I have noticed much of the coverage of the Boissoin victory last week in the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, and it is like everybody wants a pound of his flesh.
I feel compelled to come to his defence, because much of the coverage is startlingly politically correct, and very disturbing, as well as narrow minded, and inaccurate. Except for that it has been great, NOT.
This man, Stephen Boissoin, had given his life to the care of youth, not concerned about their sexuality in the sense that he did not discriminate and say I will help you but you, no. He took them all in, many of them into his home when they had no place to stay. He dealt with the problem kids, the ones everybody else rejected. Somebody has to show these kids love, to guide them to a better path than the self destructive path they are currently on.
He wrote a bloody letter to the Editor of the Red Deer Rag 7 years ago, and some self important individual took offense at it, because it was critical of his own personal agenda. He made a human rights case out of it which was absurd, except that that is the kind of chicanery that happens at HRCs. Political correctness ran amok and for 7 1/2 years they hounded and pilloried Stephen, until finally a real court held them to account.
So, it's over right. Hell no. Now, the cockroaches are coming out of the woodwork, with their own liberal agendas, and that is even scarier.
Take for example, Stephen's home town Rag. It is no wonder that small city newspapers are dying. They deserve to. Here is what they had to say over there about Stephen, after you cut through the victory stuff. You know how newspapers report things in an unbiased manner, so you can digest the facts and come to your own opinions. Well, the Red Deer Rag is not in to that, and in fact most everyone from Justice Wilson on down has managed to get their digs in. I am pretty sick of it, though it's not about me and I don't have to live with this crap.
So the Advocate/Rag started off their article titled "The door to free speech" with this unbiased paragraph:
Stephen Boissoin’s views on homosexuality are ignorant and offensive, but they should never have been censored, nor brought before the Alberta Human Rights Commission.Imagine if he were from out of town. They'd of had a field day dialing in on that one. Do they have any ideas of what Stephen's views are on homosexuality? No, but a line like this might sell a few more papers.
Much of the rest of the article reads like a mini version of the Judgment, slamming the HRC and Darren Lund for their perfidy. But then, they managed to balance that with these fine paragraphs:
Conducting a tribunal is not the way to expose insidious ideas. To examine such ideas, and to determine what bit of truth may rest within even the most contemptible of those ideas, we need open public discourse. We must be willing and able to challenge even the most central of ideas, so that they may continue to evolve and, ultimately, inspire.
To do otherwise, either by official dictum or choice, is to create a conspiracy of silence, and that breeds stagnation and, ultimately, revolt.
Hateful ideas should not go unchallenged in the court of public discourse and in the courts of the land if those ideas are judged to break our criminal laws.
I'm pretty sure that they are talking about Stephen Boissoin views that they don't have the foggiest clue about, but have plenty of opinions about. They seem to think the ideas that they know nothing about are "insidious", "contemptible" but possibly with a soupcon of truth, and then "hateful".
I guess if I was Stephen, I would not want to open myself up to debate about such issues, with the probability that the local Rag will ignore the truth of what I said, and write it up to be politically correct anyway, like this piece written by their Managing Editor. If that does not stifle discourse, I miss my guess.
Well, I am sorry for Stephen that this is not over, because I am pretty sure that he would just like to be able to spend his free time helping youth, something that the Managing Editor of the local Rag has no clue about, and is surely not going to thank Stephen for doing. He'd rather be politically correct and kiss butts.
Imagine what they would have said if he lost. The mind boggles.