101 Replies to “Trinity Western Decision”

    1. What was it Christ said about being hated because of Him? When sexual perversion and deviant behaviour take precedence over Christian morality then Canada is finished, the final nail in the coffin. In a word, the country and the people are FUCKED.

      1. Actually, I am stunned at how fast Biblical prophesy on the tribulation is happening. In 2003 I had a great debate with a pastor about how the tribulation just could never happen in a Western liberal democratic state, and hence there was clearly no possible trajectory on which to base biblical prophesy.

        Boy, was I wrong… Oh Lord, forgive my arrogance, my self-assuredness, and my smugness. Your Holy Word nails it yet again.

        I gotta get myself to a church!

        This is the work of Satan and his demons. The BEST way to smash this nonsense? Get into a solid, bible-based church, and the more they try to squash us, the more of us they create. The ultimate victory is for Western nations to return to Christ. That would crush the perverts and their “circus macabre” but good.

  1. Next step… they’ll be coming for the churches. I mean, what’s the difference between the Knights of Columbus renting a hall and a university or a church?

    1. Well, most lawyers are assholes and leeches to begin with. What this ruling does is guarantee that ALL lawyers will be assholes and leeches.
      Best to declare, as soon as you can, that you are a non-binary gender, non-christian, drug addled, oppressed disable non-white monkey and then start claiming that every socialist around has assaulted and oppressed you. Use the process that they designed against them as fast as you can.

    2. Be happening soon enough. First they will begin to tax them, and then when they pay the taxes, the taxes will be ramped up until they are bankrupted. They have precedent elsewhere.

  2. The Supreme Court made a deliberate decision to favour perverts over Christians.

    They enshrined to right to butt love your neighbor as superior to your right to practice your religion. Action of the court has removed religious freedom.

    To decide the other way, action of the court would affect no-one’s rights.

    1. “The Supreme Court made a deliberate decision to favour perverts over Christians”
      They did, and it is disgraceful.

  3. Have only skimmed the majority decision and Rowe’s concurrence (won’t have time today to look at the dissent) but based on my quick review of the reasoning the SCC has severely prescribed the scope of religious rights that will are actually entitled to Charter protection, let alone will trump other interests when conflict arises. It’s hard to know what the upshot of this decision will be because the court goes out of its way to characterize its ruling as a question of whether the administrative bodies acted reasonably but it is definitely a dark day for religious freedom in Canada.

    No one should be surprised. The current court is no longer an impartial arbiter of justice and the law. It is simply an unelected legislature imposing its preferred policy preferences as it deems fit.

    1. Well put. I have been alienated by out (in)justice system for a long time now. As you say, the moral bearings of our judges are utterly askew these days. And this nasty ruling will hurt private Christian universities. Taken to the extreme, many universities and groups will refuse to recognize Christian university degreees all.

    2. “No one should be surprised. The current court is no longer an impartial arbiter of justice and the law. It is simply an unelected legislature imposing its preferred policy preferences as it deems fit.” Yep, just as Peeair intended… an untouchable political body imposing (“interpreting”) their warped ideological policies without recourse for those it rules over… Another opportunity to point out how the imposed Trudeau Charter protects the State from the people.

  4. I am sad this morning. The Supreme Court is no longer disinterested. Rather it has become a tool for, and a supporter of, leftist causes.

    1. It is like my comment on Kate’s Mark Levin “When the FBI Does It”. This is just a little more evidence of the Marxist deep state in Canada.

      High River was a big piece of the evidence.

    2. Is it too much to say “Satanist causes”. This is not just a simple left-right political issue. It does indeed undermine the rights of Christians in Canada.

  5. Keep in mind the objective here is to eliminate Christians from as many higher end professions as possible and therefore from any influence in society.

    Wouldn’t be surprised if law societies and other professions start forcing grads to sign Trudeau style “attestations” supporting and celebrating various left wing hobby horses ranging from trans rights to global warming. Non-compliers would be denied accreditation.

    The post-modernists likely view the TWU decision as a means rather than an end. This is just the beginning.

    1. Regarding your comment on ‘attestations’, this has already begun. The LSUC requires you to make a statement on diversity in your annual report. For now, there appears to be no requirement to actually do so to maintain your good standing (it is not clear what refusing to fill out the box means) but that will come down the road. The ground work for the diversity nonsense was laid down years ago with all the ‘women in the law’ task forces and studies that everyone knew would resolve nothing.

      And, as someone who practices in a”Big Law”, I can tell you that most of the large firms, like every other big corporation, have been thoroughly caught up in the social justice stuff. Most of the partners don’t care about it but the ones that do will make everyone care and everyone else is too afraid to tell the emperor he has no clothes….

    2. If I’m not mistaken some university “education” departments require “diversity and inclusion” affirmations from prospective students. My daughter, a US resident and professional classical musician, had to supply an essay with her unsuccessful application for a university teaching position.

      And as we know summer work subsidies were granted only to entities that affirmed their devotion to the fashionable hard left orthodoxies.

    3. Your comment reminds me of my dad’s cousin’s husband was supposed to sign papers to get his teacher’s certificate in 1935 that he would teach atheism and he refused. Two years later he was arrested and shot. He lies in a mass grave near the city of Orenburg.

      Won’t happen here at some point? See Davis’ comment at 12:59 about Mulcair’s view. Suzuki said “deniers’ should be jailed.

      Like PO’ed in AB said, “This country is just a slow rolling Dr Zhivago movie.”

      Boiling a frog.

  6. They said that because law is to be inclusive of all value systems, law societies can determine that schools that are not inclusive are not accredited. I assume there was no evidence that the legal training was substandard as all the talk is about conflicting rights.

    Does it follow that the power of the state should be unleashed to ensure that at least some of the followers of Islam are to be excluded from the bar because their Imams and mosques are not inclusive of the LGBTQ community?

    1. Not when there is same brand beer crossing provincial boundaries, sans tax & provincial markup. Stamp that out first.

      This country is just a slow rolling Dr Zhivago movie. A Solzhenitsyn parody. I’m just waiting for the local commissars to come round measuring my house for “refugee” emplacements. “Vy do you haf zoh much zspace vor tzu peeeples? Hmmm?” Probably need this: 怎麼有這麼多空間讓兩個人的原因 because Почему у вас так много места для двух человек is passe. Or it could be this: لماذا لديك الكثير الفضاء لشخصين, but for my Quebec “country persons” Pourquoi avez-vous tant d’espace pour deux personnes Hein?

      Filing my garden spade & the Ox Head.

  7. Don’t you know? Homosexuals, freaks and perverts have special privileges and rights here in Canada. They’re part of the elite, and God help anyone who interferes with them.

    1. Part? You pretty much have to have a taste for raping little boys to be truly accepted in the elite.

      That’s why they hate Judaism and Christianity so much—in the eyes of the God of Israel, their hobbies are an abomination meriting public execution. If good Jews and Christians ever take Canada back, our elites can look forward to being swiftly dispatched to join their father in hell. So they are doing whatever it takes to stop it.

  8. Considering this ruling, why wouldn’t it be proportionate and reasonable to limit LGBT rights to ensure access for religious students?

      1. Don’t forget to check under your bed for Russians tonight. They like to hide in some of the most unlikeliest places…

  9. “Supreme Court of Canada rules that limits on religious freedom ‘reasonable’ to protect LGBT rights
    Kathleen Harris – CBC News”

    Let me help the CBC with some accuracy in context, here….

    Supreme Court of Canada rules that limits on CHRISTIAN freedom ‘reasonable’ to protect LGBT rights
    Kathleen Harris – CBC News

    In contrast, the Muslim community is consistently spared ANY criticisms over their often preached hatred of gays in some mosques. To that point, if a conservative gay couple (yeah, they do exist)was denied service at a Muslim bakery, I have zero doubt that the agendized media would actually pretend it never happened…. you know…. EXACTLY like they just did on the Trudeau groping story.

    Gotta keep that narrative rolling along….

