 |
Here is a simple diagram which explains the relationship between the Human Rights Act and the Human Rights Commissions.
Explanation of the diagram:
1. The Human Rights Act defines discriminatory grounds, and areas where such discrimination is prohibited.
2. When someone believes he has been discriminated against, he can file a case with the HRCs.
3. As well as a plethora of areas, ONE violation involves hate speech.
4. A case, after it's been through the HRCs and was unsuccessful, can then be appealed through the Supreme Court.
There are a few of points I would like to make:
1. The only way a violation of the HRA can be heard is through the HRCs.
2. The HRA was designed to prevent DISCRIMINATION against particular groups (look at the diagram).
3. HATE SPEECH is only one of the violations. Others include discrimination at place of employment, in housing, while receiving services, etc.
4. Almost all the high level cases of Ezra Levant, Mark Steyn, Marc Lemire and now the lesbian couple case, involve what was deemed by the plaintiffs as hate speech.
5. These hate speech cases are actually very few. The only way they got the public's attention is because those accused refused to concede, and publicized their cases according to their influence.
6. The majority of cases, which continue on almost a daily basis, are mundane cases of perceived discrimination on the job, in housing, in service areas like restaurants, etc.
7. The majority are filed by what are called "visible minorities" who fall under the race, national origin, ethnicity, colour, and religion categories of groups.
8. Thus, rather than being a freedom of speech issue, the CHRs and the HRA are about discrimination, or more precisely, preventing what groups perceive to be discrimination against them. This includes discriminatory (hate) speech.
9. Finally, these visible minority groups are largely from the immigrant populations, and are often recent immigrants.
10. The HRCs and the HRA are strongly intertwined with the Multiculturalism Act and the Immigration policies of Canada.
11. The prominent Multiculturalism Act, and the very high levels of immigrants and refugees that are being admitted into Canada, fuel the HRCs and HRA with an endless client base.
12. Until there is a concerted revision of all of these institutions and policies - HRCs, HRA, Multiculturalism Act, immigration and refugee policies, - I don't believe that politicians will be ready to annoy their immigrant/visible minority constituents by changing laws that actually benefit such groups, but clearly harm others - like journalists, Christians, and comedians.
13. Since denying truth (via free speech) is such a dramatic constraint, it is no surprise that the freedom of speech aspect of the HRCs has received the most attention. But, what runs all these organizations is the anti-discriminatory position of the Canadian government, which will forfeit everything else to protect this position.
Solutions:
1. Reduce immigration levels in general.
2. Find peaceful ways to reduce immigrants by removing them from Canadian society.
3. Reduce immigration of Muslims.
4. Find peaceful ways to reduce Muslims by removing them from Canadian society.
5. Review the HRA on all levels and make revisions, especially with the "hate speech" sections.
6. Remove the HRCs so that cases are directly decided in Canada's courts, rather than in these improvised committees.
7. Christian leaders should be outspoken about the removal of Christianity from the center of Canadian culture. They should be outspoken about non-Christian elements which infiltrate the culture, and forcibly make demands to accommodate their lifestyles. Such groups include the stringent homosexuals, and the aggressive Muslims.
8. Canadians should be inundated with positive images of Canadian history, culture and religion, so that they don't weaken in front of aggressive accusations by homosexuals, Muslims and an array of visible immigrants from Chinese to Indians to Africans.
9. Canadians should retake what is rightfully theirs, without apology, and find ways to accommodate minorities of all types with fair and realistic strategies.
