Suing for the Right to Be a Bigot

Via Feministe, two articles come to light that are a case study in why Canada was right to pass bill Bill C-250 a couple of years ago.

First, I must point to this article, in which we learn of anti-Gay slogans chalked up around a University Campus. These are the kind of things that can happen, but it's the sheer vileness of the slogans themselves that I find somewhat shocking. These are the kind of slogans that if they said "Jew" instead of "gay", would have police launching manhunts for the perpetrators. These are outright threats on the lives of GLBT students on that campus.

Then the Christian Right Wing starts to SUE because they don't like tolerance policies that include GLBT rights. Apparently, they believe that their religion is being impinged upon because they aren't allowed to say whatever they like against gays.

To my mind, there's a big difference between keeping your opinion to yourself (or being asked to), and uttering threats. While uttering threats is a crime in its own right, hate crimes laws give an extra avenue that judges and prosecutors can bring to bear when these cases reach the courts. The motives of the perpetrator become something that can be brought to into consideration far more effectively when there are specific provisions built into law.

Recently, "Christians" (and I put the term in quotes because the ones complaining have clearly not read the same scripture that I have - or they wouldn't be spewing the kind of nonsense that they do) have begun to adopt the cloak of the "Persecuted" - claiming that tolerance policies are unreasonable infringements on their freedom of religion. What they fail to recognize is that their personal freedom of religion, and right to be "offended", is bounded by the rights of others around them. (The same thing goes on in Canada, but our legal infrastructure is sufficiently different from the United States that the same tactics tend to run into brick walls)