Thaddeus Baklinski

,

‘Free Speech Wall’ at Canadian university torn down within hours by homosexual activist

Thaddeus Baklinski
Thaddeus Baklinski
Image

OTTAWA, January 23, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A “Free Speech Wall” set up by Carleton University Students for Liberty was destroyed by a fellow student who described himself as an "anti-homophobia campaigner."

Carleton Students for Liberty (SFL) founder Ian CoKehyeng explained that a Free Speech Wall is simply large sheets of paper set up in a high traffic area on campus where students can write anything they like.

But after students set up the wall on Monday in the Unicentre Galleria, one of the campus’ most frequented areas, a student, Arun Smith, tore off the paper with the messages left by students and destroyed the framework to which the paper was fastened.

Smith defended his actions on his Facebook page, saying that the free speech wall was offensive to homosexuals because someone might write something to which homosexuals object.

"In organizing the ‘free speech wall,’ the Students for Liberty have forgotten that liberty requires liberation, and this liberation is prevented by providing space for either more platitudes, or for the expression of hate," Smith wrote. He called the free speech wall a "war zone" and "another in a series of acts of violence” against homosexual rights.

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

Paradoxically, the messages that Smith destroyed contained more approval of homosexuality than disapproval.

Compared to many pro-gay messages such as "Queers are awesome" and "Gay is OK," there was only one comment, "Traditional marriage is awesome," which might be construed as touching on the homosexual agenda. Another message said, "Abortion is murder."

CoKehyeng said the SFL's stand against censorship meant that everyone should be free to express their opinion on the free speech wall without fear of running afoul of school administration or being attacked by those who object to their message.

He said that a majority of students support the free speech wall and that the main opposition “comes from a vocal minority of students who are concerned with creating so-called safe spaces on campus.”

"While this is a noble goal," CoKehyeng said, “there is nothing safe about censorship.”

Janet Neilson, director of the Institute for Liberal Studies, argued that Smith's act of vandalism stems from his world-view of homosexuals as victims.

"It is clear from Mr. Smith's [Facebook] note that for him the world is a small, closed and scary place where he and other vulnerable groups are constantly under attack," Neilson wrote.

"There is no need to be angry at someone like this. I urge Carleton Students for Liberty to re-erect the wall and encourage those who sympathise with the need to tear it down to participate along with everybody else. I don't think asking CUSA [Carlton U. Student Assoc.] to punish those opposing the wall will be constructive, but inviting engagement might be."

"We don't need to destroy anything to start a conversation, we only need to invite people to join us," Neilson concluded.

John Carpay, president of the Calgary-based Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), whose organization is a co-sponsor of the Free Speech Wall, praised the Students for Liberty initiative to encourage free speech at Carlton. However, he also pointed out the inconsistency in the school administration's handling of the vandalism committed on campus by Arun Smith in comparison to their decision to arrest pro-life students for trespassing when they attempted to set up a display of the Genocide Awareness Project.

"It's good that Carlton University allows the Free Speech Wall," Carpay told LifeSiteNews, "but it will be interesting to see how they respond to Arun Smith having publicly admitted to having damaged and stolen someone's property on campus, when they arrested and handcuffed pro-life students for wanting to peacefully express their opinions on campus. It will be interesting to see whether Carlton imposes any consequences on Smith."

In the JCCF's 2012 Campus Freedom Index, a report on the state of free speech at Canadian universities, Carlton was rated among the worst in the country.

The introduction to the Index states that one of the biggest threats to free speech in Canada comes from universities that condone illegal activities on the part of people who interfere with, and effectively shut down, the events and speech of people they disagree with, noting that Section 430 of the Criminal Code makes it an offence to obstruct, interrupt or interfere with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment, or operation of property.

“Whether universities themselves restrict controversial and politically incorrect speech, or whether they fail to uphold the rule of law on campus, in both cases the end result is censorship,” the JCCF concluded.

Contact info:

Carlton University
Dr. Roseann O’Reilly Runte, President and Vice-Chancellor  
503 Tory Building  
1125 Colonel By Drive  
Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada  
Tel: 613 520-3801  
Fax: 613 520-4474  
Email: [email protected]

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:

Donate to LifeSiteNews

Give the gift of Truth.


