Sunday, July 24, 2005


An employee at William Paterson University who was reprimanded for using a private e-mail to describe homosexuals as "perversions" says his rights were violated. Jihad Daniel, 68, of Hackensack, made his comments in March in response to an e-mail he received that had been sent university-wide by professor Arlene Holpp Scala. That message invited people to a film about lesbian relationships, titled "Ruthie and Connie: Every Room in the House." Daniel, who works repairing the university's computer networks, responded in an e-mail to Scala that he did not want to receive messages about "Ruthie and Connie." "These are perversions," he wrote as part of his one-paragraph response. Daniel went on to write that "the absence of God in higher education brings on confusion. That is why in these classes the Creator of the heavens and the earth is never mentioned."

Scala forwarded the e-mail to a university office responsible for handling discrimination complaints, saying she thought it was threatening and also went against the school's anti-discrimination policy. The publicly funded university reprimanded Daniel, saying his comments were derogatory and demeaning.

Daniel, who also takes communications classes part-time at the university, challenged the reprimand. "Even if someone didn't like what you said, you still have the right to say it," said Daniel, who told The Record of Bergen County that he was expressing his Muslim beliefs. Daniel's appeals have been rejected by the university. A Philadelphia-based organization, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, has taken up the case and says it will fight to have the reprimand removed.


Winnipeg's Museum For Human Rights: Canada's $300 Million Temple of Ideology

Right at the heart of Canada a host of the most influential, wealthy and socially liberal Canadians and world leaders are planning to construct the most powerful propaganda institute the country has yet seen. A giant glass blaze of light constructed at the crux where the Red and Assiniboine rivers meet, with deliberate architectural ties to mother earth and native Indian earth spirituality, the Museum For Human Rights will eventually serve as the temple of Canada's new state ideology. It will be a `sacred' spot where Canadians can come together and learn to worship Canada's most destructive political document, the deceptively named `Charter of Rights and Freedoms' of former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau.

This secular temple will be a place for Canadian schoolchildren to be taught to marvel at their country's `achievements' in advancing what are questionably, if not outrageously, called `Human Rights' since the implementation of the 1982 Charter. Mingling with legitimate exhibits about the internment of the Japanese in WWII and other true human rights violations justly mourned, will be exhibits championing reproductive `rights', sexual `rights', same-sex `rights'.

The Winnipeg museum will be the Sunday School of the left, where police, military and political personnel will be taught the new double-speak of ideologically defined and dangerously limited "human rights", and be trained in the most effective means of discovering, discouraging and punishing `bigots' and `extremists'. And it will be a place for the more ambitious to consider the next logical step of introducing these `rights' to the rest of the world, of evangelizing the globe in the light of the Charter's new world religion of humanistic ideology.

But, there is something deliciously right about architect Antoine Predock's winning design for the museum. A huge, shapeless construct of glass in the tradition of the Crystal Palace, to be erected in Winnipeg, the building is designed, according to the architect himself, to be an "apparition" resembling a cloud, "light filled and buoyant". When all is said and done the delightful final impression is a building designed to look as vaporous and vacuous as the false religion and the empty idol which it will have been created to celebrate.....

Repeated remarks by those involved in the costly venture have indicated that all the exhibits of the Museum will be seen through the lens of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Trudeau himself will most certainly be one of the museum's most celebrated personalities. This is hardly surprising as Trudeau's disciples are powerful, influential, and passionate; but it doesn't bode well. Canada seen through the lens of the Charter is the mere skeleton of a formerly strong, free and solidly grounded nation, stripped of its flesh and its life.

Typical of the delusional liberal attitude towards the Charter, in a 2003 interview shortly before his death, `Izzy' Apser went so far as to compare it to the American Declaration of Independence.... The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, on the other hand, is boring and philosophically and legally vague, fraught with juicy loopholes, ripe for exploitation by one who knows how....

One way of coming to a true understanding of the Charter, and through it the purpose and meaning of the so-called Museum For Human Rights, is to understand the man behind the Charter, former Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau..... Trudeau, more than any Canadian PM, shoved his personal convictions, including the Charter of Rights, down the gagging throat of his country. Western Canadian columnist Link Byfield, wrote in a September 2000 Globe and Mail article that "Parliament annoyed [Trudeau], so he bulldozed his Charter of Rights into the Constitution (1982) and surrendered statutory supremacy to the court."

In the last twenty-two years since its inception the Charter has lead to the worst abuses of judicial authority in Canadian history. Ian Hunter, in an article entitled "Canada's Judicial Captivity", printed in 1997 in First Things, explains. With the advent of the Charter, he says, "Canada ceased to be a country of parliamentary supremacy and became.a country of constitutional supremacy, where the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is `the supreme law the land'." However, "the problem with constitutional supremacy is that constitutions are not self-interpreting." There, as Hamlet would say, is the rub.

The Charter is an amalgamation of various rights which in the very act of being placed in writing are stripped of their breath and soul and instead exist in a permanent and antagonistic tension with one another. That is, none of the rights in the charter are absolute, and all are left completely open to the interpretation of a small number of un-elected judges who enjoy years of unaccountability with extended periods of tenure. In the midst of a conflict Canadians are now reduced to yelling out "I have a right!", and then sitting back to observe which right will come out on top this time around.....

"The Canadian voter still goes to the polls quadrennially" says Hunter, "but is it is judges who have imposed abortion on demand (R v. Morgentaler), who came within a single vote in the Supreme Court of creating a Charter right to physician-assisted suicide (R. v. Rodrigues), and who are systematically eradicating any normative distinction between homosexuality and heterosexuality (M. v. H.). Canada now has same-sex `marriage' especially thanks to several activist judicial decisions based on the Charter, despite the fact that the Charter's framers specifically rejected including `sexual orientation' in it. However, this didn't stop Paul Martin, just before the June 28 vote that passed Bill C-38, from stating, about the marriage redefinition bill, "this is about the Charter" and "a right is a right and that is what this vote is all about tonight".

Not only have the Charter and its authors introduced a powerful dictatorship of relativism, but so too have they imposed the added scourge of the dictatorship of the judiciary. Better yet, the relationship can be explained thus: the dictatorship of relativism is the religion, the Charter its idol, and the judges and certain politicians the priests who sacrifice truth on the triple altars of `tolerance', `freedom without responsibility' and `political correctness'.

All that the members of this new religion of ideology need now is a place to gather and worship - a temple. And they are determined to build themselves one-Canada's Museum For Human Rights.

More here

Lawyers hurt kids: "Fearful of lawsuits, authorities everywhere have been stripping playgrounds of dangerous things like teeter-totters, swings and even sandboxes. Now elementary schools in Broward Country, Fla., have playground signs that read: "No running." One mother interviewed for the July 18 South Florida Sun-Sentinel fretted about her children and others being bored at playgrounds where the only unregulated activity seems to be grubbing in the dirt. But Joe Frost, who heads the University of Texas' Play and Playgrounds Research Project, looks at the problem differently. "Play is one of children's chief vehicles for development," the Sun-Sentinel quoted him saying, and "right now it looks like we're developing a nation of wimps."

No comments: