More Natural Law and Religious Freedom

Jeepers - I have to quit reading some of these clowns. Today's entry in the howling over how "religious freedom" is being curtailed, we find the National Post's Fr Raymond J. De Souza decrying all of the human rights cases in Canada where "religious freedoms" have been "curtailed":

There have been in the last five years a number of clear-cut religious liberty cases that have ended up in the various provincial human rights tribunals. The proximate issue has usually been homosexuality, and the human rights tribunals have been inclined to limit religious liberty in favour of an emphasis on putative equality claims instead. Eventually, these cases will emerge from the shadowy legal world of the human rights tribunals and be litigated as Charter cases in the courts themselves.

Oh dear, yet another case of Broken Talking Points. In fact, De Souza is so dishonest about it that he refuses to actually name a single case except for that of Bishop Fred Henry in Calgary, choosing instead to allow people to imagine what the cases might be.

He does admit that the cases tend to involve homosexuality, but then goes on to argue:

It will pose a significant challenge to Charter jurisprudence. The tendency of the courts to favour equality claims over fundamental freedoms would seem to indicate that religious liberty would not fare well. That would likely be the outcome if the rights of Christians were at issue; but the issue would be complicated if religious minorities -- Muslims or Sikhs for example -- were to make claims on both religious liberty and equality grounds.

Here he makes two accusations - both of which are astonishing in their dishonesty. First, he is asserting that the courts have given preferential treatment to Section 15 (equality) claims over Section 2 rights. He then claims that additionally, it is Christians in particular who are being denied "their rights".

Now, if the Charter were written in a fashion which suggested that the order in which rights and freedoms are enumerated, then De Souza might have a point, as he seems to be implying that the freedoms laid out in section 2 would have precedence over equality rights in section 15. Fortunately for most Canadians (especially women and minorities), this is not the case. The Charter does not provide precedence for any one right over another, but instead obliges both courts and lawmakers to ensure that a balance is found and maintained.

I'm actually quite disgusted with De Souza's line of reasoning. What is it about the "religious" that makes them believe that it is "their right" to act in a discriminatory fashion when they encounter someone that they believe is gay? How is it that they believe that they can run around and spout whatever they want as "religious belief" and have it protected?

Of course, the reality is that this is another installment in the right wing running about claiming that there is a crisis of religious freedom in the nation. A crisis which does not exist anywhere but in their fevered little minds.