It really doesn't pay to be a christian these days; they are the Left's universal pariah.

I've posted the following at Ezra's site. I don't think it's up yet.

It’s interesting: in my car, before I read this post, I was thinking about, in a new context, the utter arbitrariness and failure to observe the rule of law exercised by our HRCs.

It occurred to me that, under the rule of law, ANYONE caught stealing, raping, setting a fire, maliciously tampering with public property, murdering, etc., is automatically charged, no matter who they are, no matter what group they belong to. (Sentencing is another, now outside the rule of law, matter: but that’s for another discussion!)

Then I thought, “But the HRCs pick and choose their victims.”

Ezra, as you have pointed out, they choose [white] Christian males to persecute AND PUNISH, never Muslims, Hindus, or Jews—or Aboriginals—who hold and express the very same views. Let’s look closer: the HRCs even let off thousands of OTHER CHRISTIANS who express, with reason and evidence on their side, the same views as the Rev. Boissoin. (His letter was quite reasonable, even though truth is no defence. Those who claim to be revolted by his views and his moderate expression of them should be required to prove their point.)

So, the fact that most Christians—but not Boissoin, the BC Knights of Columbus, Scott Brockie, or other HRC victims—are not persecuted makes the singling out of these men a complete fiasco. In fact, that they have been arbitrarily singled out for harassment and cruel and unusual punishment should render the HRCs’ treatment of them illegal.

Ezra, please address my question here: considering that the HRCs’ actions are clearly arbitrary (outside the rule of law), and target only a few, carefully selected, law abiding citizens to harass and persecute, is it possible for a class action suit to be brought against the HRCs in a real court of law? If not, why not? If so, why has no one done it yet?
It seems to me that, if a class action suit were mounted, the evidence against the HRCs would be overwhelming. Please weigh in on this.

Once again, bravo, Ezra: that you republished the Rev. Boissoin’s comments just because you have the right to do so, and to stick it to Commissar Lynch, is exhilarating!

You are a just and righteous man, standing up for all of us. Bless you!

At what point do people look at this type of thing and ask themselves... "what the f++k is going on here? How can this be? What kind of society, and what kind of process have we created?"

Nose. Face. Plain.

Gawds. It's enough to drive one to despair.

Ezra is pumped once again.I love it!

Wonder how Lynch feels when he draws attention to her dirty underwear on the line?
Wonder how her boss handles this stuff.

What's going on with the CHRCs is that the Commissars are putting forth their own Socialist Feminist anti traditional Conservative white anti abortion agenda.
That is what it is about and believe me and I don't think that people like to think this but I have become certain that the issue amongst the Left loons is strictly about Abortion. They want to keep killing babies and they don't want the Right admonishing them for it. It's all about killing babies. Isn't it ironic how these pathetic asscaps have no problem killing babies but strenuously defend the right of a killer not to be put to death. That's the Liberal way and that's what it's all about. That's why all of the Feminists hate Palin, because she is pro Life.

I've got to agree with Ezra on this one and am prepared to stand up with him, either in the form of financial help or even physical presence, if it comes to that.

All that it takes for evil to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.

Pat

What you just read is the full and complete text of a letter, published in the Red Deer Advocate, and written by Rev. Stephen Boissoin. Boissoin was accused of committing a hate crime and hauled before both the Alberta HRT and the Canadian Human Rights Commission. They found him guilty and penalized him by making him pay a cash settlement and forbidding him from expressing his religious views on homosexuality ever again. He's a preacher. That's what they do. You know, spreading the good word and all that stuff...

Well, my friend Ezra didn't like that and reposted Rev. Boissoin's words on his own blog in protest. As with Rev. Boissoin, a complaint against Ezra was also filed with the Canadian Human Rights Commission. In Ezra's case however, the case was dropped . Ezra thinks the case was dropped because he's Jewish. Boissoin is a Christian. I'm neither. We'll call this a controlled experiment...

I've joined in on Ezra's little experiment I guess:
http://www.no-libs.com/index.php/MyBlog/Thought-Police/Ezra-is-a-Jew-Well-I-m-Not.html

If enough bloggers followed suit, it could turn into one of those "maximum disruption" actions that "Lucy" keeps talking about.

maybe somebody should print it on a t-shirt and sell them, though the print would be a tad on the small side.

Yikes, bluetech at 10:40 pm! Couldn't you have found a metaphor that wouldn't roil the stomach so much?

I love the cat but this is stuff and nonsense.

He wasn't "let go" because he's a Jew.
He was let go 'cos he's a BIG MOUTH (and God bless his big mouth!!!) and an extremely dangerous threat to job-for-life bureaucrats with fully-inflation-indexed-defined-benefit-pension-plans with zero investment risk, something to contemplate on a day when Canadian stocks dropped 10%.

It had nothing at all to do with his Jewishness, tho' of course he IS correct in stating that al the persecuted have been white Christians and/or conservatives.

Ezra is one of those rare men who act out there concience. Canada is fortunate to have him& all the rest willing to stand up to the bullies of the day for true Justice.

The new revolutionary anarchist. Same as the old.

Christian.

This time the dare is to turn the other cheek, so we can slap you silly. But it does not mean silence.

We are all Ezra.

Me No Dhimmi:

Ezra pointed out that since section 13 began in 1977, not one single Jew (or Muslim or gay) has ever been hauled before the CHRT, and he asked -- so I'll ask you -- "do you really think that not one single Jew has uttered hate speech in 31 years?"

Or, put differently, do you think, Me No Dhimmi, that not one single Jew or Muslim or homosexual or lesbian has uttered hate speech in 31 years?

Well felix..if the undies fit...you know the rest.

MND...I think he's playing them. Should someone ask them to explain it, or is he daring them to explain it?
That' why I really wonder what her boss is thinking.
BTW..is Nicholson still her boss?I missed that memo.

"that not one single Jew or Muslim or homosexual or lesbian has uttered hate speech in 31 years?"

Yeah but when they utter it it's not hate speech, it's "activism"! C'mon! Get with the program!

We know why they're doing this, and it's not to foster "equality". It's been posted a couple times...here are two links:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/cultural_marxism.html

http://www.academia.org/lectures/lind1.html

What about those advertisements on TV where they have a bunch of different people saying 'I am a Muslim when... and I am a Jew when..?

Perhaps we need a parody of that, "When the HRC attacks free speech, I am Ezra"?

I'm not sure which group or govt org puts them on but...

Thanks, EBD, i was going to call MND out on that as well.

Although, he may be on to something. Perhaps it's that nobody before Ezra publicly stood with Rev. Boissoin. Therefore he was an easy target. The wolves always lick their chops at that.

Richard Evans, good point at 11:02. Arrest us all.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
- Evelyn Beatrice Hall*

"I disapprove of what you say, and I will squelch, twist, misrepresent or discredit any communication you attempt."
- Pretty much every power-seeking socialist**

*If Wikipedia is to be believed. The true originator of the phrase doesn't really matter, does it.

No Dhimmi and EDB are both right, he was let off because he was a Jewish big mouth and that was causing them trouble and they hope it would go away. Finding him guilty would cause even a greater stink, so they are trying to make the poop disappear, having their bosses taking notice does not help.

My comment isn't up at Ezra's yet.

I've been asserting the same thing for years: that Christians are being persecuted by "official" Canada in a very intentional and nasty way.

I'm grateful to Ezra for pointing this out in a case--with all due respect to you, Me No Dhimmi--which is blatantly anti-Christian, anti-white male, and anti-conservative. Christians have been taking it in the jugular for a long time in this post-Christian, increasingly Godless country of ours.

I'm always slightly bemused, and more than a little pi**ed off, that the lib-left-fem-gay coalition seems to prefer the God of the Islamofascists to the God of the Christians. It's Christians (which is something that I've pointed out countless times) who volunteer their time, treasure, and talent running most of the food banks, clothing depots, in from the heat/cold programs in our cities and towns FOR ANYONE IN NEED.

I don't know of any charitable works that Muslims do for people in need--certainly not on the scale of Christian initiatives--other than for their fellow Muslims.

We're hacking down the root of our societal tree all the while scratching our heads and despairing when the tree seems to be dying and no longer offers us warmth or shelter.

Ezra's really hit on something when he asks is it credible "that not one single Jew or Muslim or homosexual or lesbian has uttered hate speech in 31 years?" Of course they have. But it's the white, conservative, male Christian that's targeted and punished.

We can either wake up, smell the coffee, and begin to stand up to this evil--thanks for doing your part, Ezra!--or wither and die. Because, as go the Christians, there go the rest of Canadians. First they came for the ________ and I wasn't a ________. You fill in the blanks.

Correction to above: I realize, MND, that you weren't disputing the HRCs anti-Christian bias. However, I do think Ezra is right: He was not found guilty because he is Jewish, a group which seems to be protected from persecution and prosecution in this nasty HRC hate-speech head hunt.

I like Concerned Canadian's idea of a class-action suit by those white, male, conservative Christians who have been targeted by the HRCs so they can have their day in court--a real court not the kangaroo variety they were subjected to.

Oh wait, wait! Now I get it. I can answer my own question as to why the lib-left-fem-gay coalition seems to dump on Christians and their God.

Like all good little socialists everywhere, they want the huddled masses to depend on the government for aid. Forget charitable works: They don't encourage the needy to look to Big Brother for succor.

Wake up, Canada!

well said batb. we are definately cutting the roots of our free society.

Well said, batb!

Re what the Rev, Boissoin actually said—politely and reasonably, IMO: people are lined up to say they defend his right to say it but couldn't disagree more.

Disagree with what? Please be specific, with evidence. This story has feet of its own and all kinds of people, it seems to me, don’t know what they’re talking about: and Stephen Boissoin isn’t whom I’m talking about!

What Boissoin says about homosexual activists spreading their very questionable agenda, even in our public schools, is true. (Many public schools have GLBT posters in every class from kindergarten up, where the homosexual POLITICAL agenda is explicitly supported by a statement, which implicitly excludes observant Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, and anyone else who isn’t in lock step.)

Re the very questionable pleasures the homosexual activists have in mind for us and our children: READ their own publications. Pick up Xtra—it’s free—and check it out, from cover to cover, for a few months. You’ll be astonished. E.g., Gerald Hannon of NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association, which advocates you-know-what) used to write in Xtra, openly proselytizing for his cause. (Judge Rosalie Abella, now of our Supreme Court, helped out such activists by lowering the age of sexual consent to 14. Neat, eh? And Canadians wonder what the heck Boissoin is talking about.) Go to some of their web sites and be even more amazed.

With the utmost respect, why Ezra and many others claim to have problems with what the Rev. Boissoin has said here doesn’t seem credible to me.

Times are tough, money is tight.

So why not just cut the CHRC budget by 50% this year and then 505 next year and the year after . . . they'll be gone so fast because all the snivel servants will see their public teat lip lock being broken and they'll scramble off to some other sinecure.

The HRCs of Canada operate outside the Rule of Law. Indeed, they acknowledge no boundaries and express only their own opinions. They use no criteria; after all the phrase 'likely to expose to hatred or contempt' is logically and empirically empty.

Yet, our state has given them the authority to judge the opinions of Canadians. Since, again, they operate without criteria, in a realm that is totally subjective and functional only in the temporal phase of 'likely', i.e., before any actual reality has occurred - their opinions are soverign, absolute,and thus, tyrannical.

Ezra has and continue to perform a tremendous feat for Canadians, insisting on our fundamental right of freedom of speech, insisting on the rule of law - a law that operates in the realm of the factual, the actual, and not the hypothetical subjective absolutism of an entitled bureaucrat.

By the way, the HRAct says nothing about we criminal Canadians being 'let off' a charge of violation of section 13-1 via a defense that our comments are for debate. Nothing. Nothing. There is no such defense in Section 13-1. Indeed, there is no defense at all. None. Not truth, not debate, nothing. Not even an actual act of 'hatred' being expressed or experienced is required. There is no defense. The entire case is subjectively controlled by the HR bureaucrats.

The reference to the comments being used in debate are from Section 319-3 of the Criminal Code, a law that rejects hypothetical future-oriented scenarios and focuses on speech that actually incites actual violence.

So, as Ezra points out, this letting Ezra off for publishing the very same comments as Rev. Boission, is arbitrary. There is no rule (again, there are no rules, there is no defense) in the HRAct that refers to a defense of 'debate'.

The CHRC and the provincial branches, the HRC’s are your typical bureaucratic abominations. The ‘abomination’ is not meant as an insult, it is meant as an actual fact.
As anyone who wants to know, knows, they were set up to check on those that would refuse an apartment to someone for no other reason then being of different shade and other such situations.
The bureaucrats had a slow day, no bonuses. As it is with these characters, you write a case to expand your business. There is nothing as inevitable as expansion of bureaucracy once a small office is set up, this is exponentially true of government. There is no barrier so far as money goes, they say, “Tax them”.
Politicians, as has been documented in many cases don’t read all that needs to be read, perhaps a summary. Sounds good to them, all the protective and flowery spin on the language, and you end up with crap.
Question is, why is it that the government in charge is ever so reluctant to strip these tyranny guided tribunals of their want.
Why is it that a preacher gets a life sentence for writing his mind? This is incredible in a free country. Can anyone explain this?
It is good to see Ezra Levant slapping them silly. Good to see the HRC blinked. Now is the time for parliament to do them in.

So what crap will the CHRC invent to survive another day? In-house ethics? Not bloodly likely. Hey I know! "Field trip to Geneva, last one on the plane mixes the drinks!"

I don't think Ezra was let go because he is Jewish. I think they did not want to expose the corruption by persecuting him again. Civil servants are expert at figuring which way the wind is blowing and personal survival. One intelligent man fighting an institution of hate and fear. I love it! Turn the lights on and the Sow bugs freeze so you can squash them.

An actual conversation I had this week in a night course with a young lady, it began friendly enough, with us talking about her being from out East:
Her: "I really like it out here in Alberta, except for one thing"
Me: "Oh? Do you mind me asking what the one thing is?" (I was expecting a comment on the weather, it was a cold day)
Her: "All the blatant Christianity (spoken with the same tone one normally reserves when speaking about spiders, ew) out here"
Me: "What? What's so blatant about it?"
Her: "Well it-, I mean you know, its everywhere"
Me: "Its not everywhere, I cant say Merry Christmas at work anymore, I'm not allowed to oppose things that are against my religion because it means I'm evil and bigoted, and the university has now removed God from its convocation instead of being more inclusive and maybe adding a line or two for the aethiests, if anything, its the blatant attack on a single religion that should bother you"
Her: "Well they're always pushing their God in my face."
Me: "I dont force my religion or my God on anyone, why do you see the need to take my religion away from me?"
At this point she grunted and turned her back to me.

I think that Ezra Levant has a good point. If you're Christian, you have to be silent about it nowadays, cause otherwise, you could be tossed to some lions.

*sigh* Lev, it's not the Government that's driving this, it's 'progressive' lawyers and their law reform committees within the Law Societies.
http://www.cdn-hr-reporter.ca/index.cfm?fuseaction=hrp.discriminationhttp://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/about/commissioners-en.asp
http://www.lawsociety.mb.ca/pubdocs/eoarticles/Headnotes_March04.pdf

And for the strong of stomach:
http://reports.fja.gc.ca/eng/2003/2003fc1280/2003fc1280.html

Just to be clear, the public have NO influence on these guys.

DaninVan and others who post links: please could you give a one or two line summary of the gist of the topic that's linked.

I can't try all of them, and the links often don't even work for me, so if I have no idea what the link's going to say, I usually pass. I know I miss some important things by doing so. Just a few extra words would give me a heads up.

Thanks.

If I read DAninVan's last link properly then free thinking people will become near extinct via the buro-law gravy train of discrimination.
NO, wait aminute. Dead bodies on the street will prevent it.

Seeing as we're talking about the silencing of Christians (the silence of the lambs?) and the Seasons of Advent and Christmas are coming up, here are a few words of support from Ben Stein (not new) on a CBS Sunday Morning Commentary:

My confession:

I am a Jew, and every single one of my ancestors was Jewish. And it does not bother me even a little bit when people call those beautiful lit up, bejeweled trees, Christmas trees.. I don't feel threatened. I don't feel discriminated against. That's what they are: Christmas trees.

It doesn't bother me a bit when people say, 'Merry Christmas' to me. I don't think they are slighting me or getting ready to put me in a ghetto. In fact, I kind of like it It shows that we are all brothers and sisters celebrating this happy time of year.

It doesn't bother me at all that there is a manger scene on display at a key intersection near my beach house in Malibu ... If people want a creche, it's just as fine with me as is the Menorah a few hundred yards away.

I don't like getting pushed around for being a Jew, and I don't think Christians like getting pushed around for being Christians. I think people who believe in God are sick and tired of getting pushed around, period.

I have no idea where the concept came from that America [you could substitute Canada] is an explicitly atheist country. I can't find it in the Constitution [substitute our Charter] and I don't like it being shoved down my throat.

Or maybe I can put it another way: where did the idea come from that we should worship celebrities and we aren't allowed to worship God as we understand Him? ... But there are a lot of us who are wondering where these celebrities came from and where the America we knew went to.

... This is not intended to be a joke; it's not funny, it's intended to get you thinking.

Good for you, Irene Swain, speaking truth to lies, asking questions, challenging the mendacious status quo that tells Canadians that Christians and Christianity are bad for our society. The exact opposite is true.

I often ask people to consider what their town/city would look like if the charitable contributions of the various Christian churches
--usually unsung and anonymous--were to all of a sudden disappear. All it takes is a little imagination.

For government to duplicate what churches, pastors, and Christian volunteers do would cost three times as much, with delivery of said services being cold and bureaucratic. Christians aren't perfect--but then, we never said we were. But we do try to follow the precepts of a God who has called us to be our brothers'/sisters' keeper.

What's bad about that?

Thanks, batb.

And I'm still waiting, both at SDA and chez Ezra, to hear the specifics of the "I don't agree with Boissoin but I defend his right to express himself" crowd. What has he said that’s so out of line?

And, I believe the word “crowd” is the right one. (Even the word “mob”, as in groupthink, also comes to mind.) Not one of these people, who, otherwise, seem reasonable, has given one viable piece of evidence to show that the Rev. Boissoin said anything reprehensible.

In fact, much like Ezra about the HRCs, Stephen Boissoin simply stated, about the homosexual activists’ agenda, what our elites have decreed we’re not allowed to say. It also seems to me, that in doing so, the Rev. Boissoin is a more understatement kind of guy than Ezra!

So, Ezra says, “The Emperor has no clothes” about a protected group (the HRCs) and is lauded. Likewise, Boissoin says, “The Emperor has no clothes” about a protected group (homosexuals), but his ideas—which none of his critics will mention—are shunned. (It seems that even free speech supporters have been sucked into the elitist and totalitarian dogma, “Thou shalt not question any part of the homosexual agenda.”)

What a double standard here. And, for me, a real disappointment. What’s the difference between Ezra and Stephen Boissoin? It should make no difference, but I note that Ezra is Jewish and Boissoin is a traditional Christian.

If even the free speech advocates are willing to fall into lock step with, in this case, the sorry “What Boissoin said was reprehensible but I support his right to say it”, while both toeing the politically correct party line and providing no evidence against Boissoin, we haven’t come anywhere near as far as we need to.

And the West's traditionalist Christians—canaries in the mine, like the Jews in Nazi Germany—who, in these dangerous times, have important—and verboten by our overlords—tales to tell, are still marginalized.

Kyrie eleison.