Tuesday, December 8, 2009

What Now For the AHRC?

Once again the Alberta “Human Rights” Commission have been exposed as a bunch of simpering Savonarolas who use “human rights” as a blunt instrument with which to torment the ideologically impure (read about it here--how a real judge in a real courtroom overturned a “human rights” fatwa against Rev. Stephen Boisson). And once again the question is being asked--this time by Patrick Ross--whither the AHRC?
…In the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Justice EC Wilson overturned the original 2008 ruling and declared that Boissoin's letter doesn't qualify as hate speech.
Commenting via email, Lund [the hetrero who was affronted on behalf of gays and lodged the AHRC complaint against Boisson] expressed his personal regret at Wilson's decision.
"I really think this is a step backwards for our province," Lund wrote. "In my view, the judge's ruling sets such strict standards for hate speech that this section is rendered all but unenforceable."
"I'm hopeful that Albertans hope to keep our communities inclusive and respectful for all people, but this ruling certainly offers no assistance in this regard," Lund continued. "If the language contained in the letter does not meet the threshold of hateful, I am not certain what possibly would."
Certainly, this ruling very much does raise important questions about what lies ahead for Alberta's hate crime legislation.
That there seems to be no objective standard by which alleged hate speech can be judged in Alberta will certainly remain a challenge for the Province's Human Rights Tribunal. Fortunately, while this ruling on the Boissoin case will bolster the case of those who want to abolish the Human Rights Commission, in Alberta and elsewhere, it will also bolster the case of those who want to see these institutions constructively reformed.
Whether or not Reverend Boissoin's letter meets an objective standard of hate speech is something that will remain the topic of hot debate. But now the important debate is how precisely Alberta should move forward on the matter of its Human Rights Commission.
The point being there is no “objective standard of hate speech.” There are only highly subjective standards such that an Alberta “human rights” Inquisitor can consider a Christian minister’s speech to constitute hate, but claim it’s impossible to speak hate against Christians, reasoning (if that’s the right word for it) that since Christians aren’t one of Canada’s special victim groups, hateful speech about them simply doesn’t count.

Whither the AHRC and the rest of the “human rights” outfits that have metastasized into our national nightmare? Straight into the scrapheap/dumpster of history, where all heinous bureaucracies belong.

No comments: