Support NeoGAF

[Liberty4all]

The Archbishop of Toronto spoke out against the Ontario government's plan to introduce anti-bullying legislation that would allow anti-homophobic clubs to be called 'gay-straight alliances.'

At a news conference Monday afternoon, Cardinal Thomas Collins questioned why provincial legislation should affect how Catholic boards fight bullying.
"Why is a piece of provincial legislation being used to micromanage the naming of student clubs?" he said.

On Friday, the Liberal government at Queen's Park said it would introduce legislation that would require all schools to accept clubs by that name.
Collins insisted that a broader approach to the issue was needed, rather than one particular method.
"Why are Catholics not free to design their own methods to fight bullying, and provide personal support to students, as long as they attain the common goal of a welcoming and supportive school?" said a statement from the bishop earlier on Monday.

The Ontario Catholic School Board Trustees Association also spoke out against the proposed bill.
"We are concerned that the bill's focus on only one type of anti-bullying group overshadows the needs of students bullied for many other reasons," said Marino Gazzola, president of the association.

Education Minister Laurel Broten told CBC Radio One's Metro Morning on Monday that the names of clubs do matter.
"To many of our students, we know that the term 'gay-straight alliance' has great meaning, and that words matter, and that if you can't name something you can't address it," Broten said.

Collins, who is also president of the Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario, said "it is not helpful when Queen's Park moves in" to give students control of an issue instead of elected trustees, and warned other religious groups they too could be targeted.
"Please consider the implications for all when legislation is enacted that overrides the deeply held beliefs of any faith community in our province, and intrudes on its freedom to act in a way that is in accord with its principles of consciences," wrote Collins.
"If it happens to us, it can happen to you, on this and other issues. When religious freedom becomes a second class right, you also will eventually be affected."

http://news.sympatico.cbc.ca/local/on/toronto_archbishop_opposes_gay-straight_alliance_bill/473016a9


A little history for those unfamiliar with how the Canadian school system works. When the Canadian Constitution was created one of the rights created was for Catholics to have their own seperate school system. Basically when the British finally crushed the French in Quebec, alot of extra religious freedoms (To Catholics) were granted in part to help with the integration of the French population. It's a little more complicated than this but that's the gist.

The thing is the Catholic seperate school board in Canada is government funded ... basically you have a choice when sending your kids to school, you can choose either the public school system (similar to the United States) OR you can choose to send your kid to the Catholic Separate School system which is also free paid for by your tax dollars.

So the big issue is this: Should a religious organization funded through the government and taxpayers dollars be able to use religious beliefs to discriminate based on sexuality?

Keep in mind that the right of the Catholic schools to recieve this government funding is basically enshrined in the Canadian constitution (our version of "right to bear arms" sort of). Not exactly a perfect analogy but you get what I'm saying ...


My opinion is this ... no other religious organization gets government funding like this (Protestant, Jewish, other religious schools are all private and VERY expensive) ... I don't think that

a. Government and taxpayers should be continuing to pay for religious based education
b. That Government should have any right to dictate how religious organizations deal with issues that are somewhat core beliefs
c. That the Catholic school system should be private based education like all other religious based schools

I'm not sure where I fall though on this specific issue. I believe in equality for all but I just as strongly believe in the protection of religious rights and freedoms (which is also enshrined in the Canadian constitution).

The solution isn't to strip the Catholic School Board of their Constitutionally protected rights. It's to strip them of their public funding IMHO.


Another article addressing the issue:

One of the classic episodes from the Seinfeld comedy series was one in which Jerry and George are mistakenly identified as gay and try to convince a reporter it’s not true, couching each denial with the line “…not that there’s anything wrong with that,” as insurance against accusations of homophobia.

It was a hit because it managed to make both sides of the argument look ridiculous. Overwrought homophobia was lampooned at the same time the show skewered simple-minded political correctness. Too bad people in the Ontario education community don’t watch TV, because leaders in both the Roman Catholic Church and the Ontario education ministry are in the process of making themselves look silly in a confrontation of Seinfeldian proportions.

The issue is a serious one, but the actual argument has become ludicrous. Cardinal Tom Collins, Catholic archbishop of Toronto, is now in a heated debate with the government of Dalton McGuinty over whether the word “gay” should be used in clubs for gay students.

The Cardinal, head of the archdiocese of Toronto, is not against schools setting up clubs that will fight against bullying, including bullying of gays. But he doesn’t want them identified as “gay straight alliances”, the term supported by the government.

The government, as if to prove it can be just as pig-headed as the next guy, not only insists on the term, but has amended legislation to force schools to adopt it if students insist on it, which of course they will. Educators will now be in breach of the rules if they use any term that doesn’t include “gay”. You don’t like the name, you can’t have the club … but, by the way, you HAVE to have the club if the students want one.

Obviously there is a much larger question at issue here. It has to do with the Catholic position on homosexuality. The Church is dead set against conferring any sign of approval on homosexuality, which it considers “intrinsically disordered,” but is also opposed to any hint of discrimination or insensitivity. It simply wants to deal with the situation in its own way. Cardinal Collins wonders “why a piece of legislation is being used to micromanage the naming of student clubs.”

The reason is that the province has seized on the fight against bullying with evangelistic zeal and will brook no opposition to its crusade. Not only the goal but the methods must be adopted wholesale. It treats the Catholic position as a sign that it’s not fully on board with the program, even though sexual identity didn’t even register on a 2006 school board study into the causes of bullying. The main reasons people were picked on were body image, grades or language. Ontario, declares Mr. McGuinty in his best premier Dad pose, has “fundamental values that transcend any one faith.” And does he think those values will collapse in rubble if some high school omits the word “gay” from a club’s name?

While both sides look faintly ridiculous, the danger of the debate is much greater for the Catholics. Ontario separate schools receive $7 billion a year in funding, from a government that has an enormous deficit and is desperate for a means to cut spending. In creating the impression of instransigence, the Church feeds the notion that it wants the government money, but without following government rules. Its position might be more favourable if it had put forward a strong case in its defence, but it hasn’t. Cardinal Collins argues that using the word “gay” in a club’s name turns it into a club about sexual orientation, rather than one about bullying. That may be true, but the government’s intent remains clear: to offer support to students viewed as being in danger of becoming targets. No one is going to run clubs advocating good Catholic boys and girls “go gay”.

Still, it could be argued that, in its way, the province is bullying the Catholic school system. It’s the vulnerable party here, since it has a lot to lose in offending the McGuinty government’s sense of mission and its love of dictating lifestyles and choices to Ontarians. If the government suspects Catholics are less than sincere in their opposition to bullying, or secretly approve of discrimination against gays, it should be up front and say so. The Church, for its part, could be far more forthright in making clear its determination to accomplish the goals of the legislation.

The issue, after all, is supposed to be about bullying. Not about who gets to pick the name of the club.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...w-get-sidetracked-in-spat-over-naming-rights/

 

[Stumpokapow]

"Why is a piece of provincial legislation being used to micromanage the naming of student clubs?" he said.

Yep, that's exactly it, this is a bill to mandate the naming of student clubs. There's no other issue being discussed here. You got it, dude (to the quoted Cardinal).

 

[Pandaman]

i'm confused; were catholic schools blocking the formation of gay and/or anti-homophobic clubs?

So is this bill mandating that schools must atleast have this club under this name so there's atleast one 'gay club' at every school?

 

[Liberty4all]

i'm confused; were catholic schools blocking the formation of gay and/or anti-homophobic clubs?

So is this bill mandating that schools must atleast have this club under this name so there's atleast one 'gay club' at every school?

I added a second article to the OP with a slightly better explanation.

Basically the Catholic schools already have clubs that are welcoming to people who are gay/lesbian ... but you aren't allowed to label your club as a "gay/Lesbian" club due to Catholic religious reasons.

Government is in the process of passing anti bullying legislation that has parts that deal SPECFICALLY with gay/lesbian bullying. A part of the bill states that ALL government funded schools will be required to allow gay/straight alliances (clubs) if the students want it. Catholic School Board is up in arms because it goes against their religion to "openly" have that in their schools. They generally prefer to be "covertly" welcoming to all with generalist anti discrimination policies that dance around religious issues like homosexuality.

