictions bare before friend and enemy with all the fire of your faith."   We no longer have the luxury of assuming that our country's leadership shares Christian principles and will uphold Godly values. As is clearly obvious, they are quite prepared to make laws which run counter to the principles upon which this country was founded, and are attempting to silence or marginalize anyone who would protest against them. Kuyper's call to arms rings true for today. But who will answer?  Ghandi said, "You must be the change you wish to see in the world."  It means a commitment to action--and the time for action is now.

Dr. Chris Kempling Psy.D. R.C.C.

Quesnel, British Columbia

March 9, 2005

 

 

Religious Freedom in Canada


-by Dr. Chris Kempling Psy.D. R.C.C. 
A report prepared for  a March 4, 2005, presentation to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights Delegate Briefing, New York City  

Note by Dr. Kempling:
This speech was written for the United Nations Commission on Human Rights delegate briefing in New York City on March 4, 2005.  Due to time constraints, and to avoid overlap with other speakers, only the portion dealing with my story was delivered.

Canada is a country which prides itself on religious freedom and religious tolerance. And in many respects that is true. Citizens are free to practice their faiths according to their traditions, generally without interference from the government. And even when someone’s religious beliefs conflict with a long established Canadian tradition, great tolerance can be shown, as was the case with the first Sikh Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer permitted to wear a turban instead of the regulation hat. That constable started his career in my home town of Quesnel, and he was accepted and appreciated by the community.

Unfortunately, there are two primary areas of conflict between religious freedoms and government policy in Canada: abortion and homosexuality. A group of eight Christians, members of a group called Operation Rescue protesting abortion were arrested and sentenced to jail terms for peacefully protesting outside an abortion clinic. I met one of the men, Donald Spratt, who was incarcerated in British Columbia’s maximum security Oakalla prison for his crime--he was holding a sign outside an abortion clinic. Currently, he is awaiting trial in the BC Court of Appeal for violating the “bubble zone” of an abortion clinic. Once again, he was simply holding a sign with a Bible verse on it—Thou shalt not kill.

A man by the name of Bill Whatcott, an evangelical Christian who is a licensed practical nurse, was fined $15,000 by his professional association, for protesting against abortion on his own time, and also fined $20,000 by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission for speaking out against homosexuality. There is a great deal of intolerance shown towards religious people who express their views in public.

In May 2002, a Catholic high school in Whitby, Ontario, was forced by the Ontario Supreme Court to allow a homosexual student, Marc Hall, to take his boyfriend to the graduation prom, even though the church-run school has strict prohibitions against condoning any kind of homosexual behaviour. And marriage commissioners, who are public employees licensed to perform civil marriages, were told by Frank Quennell, the Saskatchewan Minister of Justice, to resign if they intend to refuse to perform same sex marriages. Several have already. The new legislation currently being considered by the Canadian government provides no protection for civic officials who for reasons of conscience or religious belief will not perform a same sex marriage. Just a few months ago, a lesbian couple in the Vancouver suburb of Coquitlam arranged to rent a hall for their wedding reception from the Knights of Columbus, a Catholics men’s service group. When the group discovered that the marriage was going to be between two women, they cancelled the rental agreement, stating that their religious beliefs prevented them from accommodating a same sex wedding. Even though they paid to reprint the wedding invitations and for the rental of a new hall, the couple is still suing the group in the BC Human Rights Tribunal.

Camp Arnes is a camp operated by the Mennoni