Aparently "FREE SPEECH" Doesn't Apply To Those Opposing Gay Marriage
This makes my head expolde. How is it that the gay community can get away with strong-arm tactics like this? When are they going to realize that we have the right and responsibility to speak our opinions in a public forum just as they do?
From the Calgary Sun - March 31, 2005
A defiant Bishop Fred Henry refused to apologize Wednesday for his comments opposing same-sex marriage in the face of two complaints filed with Alberta's human rights commission.
The complaints, filed independently, claim the Calgary bishop attacked homosexuals in remarks he made in a letter published in the local press and on the website of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Calgary in January.
But the outspoken Henry claims he is the victim of an attempt to muzzle him.
"Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are foundational, and if we're to have an honest debate in society, all the voices have to be heard, including that of the churches," said Henry, who recently said if he had the power he'd consider excommunicating Prime Minister Paul Martin over his government's plan to legalize same-sex marriage.
The controversial bill will be voted on in less than two weeks.
"I think I'm owed an apology for putting me through this rigmarole of harassment and intimidation and attempt to silence me," Henry said.
The complaints were filed by Norman Greenfield and Carol Johnson, who were both troubled by a paragraph in Henry's letter that starts by grouping homosexuality with adultery, prostitution and pornography as forces that "undermine the foundations of the family."
Henry's letter finishes by stating the "state must use its coercive power to proscribe or curtail them in the interests of the common good."
The letter later infers that homosexual sex is an "evil act."
When reached for comment, Greenfield, a member of the United Church and occasional guest columnist for the Herald, said he respects Henry's right to preach church doctrine, but believes the public letter went too far.
"I'm offended someone in his power would take the intolerant view to incite our politicians to go after a group of people he just doesn't agree with," said Greenfield. "My Bible says I'm not supposed to hate people."
(Hold on a second... Let me get this "straight"... The gay community can do what ever it likes to lobby politicians but we are not allowed to do the same? How does that work?)
Henry said he doesn't hate homosexuals, just the sexual activity in which they engage, and explained Catholic church doctrine stipulates only a man and a woman who have been married can engage in sexual intercourse. All sexual activity outside of this traditional definition of marriage is therefore prohibited by the church, according to the bishop.
The letter sparked a storm of controversy when it was first published in January, and Henry said he was not surprised by the human rights complaints, just "disappointed."
At a news conference Wednesday, Henry sat beside two thick binders he and diocese lawyers had compiled to respond to the complaints.
He warned that gay activists should watch what they say lest they veer too close to hate speech, a direct reference to Stephen Lock, who called Henry a fascist in a Herald news story in January.
(Finally someone's standing up for his rights...)
It was a warning Lock dismissed.
(And through their arrogange, the gay community ignores the warning...)
"He's not a victim here," said the local spokesman for Egale Canada (Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere). "He's not being hauled before the courts and tied to the stake here, it's a human rights complaint.
("... it's a human rights complaint." Which means that there will be investigations, courts and the proverbial "stake". Why don't these people make proper arguments instead of lying outright?)
"His comments were hateful and harmful, and gay and lesbian people felt personally attacked by those comments. When people feel attacked, they go to the human rights commission, that's why it's there."
(I feel personally attached and threatened and fear for my family where the gay community is trying to remove my ability to speak freely. Can I go to the Human Rights Comission?)
Johnson's complaint was filed at the end of January and Greenfield's was sent at the beginning of February.
Despite repeated attempts, the Herald was unable to contact Johnson on Wednesday.
The first step of the human rights investigation will be to attempt a conciliation between the complainants and Henry, but the bishop is doubtful such a process would be fruitful.
"If I'm going to be talking to a blank wall that's not even going to look at the documentation that I'm giving by way of response to the human rights commission . . . my time is pretty valuable and I'm not going to go through a Mickey Mouse procedure with no hope of success," said Henry.
"I stand by the letter, I wouldn't change one comma, one iota of that letter."
