Our Canadian Charter and human rights legislation prohibiting discrimination provides vital protection to minority groups, but its real strength lies in its moral leadership. The legislation is a lightpost to our community, that we Canadians consider discrimination simply on the basis of race, religion and other ground unjust and immoral.
There are, however, some groups for which discrimination has not been prohibited, and indeed, where lack of discrimination would in itself be immoral. One such group is the homosexual population.
The homosexual population is discriminated against for two reasons, the first of which is for their own good. Many good people in our communities believe (not without reason) that homosexuality is a perversion that acts as an impediment in the search for self-fulfillment and happiness.
The second reason for discrimination is for the good of the community as a whole.
Discrimination acts as a sign by the community that teaches homosexuals, and especially others that are thinking of joining their lifestyle, that homosexuality is considered to be harmful to both the homosexual and the community. The family, especially, relies upon the community to set standards in which children can be raised, and where values taught at home can be reinforced.
With this background, it was startling to read the report of the Parliamentary committee on equality rights submitted in October of this year, that recommends amendments to The Canadian Human Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. To legislate morality is one thing – to legislate protection for immorality is quite another.
Child welfare agencies in Ontario have already received a government directive advising them that homosexual “couples” could adopt children and ought not to be discriminated against, simply on the basis of their sexual orientation.
While one may ask what social worker would recommend the placing of a child in such a home, one need only remember that without discrimination in employment, a social worker may very well be a kindred spirit.
It is in the area of employment, and especially social services and education, that the lesbian/gay community ahs their best opportunity to influence others in their drive to obtain respectability in their community.
The Quebec Human Rights Commission ahs already assisted several teachers who were dismissed because of their sexual orientation, and one homosexual rights group was assisted when a Roman Catholic school refused to rent a meeting room to them.
It is difficult to understand how seven Parliamentarians could reach conclusions that are so uncaring to their communities, until one reviews the names of those organizations presenting submissions. There were only five submissions by church organizations, at least one of which supported the Parliamentary committee’s conclusion. In contrast, there were 32 organizations presenting submissions that incorporated “gay” or “lesbian” in their name, together with numerous other organizations that are renowned for their pro-homosexual bias.
When the laws penalizing homosexual activity were removed from the Canadian Criminal Code in 1969, it was done on the basis that private morality ought not to be subject to criminal sanctions.
Now, 16 years later, the gay/lesbian communities are in the process of obtaining legislation that will attempt to give them respectability and new forums in which to promote their lifestyle.
This legislation will impose sanctions on those who demonstrate their natural aversion to homosexual immorality, and who demonstrate their aversion in action that is quite properly discriminatory.
(Reprinted, with permission, from The Weyburn Review; December 11, 1985)
