Canada's hate propaganda law now includes sexual orientation as a prohibited
ground - but while the bill was being debated and before it was passed, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops urged Canadian senators to allow
them a "religious exemption" - to continue preaching
that sexual conduct between people of the same sex is morally wrong.
His Excellency's letter is on the right; below is Dignity Canada Dignité's
response. March 27, 2004
Msgr. Mario Paquette, P.H.
General Secretary
Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops
cecc@cccb.ca
Dear Monsignor Paquette,
It is painful for us, the gay and lesbian Catholics of Canada, to hear you,
our Church leadership, seeking an exemption from the hate crimes bill with
regard to us.
From the outset, we agree with you fully that the Canadian Bishops'
"Participation in the current public debate on marriage has demonstrated
there are individuals who believe that Catholic Church teaching on
homosexual behaviour is hatred."
Is it any surprise? Although the Canadian Bishops' rhetoric is more nuanced
than the "God Hates Fags" campaigns waged by church leaders in other
countries, I urge the Bishops to re-examine the assumptions underlying
your very public opinion that Canadian gays and lesbians, of all faiths and
of no faith, should not be allowed certain civil rights.
We, the cradle and converted Catholics who are gay and lesbian know exactly
what our Church says about us and our relationships: the Canadian
Bishops teach and propagate the idea that we are "objectively disordered"
and our relationships are "intrinsically evil".
Not even we, gay and lesbian Canadian Catholics, hope that a hate crimes
bill in Canada will change the hearts of our Bishops. But that was never the
purpose of the legislation. We hope that the bill will curtail the activism
of the Canadian Bishops in the secular arena, where they do not belong,
and whose statements demonize and dehumanize us, sowing seeds of hatred.
Sincerely,
Norman Prince
President
Dignity Canada Dignité
"add
a section that clearly exempts, from the hate propaganda provisions, the
communicating of statements about the morality of
homosexual conduct" - Canadian Bishops |
|
Canadian Bishops Defend
Faith-based HatredFROM:
the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops
TO: Members of the Senate of Canada
RE: Bill C-250
(Hate Propaganda Act)
DATE: March 25, 2004
Dear
Honourable Senators:
We understand that the Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs
has been studying Bill C-250 which would expand the definition of
“identifiable group” relating to the area of hate propaganda in the Criminal
Code to include any section of the public distinguished by sexual
orientation. The concerns of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops
about this bill were expressed in a letter to the Minister of Justice on 15
April 2003 from the then General Secretary of our Conference, Msgr. Peter
Schonenbach (a copy is enclosed for your information).Since the letter by
Msgr. Schonenbach, we understand that an amendment was made to the Bill
before it passed the House of Commons. The amendment was made to provide a
defence, “if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish
by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an
opinion based on a belief in a religious text” (the text of the
amendment is underlined).
In our opinion, the amendment is welcome but still does not go far enough
and does not adequately address the concerns expressed in the previous
letter from our Conference to the Minister of Justice. In that letter, it
was clearly stated that the Catholic Church teaches that hatred is a sin;
that homosexual persons must be accepted with respect, compassion and
sensitivity, and every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard
avoided; but that sexual conduct between people of the same sex is morally
wrong.
Participation in the current public debate on marriage has demonstrated
there are individuals who believe that Catholic Church teaching on
homosexual behaviour is hatred. We remain concerned that this Bill as
presently drafted could be used in an attempt to silence Church teaching in
this regard.
The Bill could also be used to preclude comment on homosexual behaviour by
people who do not profess any particular religious faith. Everyone has an
overall moral framework or belief system. For some people, this is primarily
based on religious convictions; for others, it is informed by philosophical
principles, and for others it is based on what have come to be called
secular values. There are people who do not belong to a particular religion
who may consider sexual conduct between people of the same sex to be morally
wrong.
The current provisions of the Criminal Code with respect to hate
propaganda are thirty years old and predate the Charter. We have seen in the
intervening years the impact of including sexual orientation in various
pieces of legislation.
For example, when the question was about social benefits, reassurances were
given that the traditional concepts of marriage and family were not at risk.
This time reassurances are being given that freedom of religion is not at
risk and that the objectives are to prohibit the incitement or willful
promotion of hatred or the advocacy of genocide. These are worthy objectives
but there is great potential for a clash of competing Charter rights. It
would be very helpful for Senators to take the time to make sure that the
guaranteed rights of freedom of religion and freedom of expression are not
overridden. We suggest that one way of doing this could be to add a section
that clearly exempts, from the hate propaganda provisions, the communicating
of statements about the morality of sexual conduct.
In closing, we wish to emphasize that the Catholic Church teaches
that every human being is created in the image of God and has inherent human
dignity. Every human being is known and loved by God and entitled to have
his or her life protected and respected. The promotion of hatred or violence
of any kind is contrary to Church teaching.
At the same time, we remain concerned about how this Bill could be applied,
now and in the future, and we ask you to take our concerns into account in
your deliberations.
Sincerely,
Msgr. Mario Paquette, P.H.
General Secretary
|