Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

World

Op-Ed: Thank God discriminatory TWU law school denied accreditation

Faith-based university

The Ontario court ruled on Wednesday, June 29, that the faith-based Trinity Western University’s insistence on forcing students to sign a ‘community covenant’ that in part says they must abstain from sexual intimacy “that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman” is discriminatory.

The court of appeals upheld the right of the Law Society of Upper Canada to deny TWU’s law school accreditation in Ontario because of the covenant. Similar battles are going on in B.C. and Nova Scotia as law society’s grapple with the Langley-based university’s attempt to grant law degrees only to those who have the ‘right’ beliefs and deny entry to those who do not.

“My conclusion is a simple one,” Justice James MacPherson wrote for the (unanimous) three-judge panel. “The part of TWU’s community covenant in issue in this appeal is deeply discriminatory to the LGBTQ community, and it hurts.

“The LSUC’s decision not to accredit TWU does not prevent the practice of a religious belief itself,” Justice MacPherson continued. “Rather it denies a public benefit because of the impact of that religious belief on others — members of the LGBTQ community.”

The LSUP had ruled that the covenant is discriminatory against members of the LGBTQ community as well as against unmarried heterosexual couples. That is why they refused to grant accreditation to TWU’s proposed law school. Hallelujah!

TWU response to ruling

TWU now says they will take their case all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. They surely will lose and I for one am hopeful the Supreme Court refuses to take the case, which it can without giving its reasons. We are getting so much better as a society that we already know anyways.

A hallelujah to that, too.

TWU’s response to the court’s ruling was, in a word, pathetic. Indeed, they went so far as to lie. Here’s what Amy Robertson, a spokesperson for TWU, had the gall to say in an interview about the court’s ruling:

“It’s saying that a public organization like the law society has the freedom to say ‘this is what you may believe. Your freedom of religion is not that important,'” she brazenly said.

“Freedom of conscience and religion is one of the most profound privileges of being a Canadian,” Robertson (rather irrelevantly) added. “It gives us the right to believe in God and express that and it gives us the right not to believe in God and express that.”

The claim that because our courts, our society, is preventing a public benefit to be bestowed on TWU means we’re preventing them from following their religion is beyond nonsense. It is a shameful lie, especially repellent given it comes from a woman and institution that profess a love of truth and God.

Also ugly is a remark from TWU president, Bob Kuhn, who called not giving his law school accreditation an “assault” on a “small Christian community” and insisted this alleged assault was “being led by a powerful moral majority who seek to impose their views and enforce conformity and compliance on TWU as a price for entering the public arena.”

That is hyperbole of the highest order. Here’s this, Mr. Kuhn: Canadians do not tolerate discrimination and when we see it, and we see it, our courts root it out. Powerful moral (talk about the pot calling the kettle…) majority? Darn rights, a moral majority called Canada.

Remove discrimination

Don’t like all of this, Bob? Amy? There are countries that allow discrimination against the LGBTQ community and if your desire to bestow publicly-given advantages only to persons who agree with you on what a loving relationship is remains strong, you’re free to move to one and discriminate thusly.

You won’t be missed here.

Look, Canadian institutions grant accredited degrees to people who embrace all manner of religions. You can study law while believing tree-frogs created the world and should be worshiped and eaten twice weekly with tomatoes. Should you wanna invite only ‘tree-frogs-created-the-world’ believers to a meal at your home, no problem.

But if you try to administer a publicly given privilege only to those that share that belief, shutting out those that do not, you will be stopped. That is called fair play and it has nothing to do with trying to prevent TWU from worshiping as it wishes.

And here’s this: the students willing to sign the covenant are being punished by this ruling no more than students who are not willing to sign it. Neither are able to go to TWU’s law school, graduate then practice in Ontario. It’s a simple concept, so simple my grade-school grandchildren understand it, and my suspicion is Bob and Amy understand it, too, but they feel so morally superior they are trying to circumvent it.

Covenant: step backwards

Let’s not end with my words, inarticulate and infused with anger, but with the words of two who have practiced the law extensively. Two who clearly know that we are getting better and that to allow TWU’s discriminatory covenant would be a step backwards.

First then lawyer Peter Wardle, who said that as a practicing Catholic his decision to vote against accreditation was a difficult one. He also said that the denial is not about religion.

“This is not about TWU’s religious or private status as an institution,” Wardle, who voted against accreditation, said. “This is about TWU seeking the right to have us accredit their law school and we are a public institution.” He said that as a public institution the law society must not “turn a blind eye to the discriminatory aspects” of the proposed covenant.

And finally there are the words of lawyer Howard Goldblatt, who noted that in the interests of the public the protection and promotion of diversity and equity is a part of the mandate of the Law Society of Upper Canada and to allow discriminatory practices would be the abandonment of those principles.

“I cannot vote to accredit a law school which seeks to control students in their bedrooms,” Mr. Goldblatt said. “Which threatens to punish those who want to be free to be themselves and to engage in loving and meaningful relationships but who must sign what I consider to be an offensive and morally diminishing agreement.”

And a hallelujah to that, too.

Written By

You may also like:

Business

United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said the carrier was reviewing recent incidents and would redouble safety initiatives as needed - Copyright AFP Logan CyrusUnited...

World

US President Joe Biden speaks during a reception honoring Women's History Month at the White House - Copyright AFP Brendan SMIALOWSKIDanny KEMPUS President Joe...

Business

A Milei marks 100 days in office, thousands protest his austerity measures - Copyright AFP Luis ROBAYOLeila MACORArgentina’s President Javier Milei has slashed public...

Life

The Michelin Guide unveiled its annual list of the best French restaurants, praising the "cultural dynamism" of a new generation of chefs.