The Ontario Human Rights Commission is going to force Christian Horizons to run all its employees through a pro-homosexual indoctrination as part of its decision released Friday that also forces the organization to get rid of its morality code in hiring.
I expect the organization will lose employees who would resist this kind of pressure on conscience grounds. One employee told me she would quit before having that kind of indoctrination forced on her. As Iain Benson of the Centre for Cultural Renewal
has argued, using public funds to force one sexual dogma on the population is as egregious as using public funds to force people to believe a religious dogma, such as the length of time it took God to create the world. Lorne Gunther writes in the National Post:
It's insulting to suggest CH does not respect rights when it is operating within its private sphere, but point taken: When CH became an agent of state policy it lost its ability to resist state morality.
It's clear, though, from the commission-ordered sensitivity training that goes along with the employment ruling that the OHRC is interested in far more than merely assuring an Ontario government contractee is in compliance with provincial government employment standards. It also wants to stamp out political views at variance with those favoured by the Commission.
And that's dangerous, very dangerous.
The Ontario government may make Christian Horizons operate its group homes as it wishes, after all, the government is paying the freight. What it may not do, ever, is demand that CH and its employees think as the government wishes.
Yet I have no doubt the OHRC's ruling would have been exactly the same if CH had been running its residential homes completely privately having raised its entire annual budget without any help from taxpayers. After all, in 1999 the OHRC forced Toronto Christian printer Scott Brockie to do print jobs for gay and lesbian customers even though his print business was private and not under any contract with Queen's Park to provide print services.
I beg to differ with Lorne though on whether there even is such a thing as "government morality." The government is supposed to represent all of us, and that includes people who have varying religious and sexual dogmas. Yes, we hope that on criminal matters there will be some consensus on right and wrong that will have some resemblance to natural law and transcendent conceptions of justice. That we still have the language to conceive of such a thing as an unjust law, shows those concepts are still alive, though maybe on life support.
When the same-sex marriage law was enacted, it had a clause that protected people from any sanctions for holding traditional views on marriage. I think a case can be made for showing that this Ontario Human Rights decision violates the spirit of the civil marriage act.
A Christian organization should have the ability--even when government funds (or tax-exemptions) are involved---to order its hiring practices in accord with its faith as long as the services it supplies are open to people of all faiths.
Should we insist the Salvation Army stop hiring Christians?
According to Statistics Canada, most Canadians, something like over 75 per cent, self-identify as Christians. We pay taxes, we have a right to have some of that tax money flow back to serve our community. And we have lots of generosity towards those who are non-Christian, thank you very much. But not at the expense of our own identity.
The government has no "morality" that it has the right to impose, except what can be worked out through a legislative consensus in the Criminal Code. Otherwise, it is appropriate that the state not be in every nook and cranny of our private lives, policing every thought and every action.
The morality of Barbara Hall is not the standard by which all morality must now be judged. The morality of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, increasingly inspired by neo-Marxist ideas, is a radical departure from the foundation upon which our whole notion of real human rights and civil liberties is based.
I believe many things are immoral. But I don't believe everything that is immoral needs to have legislation and police power to back it. But the Ontario Human Rights Commission is increasingly veering towards conceptions that nothing is immoral except intolerance; nothing is true except relativism and only the traditional Western conceptions of morality need to be suppressed because they point to absolute, transcendent truths that show the foolishness of their multicultural utopianism.