I think we need to do all we can to assist Henry with this fight. If the gay's win we would all be effectively "gagged".
From the Calgary Sun - March 31, 2005
A defiant Bishop Fred Henry refused to apologize Wednesday for his comments opposing same-sex marriage in the face of two complaints filed with Alberta's human rights commission.
The complaints, filed independently, claim the Calgary bishop attacked homosexuals in remarks he made in a letter published in the local press and on the website of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Calgary in January.
But the outspoken Henry claims he is the victim of an attempt to muzzle him.
"Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are foundational, and if we're to have an honest debate in society, all the voices have to be heard, including that of the churches," said Henry, who recently said if he had the power he'd consider excommunicating Prime Minister Paul Martin over his government's plan to legalize same-sex marriage.
The controversial bill will be voted on in less than two weeks.
"I think I'm owed an apology for putting me through this rigmarole of harassment and intimidation and attempt to silence me," Henry said.
The complaints were filed by Norman Greenfield and Carol Johnson, who were both troubled by a paragraph in Henry's letter that starts by grouping homosexuality with adultery, prostitution and pornography as forces that "undermine the foundations of the family."
(Henry is right in this case. All of those things do, in fact, undermine the traditional family. Are they complaining because they're being "outed"?)
Henry's letter finishes by stating the "state must use its coercive power to proscribe or curtail them in the interests of the common good."
The letter later infers that homosexual sex is an "evil act."
When reached for comment, Greenfield, a member of the United Church and occasional guest columnist for the Herald, said he respects Henry's right to preach church doctrine, but believes the public letter went too far.
"I'm offended someone in his power would take the intolerant view to incite our politicians to go after a group of people he just doesn't agree with," said Greenfield. "My Bible says I'm not supposed to hate people."
(Hold on a second... Let me get this "straight"... The gay community can do what ever it likes to lobby politicians but we are not allowed to do the same? How does that work?)
Henry said he doesn't hate homosexuals, just the sexual activity in which they engage, and explained Catholic church doctrine stipulates only a man and a woman who have been married can engage in sexual intercourse. All sexual activity outside of this traditional definition of marriage is therefore prohibited by the church, according to the bishop.
The letter sparked a storm of controversy when it was first published in January, and Henry said he was not surprised by the human rights complaints, just "disappointed."
At a news conference Wednesday, Henry sat beside two thick binders he and diocese lawyers had compiled to respond to the complaints.
He warned that gay activists should watch what they say lest they veer too close to hate speech, a direct reference to Stephen Lock, who called Henry a fascist in a Herald news story in January.
(Finally someone's standing up for his rights...)
It was a warning Lock dismissed.
(And through their arrogange, the gay community ignores the warning...)
"He's not a victim here," said the local spokesman for Egale Canada (Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere). "He's not being hauled before the courts and tied to the stake here, it's a human rights complaint.
("... it's a human rights complaint." Which means that there will be investigations, courts and the proverbial "stake". Why don't these people make proper arguments instead of lying outright?)
"His comments were hateful and harmful, and gay and lesbian people felt personally attacked by those comments. When people feel attacked, they go to the human rights commission, that's why it's there."
(I feel personally attached and threatened and fear for my family where the gay community is trying to remove my ability to speak freely. Can I go to the Human Rights Comission?)
Johnson's complaint was filed at the end of January and Greenfield's was sent at the beginning of February.
Despite repeated attempts, the Herald was unable to contact Johnson on Wednesday.
The first step of the human rights investigation will be to attempt a conciliation between the complainants and Henry, but the bishop is doubtful such a process would be fruitful.
"If I'm going to be talking to a blank wall that's not even going to look at the documentation that I'm giving by way of response to the human rights commission . . . my time is pretty valuable and I'm not going to go through a Mickey Mouse procedure with no hope of success," said Henry.
"I stand by the letter, I wouldn't change one comma, one iota of that letter."
I think we need to do all we can to assist Henry with this fight. If the gay's win we would all be effectively "gagged".
posted by Richard at 06:49
<< Home