Share this article

Advertisement
Hillary Clinton
Shutterstock
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, , ,

For Hillary Clinton, abortion access trumps religious liberty

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 1, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- For Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton, apparently abortion trumps religious liberty.

It may have gotten bipartisan support in the House of Representatives last night, but a spokesperson for the Democratic Party's leading presidential candidate says a resolution protecting religious liberty in the District of Columbia "overrule[s] the democratic process" and hurts women.

The vote, which saw three Democrats join the GOP majority and 13 Republicans stand with Democrats, was meant to protect pro-life and religious organizations in the District from the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Act (RHNDA).

RHNDA was signed by the mayor of the District of Columbia, Muriel Bowser, in January, and makes it illegal for any employer, including religious and pro-life organizations, to use a person's belief or actions about abortion in employment considerations. It also requires employers to provide abortion coverage.

The resolution now goes to the Senate, where it is expected to fail due to the Senate being on recess. Under existing federal law, the measure has 30 legislative days to be disapproved by Congress and President Obama. If this does not happen, it becomes law.

The 30-day window ends on Saturday. President Obama promised a veto of the resolution on Thursday, even though RHNDA was opposed by former District mayor Vincent Gray. According to Gray, while he "applaud[s] the goals of this legislation," the former mayor believes RHNDA could violate the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal treatment under the law.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

The statement by the Clinton campaign left no doubt that she stood with Obama and a majority of Democratic legislators. Spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri told CNN, "Hillary Clinton has fought for women and families and their right to access the full range of reproductive health care without interference from politicians or employers."

"Hillary will fight to make it easier, not more difficult, for women and families to get ahead and ensure that women are not discriminated against for personal medical decisions."

The remarks come a week after Clinton took criticism for saying that "religious beliefs" critical of "reproductive rights" must "be changed."

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” she told the Women in the World Summit on April 23.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper," said Clinton in her speech. "Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will."

“Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed,” said the candidate.

Advertisement
Featured Image
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, ,

Social conservatives may be funding the destruction of marriage: corporate watchdog

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

May 1, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- With over $55 million in annual revenue, the Human Rights Campaign may be America's most powerful LGBT activist group. And according to a conservative corporate watchdog, that's in part because social conservatives are funding it.

"Conservatives would be surprised to know that many of the dollars they spend every day are helping fund an agenda that seeks to destroy traditional marriage and undermine religious freedoms," said 2nd Vote National Outreach Director Robert Kuykendall. "Even when they purchase a beverage from a company like Coca-cola or Starbucks, their dollar is going to support HRC's liberal agenda to redefine marriage."

Less than 18 months old, 2nd Vote has graded hundreds of corporations on six issues -- corporate welfare, the environment, education, support for the Second Amendment, abortion, and as of two weeks ago, same-sex "marriage." Using their "scoring" system, 2nd Vote ranks corporations on their direct or indirect involvement with these hot-button public policy and cultural issues.

And according to them, some of America's favorite corporations are making the radical HRC agenda possible.

"HRC is the largest LGBT lobbying organization in the United States with reported revenues of over $55 million," Kuykendall told LifeSiteNews. "The redefinition of marriage and the undermining of religious freedom are major components of HRC’s policy agenda. To fund their policy goals, HRC has enlisted the help of many major corporations that we do business with every day to help fund. Over a third of the contributions received by HRC are listed as 'Corporate/Foundation Grants.'" 

Why should conservatives care about corporate donors to HRC? Kuykendall says the organization is both politically influential and publicly deceptive. "Last election cycle, HRC spent around a million dollars on electioneering activities and in support of liberal candidates willing to push their legislative agenda. HRC is responsible for spreading much of the misinformation regarding [Religious Freedom Restoration Act] laws and has also mischaracterized the protections provided by these laws."

"HRC organized a massive grassroots campaign in support of the legal battle to overturn state laws protecting marriage and influence the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges," said Kuykendall.

Marriage isn't the only issue on which conservatives may be at odds with HRC's corporate backers. "2nd Vote’s research into other issues such as life, the environment, and the 2nd Amendment shows that many of the companies supporting HRC have taken liberal stands on other issues as well,” he said. “For example, Apple, Citigroup, Microsoft, and Coca-Cola are Platinum Partners, the highest level of HRC’s National Corporate Partners, that have also funded the liberal Center for American Progress [CAP]."

