Canadian Catholic magazine faces legal attack for criticizing homosexuals

News Resources Tools Columns Documents ACI Group

Contenidos del sub-menu

Comments: 17

Alan Borovoy

Toronto, Canada, Jan 14, 2008 / 01:52 pm (CNA).- A Catholic magazine in Canada faces severe legal attack and possible censorship after a complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission alleged it made derogatory comments about homosexuals.

In February 2007 Rob Wells, a member of the Pride Center of Edmonton, filed a nine-point complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission alleging that Catholic Insight had targeted homosexuals as a powerful menace and innately evil, claiming it used inflammatory and derogatory language to create a tone of “extreme hatred and contempt.”

Catholic Insight responded to these charges in its January 2008 issue, saying the complaint consists of “three pages of isolated and fragmentary extracts from articles dating back as far as 1994, without any context.” Catholic Insight continued, saying, “these isolated quotes are not meaningful without the contexts of the articles themselves from which they were culled; in fact, most of them are even out of context from the sentences from which they were taken.”

“C.I. regards all of these charges as unfounded and made with the intent to harass. It intends to defend itself vigorously should the CHRC proceed. The magazine has continually emphasized that, with the respect to homosexual activity, it follows the guidance of the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church has made clear that persons with same-sex attraction must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity and that every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

The magazine also reiterated its support for Catholic teaching that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered, noting its long-time coverage of the political manifestations of the issue. “From its beginning in 1993, the magazine has traced and exposed homosexual activists for their attacks against Christians defending the traditional order in law and society and their use of derogatory language against all who stand in their way,” the magazine said.

The human rights complaints process in Canada currently funds the legal costs of complainants, but defendants must pay for expenses out of pocket. Rules of evidence for criminal court proceedings are also not followed in human rights hearings.

Catholic Insight said that the complainant Wells had also sought to shut down other websites, and had targeted Ron Gray, leader of the Christian Heritage Party. The magazine reported Gray’s claims that in his conversations with the CHRC, an official of the agency had admitted to him that the Human Rights Act is about censorship.

Alan Borovoy, general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, said he never imagined the human rights commissions would be used to undermine freedom of speech. He said that acting as censors was “hardly the role we had envisioned for human rights commissions.”

In a Catholic Insight editorial, the magazine said, “Today, Catholic Insight magazine has also become a victim of the new anti-religion. We, too, have been denounced to the Canadian Human Rights Commission in Ottawa for speaking out against the activists who agitated for adding so-called sexual orientation to the Hate Crimes Act in 2003 and the legalization of same-sex "marriage" in 2005. The politically correct activists brook no opposition.”

Comments: 17

Subscriber comments:

Published by: Dan in Calgary
Calgary Alberta Canada 02/04/2008 12:28 PM EST

Max:

1. Suggesting that gays enter heterosexual relationships serves a purpose - they might become parents of children who will be grateful for the chance at Life. This hardly equates the reverse. I see every year married men who fathered children "come out of the closet" - while they are trying to make a statement, they are also proving that it can be done.

2. Creation (or evolution if you want) defined the purpose of sex. Humans can't define it, but they indeed ignore it and misuse it, with obvious consequential social ills. All the Church is doing is pointing this out.

3. My previous rant indeed lamented irresponsible sex on the part of all - e.g., abortion is hardly the fault of gays.

4. Criticism of the Church on how abusive priests were handled is understandable. Debate over denial of the priesthood to women is fair ball. But until you disclose what purpose gay sex serves beyond physical bonding, nothing justifies the costly and meaningless harrassment of the Church by LGBT's. The Church is about promoting human life - it therefore condones only that sexual activity that fully and responsibly transmits life to the next generation. Gay sex cannot despite your valiant defence of it.

Published by: Max Facter
Canada 02/01/2008 01:28 PM EST

Dan...

The Church asserts that LGBT people must be celibate. Your assertion that LGBT people should enter into heterosexual relationships makes as much sense as me insisting that you should enter into a homosexual relationship. The Church's assertion is unattainable and cruel. Your assertion is merely laughable.

No matter how you, or the Church, wishes to unilaterally define the purpose of sex, it will not change the purpose that individuals attach to it. Humans create their own meaning - they always have and they always will.

What you should lament is irresponsible sexual behaviour whether it occurs among gays or straights. There is nothing inherently wrong in being gay or having gay sex.

As for your other assertion that only LGBT people critique the Church...perhaps you don't listen very well. Women rightly critique it for denying them roles equal to men. Divorced persons critique it for denying them re-marriage. And decent people everywhere critique it for hiding and protecting pedophiles. The Church has much to answer for and chasing everyone out who disagrees with a corrupt and bankrupt hierarchy is not going to solve its problems.

Believe in miracles if you want (sterile people don't produce children - if they could they are not sterile), but do not insult our intellects wth nonsense.

Published by: Dan in Calgary
Calgary Alberta Canada 01/31/2008 03:44 PM EST

Max:

"Grim sex?" Thanks for the laugh! Please chill and read what I said.

Do you really think that trying to bear a child with the partner you love is "grim"?

God the Creator made sex a pleasure, as a MEANS to procreation in a state of unmitigated sexual monogamy.

However, for too many people, the pleasure is no longer a MEANS to an END, but is now the END in itself. This is inherently selfish. And spreading disease, procreating children no one wants and killing them before birth, divorces from marriages based only on sexual attraction instead of mutual respect, and infidelity as a personal weapon: none of these horrors seems enough to stem this obsession.

There are many instances of "sterile" couples who, with God's grace, bear children. No stories of this among gay couples, I'm afraid! Where there is God, prayer, and a monogamous heterosexual relationship, there is hope.

Did I say that gays must be celibate? No, but I drew attention to the example of many gays who controlled their sex drives to bear children, instead of letting their sex drives control them.

The Catholic view is not about attacking LGBT's, but it is about what sex is and isn't for. Heteros who disagree leave us alone. Only LGBT's insist that Catholics change, and attack them when they do not. Gays are always booking Catholic halls for "weddings" or lodging "human rights" complaints. We don't attack gays, Max, but we will defend ourselves to the end.

Amen.

Dan in Calgary

Published by: Max Facter
Canada 01/28/2008 08:23 PM EST

Dan from Calgary writes:

"If sex between members of the same gender cannot produce children, then please tell me how same-sex activity is not disordered."

So Dan - if I understand you correctly...because the parts "fit" only straight sex is procreative and therefore it is natural and therefore good. Problem is...the parts can be pretty much used the same way in straight sex as gay sex. If the Church really believed every sexual act must be procreative, why do they allow sterile straight to marry?

The only thing I can say is that I am glad I am not your wife or girlfriend. If every sex act must have the potential for procreation where is the room for plain old fashioned fun? Sex is good. It can build trust and intimacy in couples.It can bring couples closer together no matter what the gender of each parnter is.

You are certainly free to practice whatever grim version of sex you please with whomever you choose...but to suggest responsible adult LGBT people must be celibate is just nonsense. Not even the homosexual priesthood can manage that...so how can the Pope expect lay people to accomplish it? It is far healthier to reocgnize and promote stable gay and lesbian relationships.

Published by: Dan in Calgary
Calgary Alberta Canada 01/25/2008 03:30 PM EST

Max:

I'm afraid that it is you who is missing the point.

You cannot obtain an electric current by hooking two positive or negative terminals together. And two members of the same gender cannot procreate children, no matter how much "homosexual Catholics advocate for change within their own Church"! It's been that way for centuries, Max, and I don't see any change coming any time soon.

If sex between members of the same gender cannot produce children, then please tell me how same-sex activity is not disordered. If you tell me that its point is selfish pleasure at the risk of spreading disease and bonding otherwise fertile people into non-child-producing relationships, then you need to be reminded that the Church equally forbids heterosexuals from doing this. It's not about gays, Max, it's about what sex is for and what it is not for.

No one said that gays cannot be Catholic. Gays can and do marry and bear children, as they were called to do, overcoming their disordered orientation, just like everybody else on earth each of whom has to overcome their own disorders to do the right thing. And, as priests are supposed to be celibate, sexual orientation is moot.

Finally, Max, if gay sex is not just for selfish pleasure, then please explain for all of us what holy and non-selfish purpose gay sex serves.

The Church's views are not the subject of opinion polls but only of long-realised truths that lobbying, cannot change.

Dan in Calgary

Published by: Max Facter
Canada 01/24/2008 06:53 PM EST

Dan in Calgary - I don't understand what you are talking about. You speak as though Catholics and homosexuals are mutually exclusive beings. Does it not occur to you that some homosexual Catholics advocate for change within their own Church? Why should they not? Is it not their right to challenge the Church from within? Don't they have a "right" to do so? If straight Catholics can challenge gay Catholics, why not the reverse?

You seem to deliberately miss the point. LGBT people are openly attacked by the Catholic Church like no other minority.

Is it any wonder that some gay Catholics have begun to say that it is high time we "Love the Catholic and Hate the Catholic Church"?

Published by: Dan in Calgary
Calgary Alberta Canada 01/23/2008 05:07 PM EST

The truth of the matter is that only the LGBT community has made a point of going beyond simply disagreeing with the Catholic view, and openly demanding that the Catholic community change.

No one else is doing this. Heterosexuals engaging in sex outside marriage are equally in sin, but they don't demand change of the Church; they only reject the Church and walk away. Similarly, others who are sexually active outside the limits of human sexual activity permitted by the Church disagree with the Church but otherwise leave it alone.

As Catholics can no more change doctrine on human sexuality than they can enable lesbians and gays to procreate children, the futile frustration of the LGBT community against Catholics becomes palpable to the point of hatred, owing to their inability to understand what it means to put faith in Christ and Christian doctrine first by selflessly dealing with their sexual disorder in the same way that anyone else meaningfully copes with any other disorder or shortcoming, and to put one's selfish impulses second.

I know many gays who "sucked it up", married women, and had children, despite their condition. They are selfless heroes to me.

I pray for the LGBT community and for their eventual enlightenment so that they come to realise the futility of their demands to change the fact and purpose of human biology to suit their selfish and sensual pursuits.

Dan in Calgary

Published by: Ted
Canada 01/22/2008 11:07 PM EST

"What some Catholic speech does to dehumanize and marginalize homosexuals has some similarities to what Catholics claim abortionist speech does to dehumanize unborn babies."

But that concedes the point. No one wants to ban "abortionist speech" (abortion the act, maybe, but not advocacy). And no one should ban anti-gay speech, no matter how vile (and some of the comments here have been vile). Unless you have a concrete and intentional tie between X's speech and a past or imminent criminal action against Y, the state should not intervene. Anything else is an impermissible threat to free expression.

"Shouldn't the state try to protect powerful groups from bullying and endangering members of marginalized minorities? Imagine how the Dark Ages might have turned out better for all those people murdered as witches, warlocks, and heretics by the Catholic church if the state had been able to step in and prevent the Catholic church from such wanton murder of those they felt were 'lesser' in their God's eyes?"

The sensible thing would be to outlaw murder, and then debate the homosexuality issue in public. That's worked pretty well in Canada so far, and I don't see anyone getting ready to burn witches in the foreseeable future.

Published by: Max Facter
Canada 01/18/2008 06:47 PM EST

Just because Canada's Human Rights Tribunals may not be perfect, does not imply that all Human Rights complaints in Canada are baseless. Unlike the author of this article, I have read Catholic Insight Magazine (CI) and I am of the view that Mr. Wells' complaint has merit. CI goes far beyond merely restating Church teaching on homosexuality, it actively attacks the LGBT community. It makes many ridiculous assertions that target LGBT people(directly and indirectly) such as: gays are diseased; gays cause AIDS; gays are more likley to be peadophiles; gays have a secret agenda etc. etc...sounds a lot like the baseless propaganda that the Nazis used against the Jewish people.

Despite the CHRC's alleged flaws (all legal systems have them by the way - even Catholic marriage tribunals and courts of canon law)I believe the process needs to unfold of its own accord. Let the CHRC do its thing and make its own determination based on the facts. What are some of you so frightened of?

Chill out...the truth will be determined in the fullness of time.

Published by: Guy
Mountain View, CA 01/17/2008 02:18 PM EST

Carl,

Is Mountain View that close to San Francisco that you are blind to the inate wrongness of homosexuality?

To say that homosexuality is wrong is not bigotry: it is the truth; perhaps an unpleasant truth for some (or many)!

Preaching that homosexuality is wrong or disordered is not hate speech. Saying that Jews should be burned is hate speech; or, that blacks should be lynched is hate speech. Or, even saying that homosexuals should be tied to fenceposts with barbed wire is hate speech.

But saying that homosexuality is unnatural, disordered, and wrong is not hate speech.

Published by: Scott
Seoul 01/16/2008 09:53 PM EST

Carl, you have it all backwards, the Church during the middle ages, protected the citizens against the unwarrented charges of witchcraft or heresy, and this is why the inquisition was established, to ensure consistency in the trail proceedings and that true theologians made the judgements. This having been said, in over three hundred years of the inquisition less than 4,000 people died as a result, compare this with one day under the reign of Statlin and then start to cast aspersions.

Published by: Guy Montag
USA 01/16/2008 01:28 PM EST

So much for free speech, eh?

Published by: Cindy
Florida 01/16/2008 11:35 AM EST

Not only does God have laws against sodomy which so-called Catholics twist to their own destruction but it was also against the law until homosexuals gained positions of higher authority in both Catholic and secular institutions and changed them. How can it be a crime and against the law and then no longer be so today. Men change like the wind but God's truth is eternal. As St. Thomas More said, I am the King's good servant, but God's first."

Published by: Malcolm
Perth, Western Australia 01/15/2008 07:05 PM EST

In some countries single mothers receive welfare payments from the Government. This payment is openly criticised by some of its citizens, but no one takes them to court because of their stance. There are some who say that sex outside of marriage is a sin - they, too, are not taken to court. It is well known that the homosexual lobby as well as some atheists and agnostics criticize Church teachings. Well, they have every right to do so. And, if this Insight magazine believes that homosexual relationships, whether legal or not, are sinful it also has the same right to say so. I think it is time this magazine took this very biased Human Rights Commission to court for trying to impose its agenda or philosophical views on others. Perhaps, this might stop the bullying tactics employed by the Commission.

Published by: Stephen Lord
Saint John 01/15/2008 05:21 PM EST

The commissions should be abolished. They are being used to quash freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Published by: Carl
Mountain View, California 01/15/2008 04:05 PM EST

The truth is that official religious bigotry does incite some to commit hate crimes against marginalized minorities like homosexuals. And for that, the church should be held as accountable as white supremacists are for dehumanizing non-whites or radical islamic imams are for dehumanizing non-muslims.

While it may be true that the official policy of the Catholic Church calls for tolerance and compassion towards homosexuals; in the provinces, small towns, and in some pulpits this message is often lost in the rhetoric and what comes across is really hate speech.

Shouldn't the state try to protect powerful groups from bullying and endangering members of marginalized minorities? Imagine how the Dark Ages might have turned out better for all those people murdered as witches, warlocks, and heretics by the Catholic church if the state had been able to step in and prevent the Catholic church from such wanton murder of those they felt were 'lesser' in their God's eyes?

What some Catholic speech does to dehumanize and marginalize homosexuals has some similarities to what Catholics claim abortionist speech does to dehumanize unborn babies.

Published by: Jason
Louisiana, USA 01/15/2008 02:30 PM EST

Canada is so close to being communist. This article proves that by wanting to censor the Church and the truth.

ADD A COMMENT (Your e-mail will NOT be published):


NAME:
CITY/STATE/COUNTRY:
EMAIL:
COMMENT:

PLEASE ENTER THE SECURITY CODE DISPLAYED ABOVE:
Chars:

* Thanks for your comments. The number of messages that can be online is limited. Length should not exceed 1500 characters. CNA reserves the right to edit messages for content and tone. Comments and opinions expressed by users do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of CNA. CNA will not publish comments with abusive language, insults or links to other pages.

ADVERTISING
CNA does not necessarily endorse these advertisers. Please proceed with discretion. If you feel that a website announced has inappropriate or offensive content, please send it by e-mail to catholicna@catholicna.com