News

By Hilary White

Chris KemplingOTTAWA, January 19, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Supreme Court of Canada has refused to hear the case of Chris Kempling in what family supporters and free-speech advocates are calling a serious threat to democratic freedoms.

Chris Kempling, a teacher and school counselor in Quesnel, B.C., was disciplined in 1997 by the B.C. College of Teachers for writing letters to the editor of the local newspaper denouncing the school’s teaching on homosexuality.

In August, 1997, Kempling wrote to the Quesnel Cariboo Observer, “Sexual orientations can be changed and the success rate for those who seek help is high. My hope is that students who are confused over their sexual orientation will come to see me.”

Kempling said the Court’s decision not to hear his case is “a victory for the enemies of free speech and a sad day for all Canadians who value the free exchange of ideas in the public square.”

“People need to remember that I have never been asked to retract any of my public statements, nor has any human rights complaint ever been laid against me,” Kempling said. “I was simply expressing a social conservative point of view shared by millions of Canadians.”ÂÂ

In the midst of the Canadian general election, Kempling’s case is even more significant. In Canada, the appointment of Supreme Court Justices is the exclusive preserve of the governing party. The Liberal Party of Canada, in power since 1993, has made the vilification of social conservative Canadians and their position on marriage a central point of its campaign strategy. During its long tenure in government, the Liberal party has installed homosexual “marriage” as a legally guaranteed Charter right.

Gwen Landoldt, head of Real Women of Canada, told LifeSiteNews.com that the issue is one of the integrity of the Supreme Court and must be addressed. “I don’t know where you go from here, but I can tell you that it is not the end of the fight.”

Landoldt said, “The decision indicates a double standard in the courts. It indicates the court believes that no one can publicly criticize homosexual behaviour.”

In July 2000 Kempling wrote in the Observer, “The majority of religions consider [homosexual] behaviour to be immoral, and many mental health professionals, including myself, believe homosexuality to be the result of abnormal psycho-sexual influences.”

“I refuse to be a false teacher saying that promiscuity is acceptable, perversion is normal, and immorality is simply ‘cultural diversity’ of which we should be
  proud.”

These statements, the College of Teachers said, constituted “conduct unbecoming a teacher,” and they suspended Kempling for a month. The Teachers’ College later suspended Kempling again for letters he wrote connected with running as a candidate for the Christian Heritage Party. The College is now working to prevent teachers from engaging in politics.

The B.C. Court of Appeals upheld the College’s decision and Kempling took his case to the Supreme Court with the help of a coalition of organizations, the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance. The Alliance is comprised of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC), the Christian Legal Fellowship, The British Columbia Christian Teachers Association and the Catholic Civil Rights League.

In the BC court decision, Justice Holmes said that these Charter rights do not apply to those who speak in their professional capacities. The EFC says the precedent set means that a professional association can discipline a professional for any statement made in public against homosexuality or any issue considered off limits to debate.

Kempling has vowed to keep fighting by taking his case to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, which he hopes, may shame Canada into re-examining the direction taken by the courts.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

0 Comments

    Loading...