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

"Bank of America, Google, Goldman Sachs, Starbucks, PepsiCo, and Morgan Stanley are also HRC Corporate Partners that have funded CAP. Furthermore, all of these companies signed the amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to overturn state marriage laws."

In Indiana, the state's religious liberty law was modified because of corporate pressure led by Tim Cook, Apple's gay CEO. Kuykendall says conservatives should not give up, though he acknowledges that "for too long, conservatives have let liberals and groups like HRC bully companies into not just going along with their agenda, but actively funding and promoting it."

"However, conservatives have also proven their ability to mobilize and use their dollars in support of traditional values as we’ve seen through the fundraising campaigns for the pizza parlor and wedding cake makers who have been attacked by liberals for their beliefs. Conservatives need to turn the tables on the left, and groups like HRC, and motivate companies to stop funding the liberal agenda through the power of their shopping habits."

Only nine companies have ranks of "five" or "four" on 2nd Vote's ranking system, indicating a pro-marriage perspective. They are outnumbered more than 10 to 1 by organizations that support redefining marriage.

Concerned citizens can download the app on 2nd Vote's website. The full list of corporation scores can be found here.

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Fr. Mark Hodges

First graders exposed to book about transgender boy—without parental notification

Fr. Mark Hodges
By Fr. Mark Hodges

KITTERY POINT, ME, May 1, 2015, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Parents at one Maine school are upset that children as young as six were exposed to a book promoting transgender issues, in the name of "acceptance."

Parents were not only not consulted, they were never even notified of their children's exposure to transgenderism.

Horace Mitchell Primary School read the book I Am Jazz to first-grade students. The book is about a boy who identifies as a girl from the age of two, "with a boy's body and a girl's brain." He eventually finds a doctor who tells his parents, "Jazz is transgender."

Parents began to inquire about what was being taught at Horace Mitchell Primary after children came home with questions about their own sex and wondering if they, too, might be transgender.

One mother, upset that teachers would broach the subject of transgenderism with her little boy, said the primary school ignored her complaint. "I feel like my thoughts, feelings and beliefs were completely ignored...My right as a parent to allow or not allow this discussion with my child was taken from me," she told Hannity.com.

"When I spoke with the principal he was very cold about it," the mother continued. "It's amazing how thoughtless the school has been with this whole thing."

Only after Sean Hannity made national inquiries did Horace Mitchell Primary School suggest that teachers should have told parents ahead of time.

Allyn Hutton, the superintendent of the local district, said she supported reading the book but admitted that parents should have been given advance warning about the subject matter. "We have a practice of – if a topic is considered sensitive – parents should be informed. In this situation, that didn't happen," she said. "We understand that toleration is tolerating people of all opinions."

Horace Mitchell Primary School sent an e-mail, after the fact, to concerned parents, including a link to a blog post of the school's guidance counselor, explaining their motivation was "cultivating respect."

"Some may think primary school students are too young to worry about addressing issues surrounding gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) students. Not so, experts say,” the school's guidance counselor wrote. “It’s never too early to begin teaching children about respecting differences."

Homosexual activists say they support the teaching of transgenderism to first-graders, with or without parental notification. "The staff of Mitchell School is...shedding a light on [LGBTQ] issues,” said a column in Gay Star News.

The LGBT puublication goes even further, advocating homosexual propaganda be commonplace in elementary schools across the country. "LGBTQ issues should never be classified as a 'sensitive subject,' [because] there is nothing sensitive about the way we are born. Blonde hair, brown hair, gay, straight or somewhere in-between."

Brian Camenker of MassResistance commented on the infiltration of homosexual propaganda in children's schools. "We deal with parents and teachers a lot, and the idea that teachers would do this is unconscionable. It's like the people that promote this stuff are evil. It's demonic. You can't imagine adults that would do this to other people's children, and do it with such anger, and such vitrol.”

Camenker emphasized that this is “not an isolated incident with just one, rogue teacher. This happens because the whole administrative hierarchy buys into it.”

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

“The new generation of educators is very, very frightening,” he said.

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook