No blog of significance: One of the Reasons Homosexuals Agitate for “Marriage”

I’ve said for the longest time that one of the biggest reasons that homosexuals agitate for homosexual “marriage” is that it gives them a platform from which they can orchestrate efforts to shut down any criticism–to limit, in other words, the free speech of others. And I’ve also said that as regards many of the hot-button issues facting the nation, one need not speculate about the results; one has only to look to places where policies have already been put in place to see the results.Apparently, in homosexual-marriage-friendly Canada, homosexuals are on the verge of criminalizing traditional Christian teaching on the morality of homosexuality¬†

I’m sick of hearing conservatives miscontrue what the law is in Canada. Here is a little blurb I wrote about the law in Canada last year in response to an email I was sent by another Mennonite minister…

I did a little research on the situation in Canada. As it turns out, there is an exception under the Hate Crime law for religious speech.

According to:, the law says…”No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2) . . .if, in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject;”

In other words, a minister could say that that “homosexuality iss a sin” without fear (subsection 2 refers to “inciting hatred”), however a minister could be punished if he/she said “homosexuals are sinners and should be killed” (subsection 1 of the statute refers to inciting violence against people. Subsection 1 does not include an exception for religious speech).

In fact there was a case in Canada in which a person put an advertisement in the newspaper that quoted some of the scripture that he believed said homosexuality was wrong. Initially the man was prosecuted but on appeals the courts ruled that the man’s alleged hate speech was of a religious nature and as such could not be punished.

To me the Canadian law seems pretty reasonable. It allows people to express themselves regarding their religious beliefs even if those beliefs might be seen as hateful by many, but does not allow people to use religion as a cover to incite acts of violence.


I also do want to add that the law in Canada wouldn’t fly if enacted in the US. US First Amendment law would protect non-religious hate speech too (Canadian law only protect religious hate speech), but the provisions of using hate speech to incite violence would likely be legal here.And over the last few months since I wrote that blurb above, I have changed my mind on one aspect of the Canadian law. As a free speech advocate, I’m not in favor of the Canadian law as written. I would prefer that non-violent hatemongers be ridiculed by the tolerant, than for the hateful to be in jail, but I do think it is important to note that the law is not nearly as broad as the conservatives would have you to believe. (I am of course 100% behind criminalizing hate speech designed to incite violence)