 

[Liberty4all]

Another article explaining why the Catholic School Board is upset (video at link as well):

TORONTO - Religious parents concerned over provincial anti-bullying legislation which they believe pushes a sexual agenda on their children will rally at Queen’s Park Thursday. Kim Galvao, chair of Concerned Catholic Parents of Ontario, said people of many faiths will attend the 2 p.m. protest. They aim to convince the Dalton McGuinty government to withdraw Bill 13 or at least its most controversial sections.

“(The government) must respect the rights of parents to teach their children about human sexuality according to their faith convictions without being undermined by the state,” Galvao said Wednesday. “The bottom line is this is too much information,”

Galvao said her organization agrees that bullying is wrong, but believes the legislation goes well beyond that principle in a manner that violates parental rights and attacks freedom of religion. Jack Fonseca, of Campaign Life Coalition, said the bill requires that all students in Catholic and public schools be taught the Equity and Inclusive Education In Ontario Schools guidelines developed by the provincial Ministry of Education.

The document refers to the “seven gender theory” — lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, transsexual or two-spirited, intersexed, queer or questioning, otherwise known as LGBTTIQ, Fonseca said. The guideline also says that a child’s gender might not be linked to their “birth-assigned sex,” which contradicts religious teachings, he said.

“The government’s Equity and Inclusive Education policy is being codified in law by Bill 13,” Fonseca said. “And it’s filled with other bizarre sex-related things that this government seems to be obsessed with.”

Bill 13 amends the Education Act to prohibit bullying based on race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status or disability. The Accepting Schools Act, introduced by the McGuinty government in response to the tragic suicide deaths of bullied teens, makes severe or repeat bullying punishable by expulsion.

Under the bill, school boards must accept student support clubs like the Gay-Straight Alliance, although the naming of the group would still be overseen by the board. Education Minister Laurel Broten said the Accepting Schools Act is about making all students feel safe, welcome and respected in their schools - a key ingredient for academic success.

“There is nothing ‘radical’ about making sure that every student feels accepted in our schools,” Broten says in a statement. “Catholic values include love and inclusion, acceptance and empathy — and that’s why Catholic educators and trustees are natural allies in this fight against bullying and why they continue to stand with us in that fight and in support of Bill 13.”

A preamble to the legislation says that the bill recognizes “a whole-school approach is required, and that everyone — government, educators, school staff, parents, students and the wider community — has a role to play in creating a positive school climate and preventing inappropriate behaviour, such as bullying, sexual assault, gender-based violence and incidents based on homophobia.”

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/03/28/religious-parents-to-protest-anti-bullying-legislation


Basically there is some fear on the part of religious organizations (and especially with the public funded Catholic School Board) that the new legislation will also push sexual education to children to include the seven gender theory:

The document refers to the “seven gender theory” — lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, transsexual or two-spirited, intersexed, queer or questioning, otherwise known as LGBTTIQ, Fonseca said.

I received this email from my old private high school board (Protestant):

News and Events
Bill 13 from XXX Board
XXX Board of Directors | 2012-05-10
May 10, 2012

Dear XXX parents, staff, students, alumni and friends,

By now you may have heard of Bill 13, Accepting Schools Act, 2012. This Bill was introduced by the Government of Ontario last November, in the name of diversity and equity. If the Bill is passed, it may lead to the formation of Gay-Straight-Alliance clubs in schools, give aggressive sex education to very young children and require school students to take part in gay pride parade. It will have profound negative impact to the children.

As a private school, XXXX Academy is not subject to this Act directly at the present time. However, the direction is alarming and as Christians, we need to be the salt and light of the earth. We ask that you be informed about this Bill. Evangelical Fellowship of Canada has prepared an informative document on Bill 13 with commonly asked questions and answers. You may find the document from this link: http://files.efc-canada.net/si/Educ...tly Asked Questions and Answers, Feb 2012.pdf

It is important we let our representatives at the Provincial Parliament (MPP) know our position. A sample letter can be found on XXX web site.

We also ask that you pray for the following:

1. The bill has passed the second reading and is under the consideration by Standing Committee on Social Policy. Please pray for these committee members that their hearts will be touched by the Truth.

a. Ernie Hardeman PC Oxford
b. Ted Chudleigh PC Halton
c. Jane McKenna PC Burlington
d. Amrit Mangat LIB Mississauga Brampton South
e. Dipika Damerla LIB Mississauga East, Cooksville
f. Cheri DiNovo NDP Parkdale High Park
g. Kevin Flynn LIB Oakville
h. Michael Mantha NDP Algoma Manitoulin
i. Jane McKenna PC Burlington

2. The bill may proceed to the third and final reading as early as end of May. We pray that the alternate bill, Bill 14, will be passed instead.

