Recently, a gay rights activist threatened to denounce me to the Ontario Human Rights Commission for daring to suggest in a column published by The Free Press on Nov. 17, 2007, that same-sex couples do not have an equality right to adopt children. Specifically, I said: “Given that very few children raised by a homosexual couple have grown to adulthood, it is impossible to prove the competence of homosexuals as parents.”
An array of intellectuals denounced that statement as ignorant, malicious and ill-informed. But for all their bluster, not one could cite a single study to refute the experience of centuries which indicates that with rare exceptions, children thrive best under the care and guidance of their natural parents who are united in the traditional bonds of marriage between husband and wife.
However, truth is of no account in the censorship proceedings of a human rights tribunal. Typically, Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibits the publication of even true statements that are likely to expose a protected person to hatred or contempt.
If a human rights tribunal were to order Steyn to apologize for his article and to pay several thousand dollars in damages to Elmasry, would Steyn comply?
Not likely. And neither would any other self-respecting journalist obey such an oppressive edict. They would all prefer to languish in jail as a prisoner of conscience rather than obey a court order requiring them to apologize for upholding the truth as they are given to see the truth.
There is only one sure way of preventing such a travesty of justice in Canada. The censorship powers of our human rights tribunals must be abolished. The sooner, the better.