All Posts Tagged With: "human rights"
Trans woman files human rights complaint
Minister allegedly said she “spooked” the governor general
Photo by Yukon Human Rights Commission
Northwest Territories’ Finance Minister Michael Miltenberger is facing a human rights complaint for allegedly telling a transsexual student at Aurora College that she should leave the school because she had “spooked the Governor General.”
Gabrielle Landrie told CBC News that she was standing near a computer lab with a friend on Dec. 9, wearing a dress, when Minister Miltenberger made the comment and asked her to leave. She says she was later told that the Governor General’s route had been changed to avoid her.
Although she had initially agreed to leave, she says she decided against it as she had homework left to complete. She was asked to leave again by Miltenberger.
Student alleges hate crime at Seneca
School conducting review
A 22-year-old student at Seneca College in Toronto alleges he was the victim of a hate crime on campus, according to Xtra.ca. The police are calling it an “altercation that turned into a fight.” The student came to Canada with the help of the Iranian Railroad for Queer Refugees. He alleges that on Nov. 25 he was attacked by a male student he has classes with. He says the fellow student accused him of gawking, punched a nearby telephone booth, pulled his hood down over his face and then cut his throat, most likely with a ballpoint pen. During the attack he was called “faggot” and “bitch.” Tony Vella of the Toronto Police Service told Xtra that a 21-year-old man was arrested in connection with the incident, charged with one count of assualt with a weapon and then released. Seneca officials say they are “conducting a general review into the matter.”
Ottawa condo bans student renters
But Carleton student fights back
A condo board in Ottawa passed a rule in October that essentially outlawed students from renting in their building, because it required renters to be families, common-law or otherwise intending to live together permanantly. But Carleton University student Nicholas McLeod has collected enough signatures to force a vote on the ruling, which could overturn it at the annual general meeting at the Southgate Road building on Dec. 6. according to Metro News.
Queen’s University’s marching band suspended
Distributed sexually offensive pamphlets
Queen’s University’s bands were suspended yesterday after distributing offensive pamphlets.
The pamphlets contained phrases that made light of rape, lewd photos and nods to bestiality, according to the Queen’s Journal. Entitled “The Banner,” versions of the mock song-books have been distributed to band members for years. The Queen’s Bands Executive sent an email Wednesday to bands members ordering them to destroy all hard copy or digital versions.
But it was too late. They were asked to meet with the Vice-Provost and Dean of Student Affairs, Anne Tierney, who suspended the club. Band members have developed an action plan that could allow them to be reinstated next year. It includes human rights training.
The media frenzy around the pamphlets comes at a bad time for Queen’s officials. Yesterday, they distanced itself from a fake ad that plays up Queen’s stereotypes—sexual proclivity included.
“Racialized ethical vegan” alleges discrimination
Wants $15,000 from Ryerson University
A master’s graduate has filed a complaint asking for $15,000 from Ryerson University because she says she was discriminated against for being a “Racialized Ethical Vegan.” Sinem Ketenci, a 37-year-old from Turkey, says that a senior professor at Ryerson disagreed with her comparison of maltreated animals with marginalized people, which caused another professor to withdraw his recommendation of her for a PhD in social work. “This systemic discrimination and harassment that silences marginalized minority peoples’ voices, such as me as a Racialized Ethical Vegan, is a serious threat towards freedom of speech and freedom of belief,” Ms. Ketenci wrote in her complaint to Ontario’s Human Rights Tribunal, which will now decide whether the complaint should move ahead to mediation. It’s unclear what this has to do with race, but Ketenci told the National Post: “If I were white, born here, this case would not have happened.” Ryerson has not yet responded.
Minority job applicants get fewer callbacks
Study reminiscent of 1948 Maclean’s article by Pierre Berton
Photo by |Mahin| on Flickr
A new study has shown that Canadians with English-sounding names on their résumés get many more responses from employers than those with foreign-sounding names, even when applicants have identical qualifications and make it clear they can speak English or French proficiently.
Philip Oreopoulos and Diane Dechief of the University of Toronto found that of the 8,000 fake job applications they sent out, those with English-sounding names at the top were 47 per cent more likely to receive callbacks in Toronto than resumes with Greek, Indian or Chinese-sounding names. In Montreal, English names had a 39 per cent advantage. In Vancouver it was 20 per cent.
Oreopoulos told The Globe and Mail that subconcious discrimination may partially explain the difference. Another part of their study showed that human resources professionals cite concerns over language or social skills for the possible differences in their reactions—despite the fact that such skills can easily be determined with a simple phone call.
Continue reading Minority job applicants get fewer callbacks
21+ rules may violate human rights code
Adults of legal age have a right to be served: expert
Photo by Yoshimai on Flickr
Young adults, especially men, are being barred from entering drinking establishments in Canada based solely on their age — and these are men who are have reached the provincially-mandated minimum age for drinking. Many clubs are restricting entry to those over the age of 21. Women often get a free pass if they’re of legal age.
But the practice may be a Human Rights Code violation, Raj Anand, former commissioner of Ontario’s Human Rights Commission told The Globe and Mail. “There are certain circumstances in which the stereotype of irresponsibility that attaches to young, unmarried men is sanctioned by law –– see their car insurance rates –– but visiting a bar or nightclub is not one of them. In my view, exclusion of an adult of drinking age is a violation of the Human Rights Code.”
Club owners and event planners defend the practice, suggesting that younger men are more likely to arrive drunk and spend less money.
But the rules are the rules. So young men, the next time a bouncer looks at your ID and tells you scram, just point out that it’s a human rights code violation. That ought to get you in, right?
Confucius Institutes break human rights rules
Profs working in Canada “must have no record of Falun Gong”
Photo courtesy of IvanWalsh.com on Flickr
A rule imposed by Confucius Institutes — an educational arm of the Chinese government that operates on at least eight Canadian campuses — breaks “all human rights codes in Canada,” human rights lawyer Clive Ansley told The Epoch Times.
The main CI website says that overseas volunteer Chinese teachers must have “no record of participation in Falun Gong,” a spiritual practice with roots in Buddhism and Taoism. China’s government vehemently opposes the practice and has arrested and killed many adherents, according to Amnesty International.
Barb Pollock, vice president of external relations at the University of Regina, told The Epoch Times that she did not know about the rule, but promised that her school’s agreements with China “have everything to do with academic freedom.” She also said that although teachers are selected by their Chinese partner, Hunan University, “what they teach [here] is our business.”
In June, the University of Manitoba rejected the idea of a Confucius Institute on campus. The University of British Columbia has also declined. But more than 320 exist worldwide, where they offer credit and non-credit courses in language and history.
China says that the funding of CIs—$150,000 initially and up to $200,000 per year after that— is meant to promote cultural understanding. But along with the money, schools have signed constitutions that say that “institute activities must … respect cultural customs, and shall not contravene concerning laws and regulations in Canada and China.”
Terry Russell, an Asian Studies professor at Manitoba, says that such rules compromise academic freedom, because academics are dissuaded from discussing Taiwan, Tibet, Falun Gong, or the Tiananmen Square massacre. That could result in an unrealistically positive view of China among the students who pass through the credit courses they offer in Canada, he says.
10-year-old students weren’t discriminated against
Mother had filed complaint against the University of Ottawa
A complaint of age discrimination by the mother of two 10-year-old twin boys has been dismissed.
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario complaint was filed by Wendy Foster against the University of Ottawa after her boys were removed by the school from a course on “science and social activism” about a month after they began attending classes in 2006.
They had been initially allowed into the class as “special students,” but the school later decided that they could not attend because they did not meet the entry requirements.
The HRTO adjudicator, David Muir, said there was nothing discriminatory about the school’s requirements.
Although he dismissed the case because the Ontario Human Rights Code does not apply to people under 18 years of age, he wrote that the university’s regulations:
“clearly contemplate that a person applying for entrance to a university level course will have completed a secondary school education or, by virtue of their age and life experience, have achieved a level of intellectual development sufficient to participate meaningfully in a university environment.”
Student union’s human rights complaint against Montreal police
“If you do nothing illegal, we won’t bother you,” say police.
Photo courtesy of Yannick Gingras on Flickr
A Quebec student lobby group claims that a Montreal police squad, which monitors anarchists and “marginal political groups,” has violated the province’s Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.
Now, they’re going to file a human rights complaint.
Four members of L’association pour une solidarité syndicale étudiante, including three of the group’s executives, were arrested in connection with several protests in late March against higher tuition fees. Some of those protests turned violent.
The group claims that those arrested were targeted because of their political views. ”There is no doubt about the political nature of these arrests,” ASSÉ spokesperson Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois said in a press release. “This is clearly an attempt by the [Montreal police] to decapitate the Quebec student movement on the eve of one of its historical struggles.”
Montreal police deny that the arrests were politically motivated. ”When you occupy an office and someone gets a broken wrist and there’s a broken window, that’s not a peaceful demonstration,” spokesperson Ian Lafrenière told the Montreal Gazette. “I agree that people should be allowed to demonstrate. If you do nothing illegal, we won’t bother you.”
The human rights complaint focuses on the police’s Guet des activites des mouvements marginaux et anarchistes (surveillance of the activities of marginal movements and anarchists) or GAMMA squad, which ASSÉ claims conducted the arrests. Police said GAMMA did not make the arrests in question and that the squad was formed as a reaction to increasing levels of violence at protests.
Another activist group, the Coalition Against Repression and Police Brutality, has also filed a complaint accusing the squad of discriminating against people based on their political views.
ASSÉ says it represents more than 40,000 students across Quebec.
Asking for transcripts isn’t a rights violation
Failure was law school’s fault for not accommodating my chronic pain: student
A University of Windsor law graduate has had her Ontario Human Rights Complaint dismissed.
Anica Visic accused the law firm Elia Associates, where she articled in 2007, of discrimination after boss Patricia Elia asked to see a full transcript of her grades several weeks into her job with the firm — and then fired her. Visic had previously submitted only unofficial grades.
The full transcripts showed that Visic failed her first year of school in 2000 — a fact that she blamed on the University of Windsor, which she alleged failed to properly accommodate her disability. Visic said she suffered from pain in her arms, shoulders, upper back and neck, which made writing difficult. Windsor allowed her to repeat her first year, but didn’t expunge the failed courses.
Visic was dismissed from her job for her uncooperative behaviour — not because she had failed, Elia told the Windsor Star. “She made our staff cry. She was argumentative. Clients didn’t want to work with her.” Elia recommended to the Upper Canada Law Society that Visic article for at least six more months before writing her bar exam.
UBC faces human rights complaint
Prof alleges she was denied job because of racial discrimination
The University of British of Columbia is facing a human rights complaint over alleged discrimination against a professor who is of Chinese descent. The complainant, Jennifer Chan, told the Georgia Straight that she has been subject to “systemic racism” throughout her tenure at UBC. She was first appointed as a postdoctoral fellow in the department of political science in 2001, and joined the faculty of education in 2003.
After being denied appointment to the prestigious David Lam Chair in Multicultural Education in late 2009, Chan filed complaints with UBC’s equity office as well as with the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal. “The David Lam Chair selection committee deviated from established faculty recruitment practice. It did not contact any external referees; applied shifting and unstated criteria during the search process; kept no factual record of the search process; and did not consider employment equity,” Chan said in a statement released to media this week.
The internal complaint has since been dismissed, and the Human Rights Tribunal is scheduled to hear the case on May 12. In a statement published by the Georgia Straight, UBC Scott Macrae said that the case was investigated “exhaustively,” and that “no discrimination” was uncovered. “The University has accepted those conclusions.”
Medical residents leak emails to support human rights case
Saudi doctor says he was dismissed from UOttawa program for complaining of discrimination
A University of Ottawa medical resident is alleging he was kicked out of the program in retaliation for filing a discrimination complaint against a faculty member. Waleed AlGhaithy, and two other medical residents, held a press conference Wednesday to release more details about a complaint they have filed with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal against the university. Prior to his dismissal, AlGhaithy says that he filed an internal complaint against university neurosurgeon Eve Tsai.
The three residents, all of whom are from Saudi Arabia, released emails, allegedly sent between senior faculty, that they say supports their case. One message stated that “If the complaint against [Dr. Tsai] is dismissed there are going to have to be some significant consequences for the involved parties (dismissal/suspension) or we are going to be facing this ad infinitum.” Another referred to AlGhaithy as “a real destructive force within the program.”
