Christian ads promoting Biblical moral standards pulled after complaints

This story is from Life Site News.

Excerpt:

The Christian group “Bus Stop Bible Studies” has voluntarily removed one of the forty ads it is currently running on Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) buses and streetcars because the transit authority received some complaints about one of the “Life Questions” posed for consideration by riders.

The ad in question asks “Does God care if I’m gay?” and directs the reader to the Bus Stop Bible Studies website to find the answer, which said, in part, “We know from passages throughout Scripture that God hates homosexual acts BUT no more than any other sinful act. Some individuals seem to place homosexual acts in a special class – God does not. Sin is sin.

“Homosexual activity is no better or worse than heterosexuals engaging in sexual activity outside of marriage. The Bible refers to these people as fornicators.”

This answer has since been removed from the website and replaced by a comment from the Bus Stop Bible Studies founder David Harrison saying, “It has become apparent that, while one is free to ask the question, `Does God care if I’m gay?’ one is not so free to answer the question from a Biblical perspective.

[…]Harrison told the National Post that he supported last year’s controversial Atheist Bus Ad campaign, which had said, “There’s probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life” posted on TTC vehicles, saying they were an expression of freedom of speech.

With regard to the restrictions now imposed on his campaign he observed, “The prevailing attitude at the time is you’re free to say anything that I’m in agreement with, which is not real dialogue. In a supposedly liberal society, ‘liberal’ has become a one-word oxymoron.”

Actually, this is a pretty moderate answer. Aren’t Christians even allowed to embrace a Biblical position on morality in public anymore? I know that Toronto isn’t Calgary, or even Ottawa, but this is ridiculous.

Related posts

Do public school teachers want to give children a quality education?

The Miami Herald reports on a new bill designed to improve education quality. (H/T Weekly Standard via ECM)

Excerpt:

The proposed law, which passed the House of Representatives 64-55 and the Senate 21-17, would base half a teacher’s evaluation on progress that students make on tests, most of which have not yet been developed. If the students improve, educators could earn more money.

The current system rewards teachers based on years of experience, advanced degrees and extra certification.

Got that? So the bill would make it law for teachers to be paid based on their performance, (at least a little), just the way that you buy things from Amazon.com and Wal-Mart in the private sector. If you don’t like what you’re getting, then why should be forced to pay more for it?

Well, here’s what the unionized public school teachers did:

Miami-Dade schools are open Monday and parents are told their kids should come to class as usual, despite hundreds of teachers planning to call in sick to protest controversial legislation that would overhaul teacher pay and tenure.

At John A. Ferguson Senior High School in West Kendall Monday morning, the teacher parking lots weren’t as full as usual.

“There’s nobody at school,” said 17-year-old Stephanie Barrios. “Everyone’s being relocated to the cafeteria and gym.”

She said a two-page handout listed the number of absent teachers on Monday — about 180 out of 600, Stephanie estimated.

Unionized public school teachers are not actually grown-ups. They are in a state of arrested development, hoping to put off the demands of adulthood by throwing tantrums whenever anyone threatens to take away their over-paid, underperformed jobs. There should not even be a federal department of education, in my view, and teachers should not be allowed to unionize. Why should parents be forced to pay for a low-quality education, which is really nothing more than coercive indoctrination of children by the secular left? Private school teachers are hard workers – they get paid based on the quality of what they produce.

This article is a fine, fine piece by Mary Katherine Ham, and I highly recommend that you click through and read the whole thing. I wish I had written it myself, since school choice is a big concern of mine. It should be a concern for all parents. We need to be pushing for more homeschooling protection and more school voucher programs.

UPDATE: I’ve received an e-mail from a hard-worker public school teacher who wanted me to say that not all teachers are happy with what the unions do, and that some public school teachers do work hard in spite of the anti-child, anti-parent stance of the teacher’s unions. Some teachers work extremely hard on their kids, teaching them well and volunteering for sports and field trips. But the union won’t allow them to be paid more. Some teachers have to work in very difficult environments like Compton, CA, dealing with children who are very challenging. In those cases, the hard-working teacher may part of the solution for a child looking for a better life.

Wouldn’t it be great if those good teachers didn’t have to join unions and could be paid what they are really worth? But the unions says no way.

Must-see videos on education policy

Related posts

MUST-READ: Rex Murphy attacks the Canadian Human Rights Commissions

Another National Post column by Rex Murphy.

Excerpt:

There’s a trial going on in B.C. right now, under the insanely diluted and degraded understanding of the once-noble concept of “human rights,” giving full anguished adjudication – complete with lawyers and a tribunal chairman – over a heckling spat, already three years old, at a Vancouver supper/comedy club called, surely by the gods of irony, Zesty’s.

The good old days, when all a comedian had to worry about was flop-sweat, bad timing and where his or her next joke was coming from, are long gone. Nowadays, thanks to the infinitely expanding reach of bureaucratic commissions, a couple of bad-tempered moments at Zesty’s have summoned up the Mr. McGoos of the B.C. Human Rights Commission. It is currently determining whether a lesbian patron’s human rights were violated by a journeyman comic’s obnoxious heckling of her – brought on, he says, by her equally obnoxious heckling of him. The comic in question is Guy Earle.

It’s a case remarkably similar – in its gutting of common sense, its ability to bring on a puzzled frown from anyone who first hears of it – to that of the owner of a St. Catharines, Ont., fitness club. He recently was taken before the Ontario Human Rights Commission by a prospective member who, while awaiting “gender reassignment surgery,” claimed the right to undress in the club’s women’s locker room. The women objected. The owner denied. The member filed a complaint. That case, after much financial injury and anguish, was summarily dropped. No apology, no redress, no nothing for the owner.

Is Canada a serious country? Do we staff close to a dozen offices, provincial and federal, spend nearly $200-million across the great expanse of the country, to explore the human rights implications of rude heckling in comedy clubs? Or, the human right to undress in the locker room of your choice? For this, did the great armies of the West storm the beaches of Normandy? For this, did Solzhenitsyn and Sharansky endure their endless nights of hell in the gulag?

By some crude osmosis, or just from the luxuriant carelessness of our pampered lives, we have overturned one of the great concepts of all human law. The concept of human rights, as experience and history inform us, is protection from the state’s power, not oversight, interference and punishment by the state’s power.

The core concept of human rights is the protection of the irreducible safety and dignity of the individual from the massive and arbitrary power of the state. Not, the state wandering in, with its apparatus and procedures, its boards and tribunals into the doings, or speech, of the individual.

[…]If we go out into the other world, the world that doesn’t have quite as many comedy clubs, we see what real human rights are.

A man standing alone in front of a tank in Tiannamen Square – there’s a human rights moment. The multitudinous horror of ethnic cleansing, raging warfare in the Congo, the nightmare of North Korea, the acid-tossing at schoolgirls by the Taliban – there are people all over this world trembling at the might of the state, seeing their lives foreshortened or ruined, subject to unspeakable horrors at the hands of warlords and tyrants and revengeful dictatorships — these are the fields of real human-rights violations.

Read the whole thing. It’s really hard to excerpt from a column this fine. It seems as though some Canadians still have some fight left in them.

UPDATE: There is also a follow-up column in the National Post.

Excerpt:

Just as human rights laws were written largely by advocates who profit from finding racism when none exists, employment legislation has been written by left wing advocates with an interest in the perpetration of unions and the emasculation of corporate power. The resultant risk is not merely that of Canadians becoming infantilized; it is the risk of employers becoming too complacent or timorous to resist the increasing encroachments of the nanny state. It is also the risk of an environment wherein the best thinkers and innovators depart to more commodious jurisdictions. Many employers, particularly small businesses, are crippled by legislation that pits employers against the resources of the state. Canadians might never have agreed to this legislation had they realized its implications.

In a current case, because of arcane labour laws applying to the non-residential construction industry, an elevator installation company was unionized without a vote, despite the fact only two of its seven employees had signed union cards. And those two immediately renounced their union memberships. Although the Labour Board was aware the union lacked a single supporter, it certified the company.
Worse still, the employer was bound to a collective agreement in which it had no input. The agreement was negotiated by major players in the industry.

Smaller employers, such as this one, will cease operating if they are forced to pay the same wages and benefits.

It’s not just that the secular leftists take away human rights like the right to free speech. They also attack business and the free market itself. And that means that Canadians are actually losing jobs because of political correctness.