  10. So, Supreme Court of Canada, is the BC Legal Society now effectively disbanded?

    The BC Legal Society sets up standards of behaviour for lawyers in BC, including their PRIVATE behaviour. Do not those standards of behaviour effectively LIMIT the behaviour of people on the basis of how the BC Legal Society itself defines acceptable and unacceptable behaviour of lawyers?

    Would the BC Legal Society not punish lawyers who violate their standards of behaviour?

  11. I can’t say I feel sorry for TWU because it brought much of this upon itself.

    Some 10 or 15 years ago, I applied for a teaching position there. I remember that I was asked some rather pointed questions about my personal beliefs. What I believe is, frankly, nobody’s business but my own, so I either didn’t answer some of those questions or gave vague responses. I did so because I figured that showing maturity, common sense, and professionalism in my lectures was much more important than whether or not I attended church regularly.

    The application procedure required that I go through TWU’s website and I made my submission a day or two before the deadline. I needn’t have bothered as shortly after that (less than a week, as I recall), it was announced that the position had been filled, indicating to me that TWU already knew who it wanted.

    I am sure, though, that my responses to the aforementioned questions guaranteed that my application wouldn’t have even been considered.

    1. Don’t ALL organizations have standards of behaviour, standards of behaviour as they see fit?

      What you’re saying is that TWU’s standards of behaviour don’t live up to YOUR standards of behaviour.

      1. Wrong. What I stated was that my beliefs are nobody else’s business and had nothing to do with the material I would have been teaching had I been given the job.

        1. I disagree. In a religious institution, you need to align with the beliefs of the institution. It is not just about the material you are teaching; who you are as a person affects the atmosphere at the school and impacts students. TWU did not bring this on themselves. TWU is a Christian University and they simply stood up for being allowed to express those beliefs.

          1. In a religious institution, you need to align with the beliefs of the institution.

            So what’s the difference between that and the doctrines of a certain “religion of peace” or, for that matter, communism?

            It was understood that what I did or said would not be in conflict with what the institution stood for. What I objected to, though I didn’t state that in my application, was that it was mandatory.

          2. “So what’s the difference between that and the doctrines of a certain “religion of peace” or, for that matter, communism?”
            The difference is it is their private institution. A teacher’s influence goes beyond just “what you say or do”. It is not even about their doctrine. It is about having an attitude that will promote their Christian belief.

          3. LindaL:

            Proselytising was not part of the job description. Having been a post-secondary instructor, I understood that I had to conduct myself in a mature and professional manner, particularly when I might be in a setting students or colleagues might be present.

            And, yes, the way the questions on that application were worded, it was all about their doctrine. Why should teaching physics have anything to do with how many times I went to church?

            But, like I mentioned earlier, it didn’t make any difference because it appeared that the selection had already been made by the time I submitted the application.

        2. you were applying to an organization that has specific beliefs and requires those who work and attend there to embrace those beliefs. I am not sure that you possess critical thinking skills. I for one would not apply anywhere that did not fit my personal values. Hell, I won’t vote for people who don’t have values close to mine.

    2. Would it not be reasonable for a fundamental Christian School school to hire instructors with fundamental Christian beliefs? I thought that was the whole point.

      1. Look up the case of Vriend vs. Alberta in which an employee of King’s College in Edmonton was sacked because of his personal lifestyle. He then sued the provincial government because the law didn’t protect him.

        It eventually made its way to the SCOC.

        1. “… sacked because of his personal life-style.”

          That is, the employee was sacked because of his BEHAVIOUR, correct?

          Isn’t that what the BC Legal Society itself does, that is, actually punish lawyers who, even in their private lives, do not live up to the standards of behaviour of the BC Legal Society?

          Is that not what TWU has done in the context of ALL its students, that is, set up standards of behaviour?

          1. Isn’t that what the BC Legal Society itself does, that is, actually punish lawyers who, even in their private lives, do not live up to the standards of behaviour of the BC Legal Society?

            So do the governing bodies of other professions. But, there’s a difference between what one does in private and what happens in a public setting.

            If they do something in public, they need to make sure that they don’t do anything dangerous (e. g., driving while impaired) or bring the profession into disrepute. Those could be considered just causes for being struck from the register.

            But if, say, one has a few drinks too many inside one’s residence and then goes to bed to sleep it off, would that be reasonable grounds for censure or dismissal? Maybe not.

        2. Vriend was a bizarre judgement in that it removed the right of provinces to protect certain rights without protecting all fashionable rights. As I recall Vriend never got his job back nor did he even try.

          1. By becoming a public figure, he might have made himself unemployable.

    3. Being a Christian, albeit a poor example, I likely wouldn’t apply for a position at a Buddhist school. I would think they would prefer a Buddhist and I wouldn’t fault them for wanting to explore that topic with me.
      Similarly, people interviewed for jobs at the CBC or any liberal arts faculty would doubtlessly have to express enthusiasm for group identity politics to be seriously considered.
      Being neither a Buddhist or a cultural Marxist, I don’t think I’d be particularly satisfied in either job.

      1. Unless those beliefs are essential to the job itself, they are completely irrelevant. It should also be assumed that one’s personal conduct after hours should be such that it doesn’t affect the reputation of one’s employer.

        I should have mentioned that I was desperate for a paycheque at the time I applied. I could have told the institution a pack of lies in order to make myself more presentable but that wouldn’t have been honest. To do so would have been unprofessional and, the last time I checked Scripture, lying was considered to be a sin.

        During my freshman year, I attended a church-based college which happened to have a university transfer program. It didn’t seem to be particularly strict about one’s beliefs, though everyone was required to take a religious studies course and attendance at morning chapel was encouraged but not enforced. I think part of the reason for that was that it was receiving funding from the province and, therefore, had to be more accommodating.

        1. “Unless those beliefs are essential to the job itself, they are completely irrelevant. It should also be assumed that one’s personal conduct after hours should be such that it doesn’t affect the reputation of one’s employer.”

          If you had founded the university, fine, impose those personal beliefs of yours on the university. But you did not, and there is no reason why you should impose them, just because you believe you are oh so reasonable and logical. In this respect you are no different than any dictator, who believes in his heart of hearts what he does is the best for his country.

          Truly Christian universities are but a very small segment of higher education. There are plenty of public universities who practice what you preach, why didn’t you try for one of those? I am sure you would have felt a lot more comfortable in that ambience. What you did is no different than those gay couples who most likely go through dozens of bakeries who said yes, until they found one who said no.

          Western society has progressed from imposing Christian beliefs and behavior on everyone, to forbidding them except in the ghetto of churches on Sunday mornings. Its laws have progressed from not making sodomy illegal, to forcing everyone else to embrace it. That is every bit as religiously restrictive as when Christianity was dominant. And where does Islam fit into all these? You do realize that when Sharia becomes the law of the land, homosexuals will be thrown off the roofs of high buildings?

          1. If you had founded the university, fine, impose those personal beliefs of yours on the university. But you did not, and there is no reason why you should impose them, just because you believe you are oh so reasonable and logical. In this respect you are no different than any dictator, who believes in his heart of hearts what he does is the best for his country.

            I never attempted to impose my beliefs on that institution. I simply did not discuss them in my application. That hardly makes me a dictator.

            There are plenty of public universities who practice what you preach, why didn’t you try for one of those?

            Maybe because I was getting hungry and I was looking for a job. And, yes, I did apply at secular institutions.

            What you did is no different than those gay couples who most likely go through dozens of bakeries who said yes, until they found one who said no.

            I did nothing of the sort. How is remaining silent on a matter an imposition? And, no, I don’t agree with what happened with the bakeries, either.

        2. “Unless those beliefs are essential to the job itself, they are completely irrelevant.”

          Doesn’t the guy hiring you decide what is essential to the job? Its his money, right?

          1. Doesn’t the guy hiring you decide what is essential to the job?

            If it’s not in the job description, then it’s not essential. At no time did I say that I would not comply with its rules of conduct. I simply did not discuss my beliefs.

          2. BA Deplorable Ruperts
            Since they asked questions about your beliefs, they were clearly looking for someone who would have been more proactively Christian, whether or not it was in the job description. Now maybe you would have got the job if they had no alternatives, but they obviously found someone they felt was more suitable. It was a competition, and in a competition only one person wins. In a Christian school, being a strong Christian will count for something. I don’t think that is unreasonable. Fortunately, you made your way anyway.

  12. Years past the SCOC led by Bev Mclaughlin said that “free expression” is not the same as “free speech” and ruled against that absolute right.

    A few weeks ago the SCOC decided that where the Constitution stating that interprovincial commerce shall be unencumbered by taxes, tariffs, prohibitions of transfer, is to be ignored in order to protect the Quebec dairy lobby / cartel.

    Now they’ve decided that religious rights as clearly outlined in both the Canadian Constitution and in virtually every other constitution of any other country worth emulating (i.e. NOT Saudi Arabia or Iran) is not what it clearly states it is. That is, you Canadians have the right to have a religion, but not if it affects the government’s wishes.

    So a right to a religion is not accepted. We no longer have the absolute right of free speech. Interprovincial movement is restricted and taxed for certain goods. Is peaceful assembly next? Why would any other parts of the Constitution of Canada be worth noting?

    The Constitution of Canada is obviously a piece of shit.

    I don’t have any reasons to argue in favor of keeping Canada as existent in place. Separate the living west from the cancer that the east has become. Limits on the power of government to intervene in your life is the only preserve of liberty.

    Fuck you Canada.

    1. The pipeline kerfuffle will be the end of Canada. Remember, THE WEST DOES NOT WANT BC.

    2. yes, great post… The Trudeau Charter of arbitrary rights and freedoms… You have the right and freedom of religion until the unelected unaccountable Trudeau Court says you don’t, guaranteed. F#$K Trudopia!

  13. Conservatives need to get over their respect for law. It’s just a tool for power politics.
    New Rules Conservatism is far more revolutionary than anyone is prepared to accept right now, but as more of these results unfold we’ll see a new attitude arise.

  14. I struggle to see a difference between Trinity Western and a typical Ontario Catholic high school.

    1. You might have to dig into where the funding comes from. That’s been a huge problem in the past for The BC Ministry of Health. They fund the hospitals operations but in a lot of cases the actual Hospitals were owned by Catholic Orders, and originally staffed by Nursing Sisters. Times have changed but the Catholic Orders had principles which excluded some medical procedures.
      St. Paul’s, Mt. St Joseph, and the now demolished St. Vincent’s, all in Vancouver, were three good examples of the medical conflict played out. Basically the guy who pays the bills gets to call the shots.

    1. Or the Muslim bakery being forced to bake a cake with a frosting-sculpted pennis and vagina … with the message: Happy Transition Day!

  15. So. The Canadian High Court has determined mental illness to be a civil right? See what happens when formerly science-based medical organizations redefine gender dysphoria into some transgender wonderland of free expression. Sick.

  16. Five of the judges ignored their own foundation document, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Article 2. Even a poor, dumb Yank like me understands that.

  17. Friendly reminder that Islam is the only faith tolerated by globalists, in part because it’s the only one calling for the destruction of Christianity and Judaism more loudly and shamelessly than the pervert mafia.

  18. I only wish that an Islamic University had tried this first.

    It would have passed 9-0 and then Trinity Western could have sailed right through…oh, wait…

  19. Can a secular public library in Canada censor which films are acceptable for you?

    https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/06/canada-ottawa-library-faces-court-challenge-for-cancelling-film-depicting-the-islamization-of-europe

    “Killing Europe is a documentary by Danish ex-patriate Michael Hansen, which purports to warn of the dangers of the “Islamification” of Europe. Hansen was scheduled to give a talk after the Ottawa screening.

    Critics of the film call it thinly veiled hate speech and complained to the library that the screening violated Ontario’s Human Rights Code and the library’s own policy to deny events that “are likely to promote discrimination, contempt or hatred to any person on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, marital status, family status, sexual preference, or disability, gratuitous sex and violence or denigration of the human condition.”