3. “Train a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not turn from it.” Proverbs 22:6 (NIV 1984). Pray for all the parents to recognize the honor and the responsibility to bring up their children based on His truth.

As a community, we propose we all spend some time on May 15 to pray for the items above. If you choose, please connect with your fellow XXX friends to pray together.

“If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.” 2 Chronicles 7:14. (NIV 1984)

In His Service,

The Board of Directors
XXX Academy

Members ofProvincial Parliament near 245 Renfrew Drive, Markham:
Riding
MPP
Email Address
Address
Phone Number
Markham – Unionville
Hon Michael Chan, MPP
mchan.mpp@liberal.ola.org
9th Floor, Hearst Block
900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1
416-326-9326
Richmond Hill
Reza Moridi, MPP
rmoridi.mpp@liberal.ola.org
4th Floor, Hearst Block
900 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1
416-325-4140
Thornhill
Peter Thurman, MPP
peter.shurman@pc.ola.org
Room 450, Main Legislative Building, Queen's Park
Toronto, Ontario M7A 1A8
416-325-1415
Scarborough-Agincourt
Soo Wong, MPP
swong.mpp@liberal.ola.org
18th Floor, George Drew Building Building
25 Grosvenor Street
Toronto, Ontario M7A 1Y6
416-325-4925
Willowdale
David Zimmer, MPP
dzimmer.mpp@liberal.ola.org
17th Floor
777 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario M5G 2E5
416-585-6763

For more contact info of MPPs, please clickon the link: http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/members/members_current.do?locale=en

Dear (Name of Your MPP),

I am a voter living at [provide address] and I am writing to you to express my concern over the Accepting Schools Legislation, Bill 13. As a citizen of this province I support legislation that prevents bullying of all people. However the Premier of this province is using this legislation to promote one group over others – the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered communities. As such, the legislation is biased.

The legislation will result in gender-related sexual health information that I am not comfortable with- curriculum which the Premier had removed from the Ministry of Education website in April 2010 because of the many citizens who expressed concern. I do not believe that such instruction will result in a more positive, healthier society.

The legislation mandates special clubs for certain students with certain characteristics (homosexual, racial, gender identity). Listing certain categories creates a system ripe for reverse discrimination, sending the message that certain characteristics are more worthy of protection than others. Instead of bringing more peace and unity, this can politicize the school environment and introduce divisiveness among different groups of students and parents.

Further the legislation mandates organizations, including religious groups, that rent space from a school board, must adopt the “standards of the school board”. This legislation goes far beyond respect for others, it is legislating what people must believe. I agree with the statement made by Allan Hubley, father of the late Jamie Hubley, when he stated, “This is one issue where partisan politics and special interest agendas should not get in the way of the ultimate goal: protecting kids from bullying”.

As a parent I raise my child to respect the choices of others. However, these amendments to the Education Act will put into place legislation that can be used to create an environment that is in conflict with the traditional values of our family and will lead to singling out/bullying of children from these homes.
This legislation is a form of social re-engineering, designed to appease a special interest group. As a voter, I am in favour of anti-bullying legislation for all, and favour amendments that include respect for people who subscribe to a particular faith or world view.

Regards,

[Full Name]

The government actually has two versions of the bill in play. One version doesn't really touch on gay/lesbian issues the other version does. Differences can be found in this document here on pages 12, 13 and 14: http://files.efc-canada.net/si/Educ...tly Asked Questions and Answers, Feb 2012.pdf (this document is put out by the Evangelical Association of Canada but is pretty neutral in terms of the chart on pg 12 - 14)

 

[Dude Abides]

This seems a bit similar to the controversy here in the US about books like "Heather Has Two Mommies," where some people seem to think that even acknowledging the existence of gay people in schools is pushing the alleged "gay agenda."

 

[ClassyPenguin]

The Catholic Church is so backwards.

