posted on April 30, 2004 08:43:21 AM new
'Chill Bill' Passes Canadian House, Makes Free Speech Against Gays a Crime
By Jimmy Moore
Talon News
April 30, 2004
OTTAWA, ONTARIO (Talon News) -- A bill introduced by Canadian parliament member Svend Robinson that would make free speech against homosexuals a crime passed in the House of Commons.
The "Chill Bill," or C-250, passed by a vote of 140-110 on Wednesday despite objections from the religious community that religious speech would be limited by the law if they speak out against homosexuality.
If it becomes law, then the "Chill Bill," which is also known as the "Bible As Hate Literature" bill, would ban speech that would be used in condemnation of homosexuality or homosexual acts.
This is similar to the anti-hate speech law in Sweden where a Pentecostal minister is now facing charges for using the Bible to point out that homosexuality is a sin.
Robinson, who belongs to the socialist New Democratic Party in the Canadian parliament, has championed civil liberties issues in the past and is openly gay.
The "Chill Bill" would specifically amend Section 318 of the hate crime law by adding the phrase "sexual orientation" as the fifth protected class of people, adding to color, race, religion, and ethnic origin.
"It's a bill that recognizes that when hate crimes are perpetrated [in Canada] against those who are of a minority religion or race or ethnic origin or color, that Canada says this is wrong," Robinson said in defense of his bill.
Robinson asserts that homosexuals should also be included as part of the language of the hate crimes law.
"But there's one group in the country and that is gays and lesbians -- the group that has more hate crimes, more violence perpetrated against it -- that isn't included in the hate propaganda laws," Robinson notes.
However, Evangelical Fellowship of Canada President Bruce Clemenger believes this bill would have a decidedly "chilling effect" on people of faith who believe homosexuality is wrong.
"Whether this law leads to the prosecution of religious groups or not, it's almost certain to have a chilling effect," he told the Calgary Herald. "Will the Gideons still be allowed to place Bibles in motel rooms?"
Clemenger is concerned that the terms "hate" and "sexual orientation" are not defined in the legislation. The maximum penalty for these hate crime convictions is five years in prison.
Robinson responds to this by saying his bill was drafted to prevent "gay bashing" and contends that the notion that religious speech would be silenced by the bill is "utterly without foundation."
Even still, John McKay, a member of the Canadian parliament who voted against C-250, said those who oppose homosexuality will be forced to suffer the consequences of speaking out against them in the future if this bill becomes law.
"Anybody who has views on homosexuality that differ from Svend Robinson's will be exposed rather dramatically to the joys of the Criminal Code," McKay told the Canadian Press.
Canadian legislative observer Vic Toews said Robinson is simply advocating "fascism" to promote his radical agenda.
Derek Rogusky, the vice president of family policy for Focus on the Family Canada, said any legislation that limits the rights of people of faith while giving more rights to gays generally favors homosexuals when challenged in court.
"We've seen through the courts that when religious freedom comes up against gay rights, that in fact religious freedom tends to be more often than not the loser in those particular cases," Rogusky told CBC Newsworld.
But religious objections to homosexuality are already being condemned in Canada.
The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission recently ruled that a newspaper ad that listed Biblical references in it opposing homosexuality amounted to a human rights offense. The newspaper and the man who took out the ad were forced to pay $1,500 each to three gay men who complained about it.
And in British Columbia, the supreme court said a high school teacher's one-month suspension without pay should remain because he wrote letters to the editor in his local newspaper contending that nobody is born with homosexuality.
Bill C-250 is now headed to the 105-member Canadian Senate for consideration.
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on April 30, 2004 09:38:50 AM new
#1. The Bible DOES say Homosexuality is a sin.
#2. That being said, It's not the government's place to regulate what we do in our bedrooms. Therefore Homosexuality should be legal.
#3. That does NOT however mean the government should bar people from discussing it. If you can talk about being PRO gay, you should be able to talk baout being ANTI gay.
#4. The whole 'Born Gay' argument is ridiculous. Even IF there is a genetic tendency involved, it's still a matter of choice whether to go with it or not. If my parents were fat, it's genetically likely that I will be fat as well. But it's still my CHOICE to be fat- I can pig out or diet as I wish. Same with homosexuality.
#5 It'll never pass anyway, even in Canada.
--------------------------------------
We do not stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing -- Anonymous
posted on April 30, 2004 11:38:15 AM new
Replay, it's too bad most people have to turn to the Bible to instruct them how to live. What's the point of having individual brains if God wants us to all think the same? Although this bill will never pass, it shows that Canadians aren't going to put up with hate-mongers whether they claim to be children of God or not.
posted on April 30, 2004 11:51:02 AM new
It's hard to believe that a supposedly 'free' country is working to pass laws to limit their citizens freedom of speech. How sad
If this bill does pass...this will just be the beginning of other things people won't be allowed to say....opposing views people won't be allowed to speak out about.
posted on April 30, 2004 12:06:55 PM new
Oh and another question to Kraft (or any other Candadian) Is Air America going to be on the radio up there.. is it in their schedule?
And do you all get NPR?
Thanks
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
posted on April 30, 2004 12:23:49 PM new
The bill will never be passed, but it's a great way to be heard.
I didn't know you couldn't get Fox news here, but maybe it has something to do with the Arabs owning the station and the U.S. wanting us to cut all ties with terrorists.
"You don't need the Bible to know that homosexuality is wrong, all you need is a decent set of morals."
posted on April 30, 2004 12:36:58 PM new
What we watch in Canada is regulated by the CRTC which dictates that a certain percentage of our programming be Canadian content. The bigger news channels, such as MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, etc., would win out over Fox in the selection of American news channels offered, which could be the case here. It could also be that Fox didn't want to sell their broadcast to Canada.
posted on April 30, 2004 12:40:30 PM new
Here's why Fox News isn't shown in Canada....and why CNN is.
From the Toranto Sun:
Mon, April 26, 2004
Fox News? Not in our henhouse
By PETER WORTHINGTON
WHY IS Fox News banned from Canada yet CNN isn't?
Is it, as some suggest, because Fox News is conservative while CNN is liberal and more acceptable to Canada's governing CRTC? Or is it accidental, because CNN was first on the all-news scene?
Whatever the reason, in the U.S., Fox News has left CNN in its wake and is, arguably, becoming more influential than the establishment networks which also lean left.
Whenever I return from an extended visit in the U.S. (we have family there) I feel withdrawal pangs because Fox News is denied access to Canada.
I suspect I'm typical of those who watch TV news and commentary: I find Fox News an invaluable balance to CNN programming.
With access to CNN but not Fox News, Canadians are being deprived. Short-changed. One needs both for better understanding -- Bill O'Reilly's view of politics versus James Carville's.
One needs a left and right to find balance.
When I phoned Rogers Cable and wondered why Fox News wasn't available, my question was greeted with chuckles: "Ask the CRTC or, better still, ask the CCTA (Canadian Cable Television Association)."
The CCTA has had an application before the CRTC for what seems like ages. But no response. And the public demand for Fox News grows.
"We don't understand how the CRTC can keep denying Canadians the right to have Fox News," a spokesman said, whom I don't want to identify because it was a conversation, not an interview.
CNN, the BBC, Euro News all have access to Canada, but not Fox. But pressure is growing and the CCTA guy figured that in six months there should be a CRTC ruling, but not necessarily approval. (If approved, cable companies can bid.)
Canadian media critics and reviewers tend to revile Fox News and U.S. radio for their conservative hosts.
posted on April 30, 2004 12:44:23 PM new
From what I have read, Fox News is just one of many American TV icons not allowed in Canada (HBO is another). They seem to fear cultural bleeding & want to keep Canadian programs ascendent over all others and fear that won't happen if American counterparts share cable-space. We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on April 30, 2004 12:51:02 PM new
Linda, programs aren't "banned" here. As I said, it's a matter of choice. If the CRTC allows so many American news stations - let's say 3 of them - they would pick the most mainstream ones like they have done. Just because a handful of Fox News lovers want to see it in Canada, doesn't mean everyone does. That's why the proposal is still sitting on a shelf.
posted on April 30, 2004 12:54:11 PM new
I ended up 'googling' it
Hey Canada you guys have lots of 'conservative' message boards!!
Ok here's one's post:
______________________________
My brother sent me the following email today:
Like you, I am appalled by the Liberal bias of the media in Canada.
There may be a way to change the Liberal media monopoly soon through organized Conservative activism.
I believe there's a simple but effective way you can help.
Here's the idea and background:
I can't underscore how important the inclusion of FOX NEWS would be in supporting Conservatism in Canada, and in turn pressuring the Canadian media to start reporting the truth with balance.
I contacted Rogers Cable to find out why FOX NEWS (the top cable news outlet in America currently pummelling Socialist CNN in the ratings) is not included in their cable lineup instead of, or in addition to, CNN.
I also asked how many other customers like me were asking for FOX NEWS.
The response was inspiring - requests for FOX NEWS are becoming significant.
And responding entirely to the consumer demand, Global Television has applied but were denied the right to sponsor FOX NEWS in Canada by the CRTC.
Now Rogers Cable wants to take a shot at bringing FOX NEWS this spring.
I discovered that in about 1 month's time, the CRTC will be holding hearings that may include deliberations on the request by Rogers Cable for the inclusion of FOX NEWS to their cable service.
Their primary approach/justification is market-driven (i.e. because people want it), but I specifically asked that Rogers add "IDEALOGICAL BALANCE FOR A SIGNIFICANT & UNREPRESENTED DEMOGRAPH", i.e. Conservatives, to their application as well.
Now, the CRTC have a web-site http://www.crtc.gc.ca and an email address [email protected] .
So:
Spread the word to others to flood their web-site in support of this application, which will help get FOX NEWS in Canada, and help spread Conservatism!
I will be sending a message later, (even though I don't have cable but hell, they don't need to know that right?).
Anyway, I told my brother I would post this on FD because I knew a lot of you would be all over this. So let's start flooding them and see if we can make a difference!!
________
Reply:
XXXXX
Fox is telecast in many countries now except Canada.
The very fact the Canadian government (under the guise of the cable companies' decisions) refuse to allow Fox admittance to the cable lineup concerns me that Canadians are being censored as to their media content.
I am not stating here Fox News is the absolute best there is either, but it does offer an alternative view of political shenanigans, especially those going on in the United States.
Canadians have so much misinformation being fed them about the U.S. it is medieval.
________________________
I'd love to see a "Fox News Canada".
________________________
Quote:
Fox News Canada would have been American Fox News with a Canadian news summary following the US hourly and a Canadian version of Hannity and Colms that was rumored to have featured Michael Coran and Avi Lewis.
Why not just allow us to have Fox news period?
Why won't mummy and daddy Ottawa "allow" us to watch whatever the hell we want? Aren't we old enough?
_____________________________
So, your CRTC? won't let it in??
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
posted on April 30, 2004 12:54:31 PM new
Bunni, the problem with HBO, is that we have our own Movie Channels. If we had to compete against HBO for programming, we'd lose, so it's in the best interest of our Canadian owned movie channels to not have HBO come to town. The CRTC protects these companies.
posted on April 30, 2004 12:56:08 PM new
That's what I said... We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on April 30, 2004 01:08:50 PM new
Linda, I would never support such a thing and I don't know anyone that would. It's a waste of taxpayer's money BUT it's an effective way to be heard.
