Human rights tyranny strikes again… and again… and again…
This week has been quite a week for the advancement of Canada’s evil human rights regime. We have seen numerous decisions from human rights commissions around the country, some of which are particularly destructive of liberty and justice.

We have already talked about the human rights decision against Christian landlord William Goertzen in the Northwest Territories.

There was also a decision in Quebec in which the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal ruled in a racist comment case in favour of a black transit cop. I’ll refrain from getting worked up with a comment of my own and just reprint here a letter to the editor that appeared today which reflects most of the sentiment that adult Christians should have in response to such a decision.

The Montreal Gazette – September 30, 2010
Letter: Suck it up, officer

Quebecers should be afraid, very afraid. And employers should be doubly afraid. The Quebec Human Rights Tribunal has just ruled that name-calling is an offence. And if it’s your employee who calls someone a bad name, you’re liable too.

Yes, uttering a racial slur should be socially unacceptable, but should it result in an $8,000 damage award? What if the transit cop was really fat and the trucker told him, “I don’t pay attention to lardboy rent-a-cops.” Wouldn’t that humiliate him in front of his colleagues?

… William Greer is a professional law-enforcement officer, not some uneducated recent immigrant being taken advantage of by an abusive employer. Greer should grow a thicker skin and learn what most people learn on the playground: Sticks and stones can break my bones, but names will never hurt me.

–

We’re not finished yet. Yesterday the Canadian Human Rights Commission ruled in favour of three CN employees who, as parents, refused to accept a transfer to Vancouver in order to retain their employment with the railway company.

Tell me that the human rights agenda is not anti-rational, unpredictable and incomprehensible – three characteristics that are antithetical to a civilized Christian law order… The human rights system ostensibly exists to eliminate discrimination. Against certain politically popular categories. One of these is family status.

Most of us assume that the elimination of discrimination means – well, the elimination of discrimination. Of course only the most naive person today takes words at their face value when discussing human rights. But going on the basis of the words as traditionally understood, in this case, the elimination of discrimination might be understood to mean the enforcement of equal treatment of all CN employees.

So, tell me where the discrimination was in this case. The CHRC decision, in fact, mandates discrimination. This government human rights agency is telling CN to give special treatment to these employee parents. Because they have children, the obligation to transfer to another part of the country to retain employment that exists for all employees of similar standing, is more onerous for them. Therefore, that requirement that employees should be prepared to transfer in order to retain employment should not be imposed on them.

If Canada was a rational country, the CHRC would be run out of town as the laughing-stock of the nursery school. Unfortunately, the CHRC is not funny; it’s a corrupt, deceptive, justice-killing, liberty-banning agent of the messianic state. It’s a hideous agency which exploits and burgles wealthy organizations on behalf of whining, blame-shifting citizens. And that’s what all the country’s HRCs do.

And Canadians can’t figure out what’s going on so they aren’t rising up to condemn these institutions. One of the complainants, Kasha Whyte, was quoted in the Edmonton Journal as saying, “she is also pleased the commission affirmed the right of employees to be protected from discrimination on the basis of their family status.” Say what? Lady, it’s the exact opposite. But the absurdity of that statement went right over the head of the leftist journalist who wrote the Journal article. Nobody attempted to explain how this decision eliminated, rather than expanded, discrimination. Most people don’t question human rights because they have been taught to enslave themselves to this concept without thinking.

Then there’s the report issued today from the Yukon Human Rights Commission declaring that housing should be treated as a human right. the YHRC has recommended a collection of amendments to the Territory’s Landlord and Tenant Act to reflect this anti-private property agenda. What a collection of fools. Do they really want to scare private landlords away and have the state take over rental housing? It won’t take more than a couple of years before the entire region looks like a Third-World slum. What a tragedy that there are still people in leadership in Canada who want to experiment with the failed ideology of socialism, oppressing and torturing the victims of their public policy fantasies.

I haven’t even reached a discussion of the most hideous human rights decision to come out this week, and I will have to leave it to another time. Not surprisingly it comes out of Ontario, and Barbara Hall’s fascist fiefdom. This was an interim decision in a case where a woman is citing discrimination for why she wasn’t given the post of dean of law at the University of Windsor. This decision has very foreboding implications for the survival of justice and liberty in Ontario. It might have made me fall off my chair if I was not already well-convinced of the fundamentally evil nature of human rights commissions. If they mandated sharia law and lined up to be the executioners, I would not be surprised in the slightest. It’s all consistent with human rights. After all, these are human rights commissions, and not a single person in Canada’s Establishment has publicly called for so much as a name change to these despotic agencies.

We will look at Barbara Hall’s evil Ontario agency decision another time. Meanwhile, we must all call for the complete abolition of Canada’s human rights commissions and human rights tribunals.