Lawyers Trump Human Rights

The Ontario and British Columbia Law Societies here in Canada have banned graduates from Trinity Western University's Law School from becoming lawyers in those provinces.  The reason has nothing to do with academic credentials.  The reason lies in the university's requirement that students sign a pledge not to engage in sex outside heterosexual marriage.  Period.  Full stop.  Why the pledge?  Trinity Western is a Christian School, based on their view of Christian morality.

The lawyers, in self-righteous rage, accuse the school of discrimination against homosexuals - the school violates their human rights!  Bull feathers!  Homosexuals can attend Trinity Western without any fear of discrimination as long as they honour the school's moral code.  The ban on sex applies equally to single heterosexual males/females as it does to homosexual males/females.

What the lawyers are fundamentally missing is the definition of "human rights"  as it applies to Canada.  In many other countries the fight for "human rights"  has a very different meaning, based more on life-threatening issues or fundamental freedoms that we already have.  Here are some examples.  The right to criticize the government without being jailed or shot (China, North Korea etc);  the right to convert from one religion to another (Iran etc)  the right for a female to drive a car  (Saudi Arabia etc).  The list goes on and on.

In Canada, the definition of human rights has a much more limited meaning because we've had fundamental rights and freedoms for centuries - they are entrenched in our Culture and in our Constitution.  Human rights in Canada means the right NOT to be discriminated against because of a "group characteristic" you have, over which you have no control.  Examples include your race, gender, disability, sexual orientation etc.  Human Rights has nothing to do with your behaviour, only your group characteristic.

The introduction of Human Rights laws in Canada paralleled the struggle for Civil Rights in America in the 1960's.  The massive discrimination against African-Americans had similar issues here.  When I was working for the Human Rights Commission in British Columbia, I was struck by the hard attitudes employers had against hiring women, aboriginals or whatever group they were prejudiced against.  Often, they could not or would not look beyond the group characteristic to see the individual beneath.  Even today, I am still amazed at some of the idiotic prejudices held by intelligent people.

But I digress.  The point is that human rights has nothing to do with behaviour - it has everything to do with discrimination against someone simply because of who they are.  If Trinity Western banned homosexuals from attending their law school, I would be the first one on the barricades.  But their moral code relates to behaviour, not group characteristics.

P.S.  To all you clever ducks out there who read this and say "Eureka I've found the Achilles heal in this argument".  Wrong!  I know what you're going to say - but you lose - a married homosexual couple can attend Trinity Western, provided they sign the pledge like every other student.