Tag Archive

Letter to Canadian Heritage Minister on SciTech Museum’s Sex Exhibit

Published on May 15, 2012 By SiteEditor

Letter from EFC to Canadian Heritage Minister James Moore on the Ottawa SciTech Museum’s Sex Exhibit:

May 14, 2012

The Honourable James Moore
Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

Dear Minister Moore,

I am shocked to hear about the explicit sexual content of the exhibition “Sex: A Tell All Exhibition” that is scheduled to open May 17 in the federally funded family environment of the Canada Science and Technology Museum.

CFA and EFC have different views on child sex crime reforms – EFC’s position

Published on October 5, 2010 By SiteEditor

You can also read this commentary online here.

Rolling the Dice: The Proposal to Change the Criminal Code from “Child Pornography” to “Child Sex Abuse Materials”

DateThursday, September 30, 2010 at 1:18PM

Should the term “child pornography” in the Criminal Code be changed to “child sex abuse materials”? While there may be laudable principles for considering to do so, it would be a legal gamble – with children at risk – to amend the law. This gamble could very likely provide child abusers with a new legal defence when faced with charges related to child pornography. The EFC has a long history of public policy engagement on matters of child protection.

A serious problem with Christian Horizons court decision

Published on May 21, 2010 By SiteEditor

National Post – May 20, 2010
Heintz v Christian Horizons: Solomon would not approve
By Don Hutchinson

Excerpt …

Faith groups find common ground – Or do they?

Published on April 14, 2010 By SiteEditor

I can’t make head or tail of the following article. The categories, distinctions and paradigms don’t seem to be coherent. When ecumenism goes too far, it is invariably based on incoherent notions. I can’t find a single philosophical strand that ties all the disparate thoughts in this article together. We shouldn’t be instinctively hostile to the idea of working together with others and building coalitions to achieve shared goals, but if one has to throw reason out the door in order to participate in a particular coalition, then the parties should re-think the merits of that approach.