By John-Henry Westen
TORONTO, June 21, 2006 – “Ryerson’s half-hearted support of its own decision to give Dr. Somerville this honour is yet another example of how the forced acceptance of the gay ‘marriage’ agenda is restricting free speech in circles including the academy.” That was the comment of Phil Horgan, President of the Catholic Civil Rights League, on the controversy surrounding the decision of Ryerson University to grant an honorary degree to Margaret Somerville, professor of the Faculties of Law and Medicine at McGill University.
Dr. Somerville accepted the degree and addressed the graduates at the convocation ceremonies.
Â
Even though Somerville supports civil unions for homosexuals, while opposing same-sex “marriage,” gay activists launched a campaign to have the honour rescinded. Several professors on stage turned their backs to her in protest.ÂÂ The university, while it refused to withdraw the degree, issued a statement suggesting it would not have invited her to receive it “if it had known her views on same sex marriage.”
Horgan noted that Ryerson’s prejudice against pro-family attitudes should be taken into account when considering Ryerson for post-secondary education.“Parents and prospective students of Ryerson will now be aware of the narrow-minded approach of this school,” he said.
“Independent or dissenting voices on this or related issues are increasingly marginalized,” added Horgan.“Is there any doubt about the likelihood of obtaining a teaching appointment at Ryerson if one espoused such views? How would a student be treated who shared Dr. Somerville’s position?”
He explained that “Academics such as Dr. Somerville, who have seniority and respected track records based on the wider body of their work, are somewhat freer to speak out. For younger academics, or students in the classroom, freedom of speech and the freedom to have a dissenting view from the politically correct vision are likely to be increasingly limited for those with traditional viewpoints.”
Horgan concluded with a warning that the predictions of loss of freedoms resulting from the legalization of homosexual “marriage” are beginning to be realized.“We have said from the beginning of the marriage debates that changing the definition of marriage would have far-reaching repercussions, particularly on children’s rights to be raised by their mothers and fathers, on freedom of religious and conscientious beliefs, on those who believe traditional marriage should be preserved, and on the future ability to espouse those views,” he said.“Prepare to be further marginalized.”