Question: Who is this Big Brother?

It is the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC), an extra-judicial body but since 2008-2009 elevated to a new and higher status by Ontario’s Premier Dalton McGuinty. It fully approves of same-sex marriage and the homosexual lifestyle. So does McGuinty. In January 2011, OHRC issued a document entitled “Student discipline under the Code and Equity strategy”  (Evadne Macedo, OHRC, Jan. 27, 2011).

First, we learn that “the new Ontario human rights sys­tem was invented in June 2008. It has three pillars: OHR Tri­bunal; the OHR Legal Support Centre, and the OHR Com­mission (p. 3). The Tribunal decides on applications and the Centre provides legal help to “claimants.” The Commission does everything else: initiates policy; promotes the Code; and enforces compliance. It also reaches out to the police, and the housing and education sectors.

The Code covers 15 grounds including “systemic discrim­ination for gender issues” (p. 6). With the full approval of the then-Minister of Education, self-confessed lesbian Kathleen Wynne, schools and education are now OHRC’s main field: it oversees the complaints, initiates discipline, and controls the collection of data. It covers everything in schools: policies, leadership, relationships, religion, discrimination, account­ability, transparency, etc. (p. 9).

The document makes clear that “The Code has primacy over the Education Act,” (page 11).

Nota bene:
This is important. The Education Act ac­knowledges the public school and Catholic and French school systems in Ontario as autonomous systems with their own authorities. This Act was again approved and constitutionally guaranteed in 1982 when Canada’s BNA Act was repatriated from Britain.

In the spring and summer of 2010 trustees and educa­tion officials still thought that the E&IE (Equity and Inclu­sive Education) strategy was to be implemented within the Educational Act. Now we know that Ontario’s Human Rights Commission stands over and above the Education Act. (See “Catholics’ constitutional rights no safeguard under Ontario Equity Strategy,” LifeSiteNews.com, Sept 7, 2010.)

Here is another threat: “Human rights’ strategies set the tone for all other work in school boards including discipline” (p. 12).

Page 19 repeats, under the heading “(school) Boards,” to “Remember the primacy of the Code (high standard that applies to everything)” and to…”Bring the Code into board policy rather than using board policy to keep the Code out.”

This is a manifesto of complete dominance directed es­sentially at and against the Judeo-Christian communities. Catholic schools have always aimed at providing a safe and welcoming environment for each student according to God’s First and Second Commandments.* But today Premier Mc­Guinty and his OHRC have made sexual orientation (i.e. the acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle) part of God’s com­mandments to be observed at all times contrary to the teaching of the Church.

Page after page is filled with orders, injunctions, and de­crees, such as Educators Must:

· constantly challenge the status quo;
· examine the potential resistance;
· update our knowledge around current trends and issues;
· network with other activists.

What is the difference with the old Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC)—which was already very nasty with recalcitrant objectors to the homosexual syndrome—and the HRCs in the other provinces and the national one in Ottawa? Well, outside Ontario, the HRCs still wait until somebody brings in a complaint, then they evaluate it and decide to ac­cept it or not. Once accepted, they carry the ball for the claim­ant, i.e., take all the steps necessary for the claimant to cruise to his or her ideological victory. One must not forget that the HRCs themselves always had the promotion of “sexual orien­tation” and its GLBTQ offshoots as their primary goal.

Under the new Dalton McGuinty provisions, the OHRC no longer intends to wait for a complaint to be registered. The OHRC itself takes the initiative, and starts the witch hunt to see if they can find their victims, to apprehend them and “dis­cipline” them. In the case of school board employees it would mean suspensions in order to be brainwashed and “re-edu­cated,” or else be fired.

*Note: See the April editorial: “The TCDSB must reject the Equity and Inclusiveness Policy”, C.I., April 2011, p.3).

Father Alphonse de Valk, 79, a retired professor of history, is a priest of the Congregation of St. Basil (C.S.B.). He publishes and edits Catholic Insight.

This article is republished with permission from the May 2011 edition of Catholic Insight.