For those who have been following Canada’s human rights tribunals and their decisions against Christians who express moral opposition to homosexual activism and same-sex marriage, the name Stephen Boissoin should be familiar to you. I won’t go into the whole history of his case, however, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal recently ordered him to stop talking about homosexuality from the perspective of his evangelical Christian faith. Moreover, the government tribunal ordered him to apologize for his previous expressions on this topic as a Christian, and has prohibited him from criticizing the government process to which he had been subjected.
Admittedly, given the stridency of his letter that brought about the original complaint, as well as the way he was characterized in the mainstream media, I expected a sort of Fred Phelps light.
This impression was wrong.
I realized how wrong it was within seconds of speaking to him last week for the first time.
Stephen struck me as anything but hateful. He came across as gentle, albeit fervent like most evangelicals (although he doesn’t admit the label, calling himself a simple Bible Christian). Moreover, he expressed genuinely felt concern for the emotional, spiritual and physical welfare of those who practice the homosexual lifestyle. I think part of the problem was the fact that the theological vocabulary between Catholics and Protestants has evolved differently since the Reformation. So quite often things that are understood or interpreted one way by one, are misinterpreted another way by the other.
However, there is one thing Catholics and evangelicals share besides their faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God. And that is a 100 percent conviction rate before Canada’s human rights tribunals on Section 13.1 cases. The legal persecution makes no distinction among Christians.
Which is why I felt it important that others see this side of Stephen Boissoin – the side many have neither seen nor heard because their impressions of him are drawn from secondary sources. These sources are not always sympathetic or balanced. I am grateful to Stephen for graciously accepting the invitation for an audio interview and podcast.
It lasted for a little over half-an-hour. I am currently breaking it down to four parts, converting to video so that I can upload it to YouTube, and will be posting it to Catholic Light as it is uploaded.
Part One
Part Two
Part Three
Part Four
Category: Controversies
A moderate Canadian Muslims comments on the Steyn case
Many Americans are familiar with Mark Steyn’s current run-in with the British Columbia Human Rights Commission. One of the most fascinating commentators on this controversy has been Tarek Fatah, a Muslim-Canadian author, activist and one of the founders of the Muslim Canadian Congress. He is well-known to Canadians who follow this controversy as a civil libertarian and a leading voice of Muslim moderates in Canada. He is also known to journalists as a candid interview.
Fatah’s position on the Steyn case is unique to many who have expressed strong opinions. He disagrees vehemently with Steyn and his book America Alone, against which the Muslim author has leveled some pointed criticisms. However, Fatah also publicly defends Steyn’s right to voice his opinions. As a best-selling Canadian author himself, Fatah has spared no criticism of the Muslim activists who denounced Steyn before the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal.
While I may not agree with everything Fatah says in this interview, I felt it was important to offer his words unedited (except for a brief exchange in the middle, where a friend or family member chances in on the interview without realizing it). He offers some excellent insights and definitely lives up to his reputation for candor. That, and a fine sense of humor as he compares Canada’s human rights commissioners to angry mall cops and dares Canadian Islam’s more fundamentalist elements to drag him before the tribunal.
Please note that while the following is audio only.
Interview with Tarek Fatah, part 1
Interview with Tarek Fatah, part 2
Hooray for Cdl. Mahony!
No, it’s not April 1. I really am cheering for the Archbishop of L.A. who has barred dissident Australian bishop Geoffrey Robinson from speaking in the Cardinal’s diocese during his book tour.
Thank you, Eminence, for joining the Australian bishops in their particular effort to spread sound teaching of the Catholic faith.
‘Tis the season for disrespect to human dignity
Across the street from Framingham’s “Shoppers World”, a disused computer store has become the site for an exploitative exhibit of human remains from China. Y’know, China, already notorious for its human-rights abuses?
The exhibit started a little before Halloween — oh, no, that’s not exploitative — and it sounds like just the place to drop in for a little break from Christmas shopping.
Thanks be to God, there is somebody with the guts to stand up and state publicly that this shouldn’t be going on: a Jewish pharmacist from a few towns away. God bless him for telling it as it is.
(Photo credit: Globe staff)
Is a little cold water unwelcome?
There must be something malfunctioning over at the Rorate Coeli blog. I posted a comment there yesterday, but today it’s gone.
The story “New Catholic” posted is a typical bit of fodder for the disgruntled: show a picture of a bishop at some event sponsored by a non-Christian religion, use the caption to put some words into his mouth, and accuse him of committing idolatry.
Now, as with most of these scandal-stories, there’s less to it than meets the eye, so we shouldn’t exaggerate it. The event wasn’t a religious rite, it was an award ceremony, and it wasn’t held at a Hindu temple, but at the Pope John Paul II Cultural Center in DC. And whatever Abp. Sambi meant to do by lighting some lamp, you can be confident that he had no intention of offering adoration to some non-Christian god.
That’s what my comment on the story said, but it’s disappeared now. I do hope it wasn’t censored for casting cold water on the overheated mood of the other readers.