    The library initially agreed to the screening but reversed the decision under public pressure, including a letter sent to the library and city council by prominent Ottawa human rights lawyer Richard Warman……”

    1. I believe they cancelled the film, hoping to avoid becoming involved in a court case. Now, it looks like they are anyway.

  20. The ruling comes as no surprise.

    I think the key point here is that the Supreme Court is quite prepared to interfere in the affairs of private institutions.

    It was Pierre Asshole Trudeau who said there’s no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation, but ironically there seems to be a place for the state in the affairs of a private business.

    Second, this ruling just reaffirms yet again what no-one ever wants to discuss: the Charter is a very flawed document.

    Million dollar payouts to terrorists, gangs on the run, interference in the affairs of private institutions, this is the “vaunted” Charter at work for Canadians.

  21. here’s a suggestion to the twu mandarins:
    flunk the lgbtwiryuqyejrkfrnmcdjdkleor with a torrent of excuses about ‘subpar grasp of the material’ etc.

    the bloke in seattle or wherever who got sued for not baking a gay wedding cake should have instead tried his ‘best’ but the 1st time it came out flat as a pancake, the 2nd time the apprentice screwed up the icing, the 3rd time the baker dropped it taking it out of the oven, the 4th time etc.

  22. How can Ontario universities admit students with a Catholic high school education? Same thing. My Anglican daughter taught math and science at an Alberta Catholic school as a replacement for a few months until the end of the year. The job ended and she was replaced by a Catholic in September. She totally expected it. Why wouldn’t receiving a Catholic education include Catholic teachers? A Catholic education is a Constitutional right under the Alberta Act.

  23. Gutless judgement that makes it OK to discriminate against people solely on the basis of what school they graduated from.
    The same claque of cowards that decree I can bring in wine from Montana but not from BC.

  24. The UN has a diversity program…The Canadian Supreme Court is made up of SJW under UN supervision…
    CANADA where did you go? You do know the role of Government LAWS & Royal accent…right right

  25. Ive been saying this for a long time, ever since gay rights hit the news.
    there will be a day when some barroom schmuck is FORCED to submit to homosexual rape to comply with some vague ‘verbal agreement’ that caused the rapist to feel such stress and palpitations and loss of personal freedom bla bla bla.
    the judgey-judge is a closet faygot and the precedent is set.

    think not? where the fcuk have YOU been in the last 20-30 yrs?

  26. Honestly, we are all getting what we voted for.

    We let government into schools.
    Into marriage.
    Into business.
    Into bedrooms.
    Into kitchens.
    Into garages.

    What did you think the end game was.

  27. Thanks for spreading the word on this issue, Kate. I have been watching this closely. The minority (2 judges) stated that “the Majority betrays the promise of our Constitution that rights limitations must be demonstratively justified.” That to me is the heart of the matter. Scary day for all Canadians.

  28. SCOC rules Christians are to be ‘obscene’, and not heard.

    It’s a “Back to the catacombs yea Christian swine!” ruling.

    If you’re a Christian, the unmistakable advice is to go underground.
    Meanwhile back in the 2nd century AD…”Welcome to ROME!”

    Prosit!

    Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
    1st Saint Nicolaas Army
    Army Group ‘True North’

  29. I guess the Soo-preames figured queer coms couldn’t get legal skooling anywhere else. Makes a lot of sense.

  30. The Globalists have been in collusion for a long time to eradicate all vestiges of Christianity from the face of the earth. They are lawyers and legalists who know that by suppressing Christianity and morality based on God and His character, then the job of herding the steeple is a walk in the park.

    When lawyers without a Godly moral reference point are the only ones allowed to interpret the Constitution and then all subsequent laws under it, subjectivism and feelings are all that is needed to make new laws and overturn the existing foundational laws which this country was founded and established on.

    Our greatness and strength as a nation can only return when these type of rulings are dismantled and we return to our roots and destiny as Canada, the True North strong and free.

    Our freedoms have been stripped. We as Christians have been relegated to second class citizens. And our citizenships are now totally in the balance.

  31. How about a decision to limit the rights of extreme Leftists on the Supreme court by ensuring that a quota of true Christians on the bench is met?

  32. The SCOC has no idea what “rights” are. All rights flow from property rights and without those, as in Canada, rights are what elected politicians or unelected legislators (SCOC) grant. TWU is a private institution recieving no money from government and should therefore be free to discriminate as they see fit. Private discrimination is the essence of freedom while public discrimination is the essence of tyranny. The problem with Law societies is like other professions, they are guilded by the state and have tried to share in the discriminatory practices and tyranny of the state.

  33. There should be no Christian schools of law, medicine, or science. Period.

    I will go a step further and say there should be no religion (of any kind) taught in any elementary or secondary. Let people study religion once they are in post-secondary institutions and I’d wager we’d have a lot more conscientious, free-thinking, well-adjusted atheist adults.

    1. When the state implements your opinions it’s tyranny but when private institutions do it, it’s just the free market. Therefore the state should not be involved in education. Jesus freaks can teach those subjects just as well as heathens but that’s just my opinion.

      1. Exactly, it supports publik skulling, sticky atheist too. Wow, how original, why did none ever thought of that before, … oh wait.

  34. Just to clarify, the SCOC didn’t deny TWU the right to teach Law; they gave the Law Society the right to deny accreditation.
    Comes out the same but you know, Lawyers being Lawyers…The older I get the less I like them
    If TWU could find a Law Society that WOULD grant accreditation, well now that’d be a showdown, eh?
    Mind you the students would have to leave BC to article.

  35. What makes me laugh at this decision is the fact that we have a French Catholic PM who lives in a province where the majority of people are of a Christian background. When Justin campaigns in rural Quebec, he boasts of having attended College Jean-de-Brebeuf, a private Jesuit Catholic college in Montreal. Why isn’t he opposing the Supreme Court’s decision??

    Vote Liberal??

    PS: I’m not a lawyer,, however how can the Canadian Forces prohibit their enlisted personnel from having sexual relations with other members while a Christian College can’t enforce the same rules??

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/no-sex-please-were-soldiers/article1390372/

    1. We have a Quebec PM who is Catholic in name only, just like his father who only became a practicing Catholic at his own funeral.

  36. There is only ONE religion comrades! The religion of the left.
    As practiced by Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Castro, Chavez etc.

  37. Canada is seeing rule by the Judiciary. In the British democratic system the courts including the Supreme court are suppose to interrupt the rule of Law, Not Make Laws!!!!

  38. Im told the pledge TWU asks students to sign is very similar to the one used ar BYU. No problem in the USA.

    The same thing with the baker. He refused to bake a cake for the homosexualiists as it violated his freedom of religion. The courts in the US found in his favor. That would never happen in Canada. The full weight of the law would be applied to the baker.

  39. When the supreme count is openly permiting discrimination of a recognized group (Christians) then you know that freedom and democracy are gonzo in your country. How long before Christians are orered by the government to wear cross patches on their shirts/jackets so that we can be recognized as the evil ones.

  40. I was there in the early 1980s. At least when I was there and at least in the guy’s dorms, the “community covenant” as it is now called was not enforced rigorously. For example, stealing things is just as biblically condemned as is boinking someone who is not a member of the opposite sex that you are married to is and theft was a big problem on campus. I still remember how two dorm mates once stole my bicile and then laughed at how angry I was about it. I’ve come to the conclusion that the whole thing is simply meant to discourage the unclubbable. All cliques do that, from the aristocracy on down.

    I had several problems there, but I think I know what the biggest three were. First, although i was fundamentalist in my theological outlook I was not raised fundamentalist and so did not know the secret handshakes or secret code words of the subculture. Strike One. Second, I was an introvert. Still am. Strike two. Third, I was “trying too hard,” which of course means that i was trying to be something I wasn’t, and what I wasn’t was welcome.

    I knew I made a horrible mistake in going there by the end of my first day but I said to myself that night”you made your bed now you have to lie in it.”

  41. Well duh! Everyone knows that lawyering and sodomy go together like fish and chips or bacon and eggs…

Navigation