 

[Liberty4all]

This seems a bit similar to the controversy here in the US about books like "Heather Has Two Mommies," where some people seem to think that even acknowledging the existence of gay people in schools is pushing the alleged "gay agenda."

The real issue is that it touches on Religious Freedoms versus Gay/Lesbian Rights ... typically pretty explosive issues when they meet head to head.

Because of how Canada was formed Catholics have their right to a public funded Catholic education, a right enshrined in the Constitution of the country. The Catholic church is essentially saying the formation of Gay/Lesbian clubs in their school system violates their freedom of religion.

 

[Red]

This seems a bit similar to the controversy here in the US about books like "Heather Has Two Mommies," where some people seem to think that even acknowledging the existence of gay people in schools is pushing the alleged "gay agenda."

I still don't know what the fuck "the gay agenda" even means. I hear it pretty often and it doesn't ever make sense.

 

[Liberty4all]

I still don't know what the fuck "the gay agenda" even means. I hear it pretty often and it doesn't ever make sense.

While I have no personal opinion on the issue I deal with extremely "religious" individuals often that love to throw that phrase around. Essentially, alot of religious folks feel that (and keep in mind the next part is ENTIRELY from a super religious/ultra conservative person's perspective, not mine):

"The gay agenda" is to get sexual education into the public school systems (indoctrinate youth at a young age) so that when they eventually get older they will help pass laws that set Gay/Lesbian/Transgendered rights such as the right to marriage.

Eventually "the gay/lesbian agenda" is to have discrimination of gay/lesbians to be put at the same level as discrimination against person's of colour once was. At that point government will pass laws that hold religious organizations legally accountable in terms of their hiring practices (or issues like this thread)/acceptance/etc ... "


Again the above is a synopsis of what I've heard from super conservative folks ... They look at the whole issue as being something where eventually their religious freedoms will be at stake.

 

[Kinitari]

I know the catholic school board has already been brow beaten in Canada in regards to the treatment of things like homosexuality in their schools, and their attitude right now seems to be a sort of... vague addressing of the issue without openly committing. This would force their hands a bit more, and pretty much force them to be openly supportive of homosexuality.

Tough. Heck, even if you weren't a publicly funded school system, I would want this sort of legislation to be applied. I'm proud of how progressive we are about homosexuality in Canada - but not so proud to think we're perfect, we still need to make strides.

 

[Red]

While I have no personal opinion on the issue I deal with extremely "religious" individuals often that love to throw that phrase around. Essentially, alot of religious folks feel that (and keep in mind the next part is ENTIRELY from a super religious/ultra conservative person's perspective, not mine):

"The gay agenda" is to get sexual education into the public school systems (indoctrinate youth at a young age) so that when they eventually get older they will help pass laws that set Gay/Lesbian/Transgendered rights such as the right to marriage.

Eventually "the gay/lesbian agenda" is to have discrimination of gay/lesbians to be put at the same level as discrimination against person's of colour once was. At that point government will pass laws that hold religious organizations legally accountable in terms of their hiring practices (or issues like this thread)/acceptance/etc ... "


Again the above is a synopsis of what I've heard from super conservative folks ... They look at the whole issue as being something where eventually their religious freedoms will be at stake.

So the gay agenda is basically the struggle for equal rights.

 

[Liberty4all]

I know the catholic school board has already been brow beaten in Canada in regards to the treatment of things like homosexuality in their schools, and their attitude right now seems to be a sort of... vague addressing of the issue without openly committing. This would force their hands a bit more, and pretty much force them to be openly supportive of homosexuality.

I think it's far more likely it will produce a Constitutional challenge based upon both the right to Freedom of Religion and The Catholic School's (protected) Rights under the Constitution (Section 93). The Catholic School board in the end takes it's marching orders from the archbishop who takes his marching orders from Rome.

They don't exactly have the most progressive Pope right now ...

 

[Tideas]

he is right in a sense though that ppl are bullied for many more reasons than just gay straight

 

[Liberty4all]

So the gay agenda is basically the struggle for equal rights.

I guess it depends who you ask !

 

[Dude Abides]

So the gay agenda is basically the struggle for equal rights.

Yes. And acceptance. To these types of people, gays are inferior. While they may be willing to tolerate the existence of gays, they don't want homosexuality to be seen as normal or equal to heterosexuality, either in the law or in the culture.