Also, you're mixing up the word "ban" with the word "regulate". The CRTC is a regulatory commission that protects Canadian content. We only have so many satellites in the sky that can support only so many stations, so we have to choose which ones to carry. Seems pretty simple to me.
posted on April 30, 2004 01:14:16 PM new
After reading bunni's post I did a google search....there's plenty more like this...
This one taken from the American Enterprise online:
"Doug Patton penned an article titled, "If You Like Canada, You'll Love Howard Dean." His point was that the far left Democratic Presidential candidate's collectivist leanings on issues such as healthcare and taxes bear a strong resemblance to the near-socialist government setup in nearby Canada. Indeed, Dean's surprising popularity is a good indicator of the trend amongst many left-libs in the U.S. to openly envy, admire, and aspire to Canada's big government, model with its extensive social safety net and universal health care system.
They marvel at Canada where people are free and taken care of.
Well, as a born and raised Canadian who has returned to her native land after a decade in the States, I'm here to pose an important question to these liberal Democrats: How free can a people be if they're not allowed to choose what they watch on TV?
You see, what Canadians really want to watch is American television. The professors and stuffed shirts who make up Canada's cultural elite do not like to admit this fact (CBC-loving Canadian nationalists will be the last people on the planet to notice that every remotely amusing Canadian ends up in Hollywood), but it's true. Canadians thirst for timely episodes of Ozzie cursing a blue streak on "The Osbournes." They crave the ability to flip on ESPN and catch a ballgame no one else is carrying. They long for the novel pleasure of watching current events discussed by right-wing pundits on a conservative-slanted network like Fox News. (Well, okay, maybe that last one applies mostly to members of my immediate family, but you get the picture.)
Yet, in all of these cases, Canadian viewers are denied.
Why? It all boils down to the disturbingly powerful Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), a quasi government agency that regulates what can be shown on Canadian airwaves and decides which TV channels Canadians may access.
The CRTC has decided, in its infinite cultural wisdom, that American stations such as HBO and MTV are simply not healthy for Canadians because they would steal viewers away from Canadian television offerings.
Music videos? There's no excuse for a healthy Canadian teenage girl drooling over imperialist MTV VJ Carson Daly when she could just as easily be drooling over an equally young, attractive, vacuous Canadian VJ on Canada's Much Music network. Funny stuff?
The CRTC is not going to let Canadians watch America's Comedy Central because they'd probably realize what absolute crud is shown on the Canadian Comedy Network (man cannot live by SCTV reruns alone) and they'd never tune in again.
It's not that the CRTC is opposed to everything foreign, of course. The Commission is currently considering an application by Canadian cable companies to add Arabic language news network al-Jazeera to the selection of television channels available for Canadian consumption. It's just the American stuff the cultural puritans at the CRTC can't stomach.
Video of Osama bin Laden covertly cuing his sleeper cells to take terrorist action in North America? No problem. Tony Soprano talking about whacking someone at the Bada Bing? No way.
So, we Canadians find ourselves in the absurd position of potentially being able to tune into the latest news on the jihad against the imperialist, murderous, blood-sucking Jewish Zionist conspiracy, but unable to catch an episode of "Hannity and Colmes" because a bureaucrat at the CRTC has decided the former is more culturally acceptable than the latter.
The Canadian government just doesn't trust its citizens to make their own decisions about what content—be it fluff or high art—they want to grace their own personal boob tubes.
-----------------
posted on April 30, 2004 01:26:30 PM new
Welp, guess that all went over like a lead ballon.... I guess no one wants to talk about it .......
back to bashing the US gov't and our policies......
OH, and we DO get Canadian TV, I told you Kraft the other day? it was only CBC, but there is more, if you get the whole shebang that comcast offers.....
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
posted on April 30, 2004 01:27:52 PM new
LoL! Did Twelve write that? I'd like to know what channels this person is missing out on? What's he talking about? We get the Sopranos & the Comedy Channel. That's a hoot!
