Featured Image
Protestors against COVID restrictions gather outside parliament building in Edinburgh, September 2020.Exploring Planet Earth /

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.


VANCOUVER, British Columbia, March 22, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The top court in the Canadian province of British Columbia (BC) has dismissed a legal challenge against the BC government’s COVID health order which bans in-person religious gatherings. The court, however, struck down a prohibition on outdoor protests.

The legal challenge was made by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) in the Supreme Court of BC

In January the JCCF announced it was filing a legal challenge on behalf of three churches and four individuals against the restrictions on worship services and public protest issued by the BC Chief Medical Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry.

Shortly after filing the legal challenge, the BC government sought an injunction to try and close the churches that brought the legal challenge, before the case went to court. However, on February 17, the Court denied the government’s injunction request.

In his March 19 decision regarding the churches, Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson of the Supreme Court of BC stated that Henry’s orders did infringe on the applicant's fundamental freedoms of religion, speech, assembly, and association, but ruled they were justified.

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Man accused of "misgendering" his own daughter must be released from Canadian jail
  Show Petition Text
13925 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 15000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

NB: You do not need to be from Canada to sign this petition.                                      Stock Photo from

A Canadian man (name withheld), from British Columbia (B.C.), has been jailed for speaking about his vehement opposition to his gender-confused daughter's (name also withheld) attempt to "change" sex, and for referring to her as a girl.

The father objects to a court order allowing his daughter to undergo a chemical "sex change", and refuses to be silenced or cowed into submission by provincial authorities who want to compel him to lie about the sex of his daughter.

This must not stand!

Not only is this an unconstitutional violation of this father's Charter Right to freedom of expression, it is an absolute travesty of parental rights and a tyrannical form of compelled speech.

Please SIGN and SHARE this petition which calls on national and local politicians to intervene on behalf of this British Columbia father, and to rein-in extremist judicial activists on the bench.

NB: You do not need to be from Canada to sign this petition.

In a sane world, this would not be an issue.

But, with the courts now acting as the enforcers of the most radical parts of the LGBT agenda, we must now see to it that national and local legislators step-in before the only people with any rights at all are homosexuals and gender-confused children.

A 14-year-old girl cannot properly consent to the type of medical experimentation involved in attempting to "change" sex - including puberty-blockers, opposite-sex hormone treatment, and even surgery, which all have lifelong effects - precisely because of her immaturity and lack of life experience.

That is why this father is entitled, nay, obligated to step-in on behalf of his daughter, even if it means forbidding these procedures, or, at very minimum, putting them off till she reaches the legal age of maturity.

Indeed, in court, the father stated that he is objecting to his daughter's "sex change" - and to the court's bully-boy tactics - for her "best interests."

But, evidently, the only way the courts thought they could silence him was to send him to jail.

Jay Cameron, the litigation director for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, whose legal counsel organization is helping with the case, stated:

"We have ongoing grave concerns about the state’s imposition of ideology and gender orthodoxy in this case and others like it to override parental rights and freedom of expression, and concerned and dissenting medical opinions. Anytime the state attempts to become the enforcer of ideology or dogma it asserts infallibility and overturns the marketplace of ideas and the constitutional rights of Canadians. That is not the proper role of the state. Oppression is always sure to follow."

This immoral and unjust ruling must be overturned, and this father must be allowed to resume his care for his daughter and his parental authority.

Thank you for SIGNING and SHARING this urgent petition for a Canadian father unjustly jailed for objecting to his daughter's "sex change" and for referring to his own daughter as a girl.


“Grave concerns” about BC father’s arrest for opposing child’s gender transition: Justice Centre -

  Hide Petition Text

“Although the impacts of the G&E Orders on the religious petitioners’ rights are significant, the benefits to the objectives of the orders are even more so. In my view, the orders represent a reasonable and proportionate balance,” concluded Hinkson.

“The religious petitioners have not satisfied me that they are entitled to challenge the G&E Orders on their judicial review under s. 2 of the JRPA. Even if they could do so, the infringement of their s. 2 Charter rights by the impugned G&E Orders is justified under s. 1 of the Charter. This part of their petition is thus dismissed.”

On Friday, Henry said that she was “thankful” that the court upheld her ruling banning religious services.

Regarding Henry’s orders banning outdoor protests, Hinkson ruled that they indeed did infringe on one’s constitutional rights and ordered them to be struck down.

“Mr. Beaudoin has persuaded me that his s. 2(c) and (d) Charter rights were infringed by the G&E Orders that predated February 10, 2021, and that the infringement of those rights by those orders cannot be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society,” ruled Hinkson.

“I declare that orders made by Dr. Henry entitled “Gatherings and Events” pursuant to ss. 30, 31, 32 and 39(3) of the PHA, including the orders of November 19, 2020, December 2, 9, 15 and 24, 2020 are of no force and effect as against Mr. Beaudoin as they unjustifiably infringe his rights and freedoms with respect to public protests pursuant to ss. 2(c) and (d) of the Charter.”

JCCF lawyer Marty Moore told LifeSiteNews that although the JCCF is pleased to see the court strike down the “Gathering and Events Orders’ prohibition on outdoor protests,” they were disappointed that the case against the ban on churches was dismissed.

“We represent many clients across the province who were issued $2300 fine for peacefully exercising their freedom to gather and protest government lockdowns. This decision is very welcome news for them, and for all others, who engage in this fundamental democratic right,” said Moore.

“We are obviously disappointed with the lack of scrutiny applied to the orders of Dr. Bonnie Henry banning in-person worship services, despite the acknowledgment that these orders violated the fundamental freedoms of our clients. We are reviewing this decision carefully and in all likelihood, it will be appealed.”

Moore told LifeSiteNews that while the BC court’s decision is “not binding precedent” it could, however, “influence” the JCCF’s other court cases on the go in Alberta, Manitoba, and Ontario.

“This decision is not binding precedent on other provinces, though it could be used to influence other courts if it is not successfully appealed,” said Moore.

Current restrictions outright ban all in-person religious gatherings of any kind in BC while allowing people to gather in malls, shops, and outdoor pools.

Just earlier in the week, Henry said that she was looking at “easing” restrictions on in-person worship in the province but gave no firm timeline. She said in November that she has “no time for people who believe that wearing a mask somehow makes them ill or is a sign of lack of freedom,” or for those who oppose vaccines. 

In October, Dr. Stephen Malthouse, who practices family medicine in British Columbia, made headlines for writing to Dr. Henry and blasting the government’s COVID-19 lockdown policy. 


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.