According to the Globe and Mail, the university is reserving comment, and is waiting until the human rights hearing before making its case. “The university feels that’s the proper forum where we will speak out,” a spokesperson said.
Human rights complaint filed against UOttawa
Saudi medical residents allege ‘discrimination, reprisal, and intimidation’
A complaint has been filed against the University of Ottawa with the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, by three medical residents. Drs. Waleed AlGhaithy, Khalid Aba-Alkhail and Manal Al-Saigh, are alleging “discrimination, reprisal, and intimidation,” according to a press release distributed by the Students’ Appeal Centre on Sunday.
The appeal centre has scheduled a press conference for 10:30am Wednesday in the central administration building where further details of the complaint will be made public. The media release stated that “The evidence for reprisal and targeting is unambiguous in the form of emails between hospital executives, including emails leaked by an inside source and sent to hundreds of faculty and residents.” AlGaithy, the release adds, “was summarily dismissed despite his outstanding academic and professional standing.”
Appeals centre director Mireille Gervais suggested to the Ottawa Citizen that the alleged discrimination is related to the ethnicity of the three complainants, all of whom are from Saudi Arabia. “It’s in line with what we’ve been seeing at this institution,” she said. When the Citizen contacted the university for comment, a communications director said, “We’re bound by confidentiality, so I can’t really discuss any of the details of these cases.”
Should HRCs pick your faculty dean?
A University of Windsor law professor is asking the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario to appoint her Dean of Law
The rules of playground politics clearly state that the teacher has ultimate veto power. You and your buds can decide to spend this recess playing tag; no touch-backs allowed, past the bench is out of bounds, and the kid with no friends has to watch from the sidelines. But if Herr teacher happens to wander into the courtyard, instructing you to change the game to Red Light/Green Light (with Loner Louis as the coveted “Stoplight” leader, no less), well, you’re pretty much out of luck. Grit your teeth and wait for the “signals,” kid; the teacher has ultimately spoken.
Luckily, most of us graduate from third grade and develop more sophisticated expectations when it comes to governance, hierarchy and internal politics. Simply put, by about sixth grade, kids realize that the brainiac biology teacher who doesn’t know a tennis ball from a badminton birdie isn’t really the most appropriate guy to be divvying up sides for dodgeball. Of course, logic of this sort is known to furiously implode (even in the sacred halls of academia) once Human Rights Commissions are thrown into the equation. Case in point; the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal is suddenly deemed qualified (by one woman and her lawyer, at least) to appoint hires to the dean of law chair at the University of Windsor.
Humans Rights Commissions in Canada are the provincial and Federal bodies that will bring a comedian to court for making disparaging comments to a heckler, ensure your human right to breastfeed while in a public pool, and enforce your right to counsel rape victims at a women’s shelter, even against their vulnerable objections. Now the Human Rights Commission of Ontario has been asked to guarantee Emily Carasco’s human right (?) to a five-year term as dean of law at the University of Windsor.
Carasco, a law professor at the university, says her candidacy for the dean of law position was spoiled by a false accusation of plagiarism, as well as racism and sexism. She has requested an order appointing her dean for a five-year, renewable term, $60,000 from the school for “injury to dignity” and $15,000 from colleague Richard Moon who raised the plagiarism allegation and, in a salacious twist, is a vocal defender of Canadian Human Rights Commission. (I’m sure he’ll be asked how that medicine tastes in due time.)
Carasco was one of two shortlisted candidates for the top law-school job, along with Toronto lawyer Scott Fairley who taught at the university in the early 80s. After an extensive interviewing process involving students, staff, administration and faculty, neither candidate was appointed and the university started a fresh search in the spring. While Fairley called the process “rigorous but fair,” Carasco expressed a different interpretation in her July submission to the Tribunal:
Put quite simply, the Faculty of Law and the University of Windsor, in spite of lip service paid to equity and social justice, did not want a visible minority woman as Dean of the Faculty of Law, no matter how well qualified.
Moreover, my decades of advocacy on behalf of equity at the University, an integral part of my identity as a visible minority woman, had left them in no doubt that in my Deanship I would do more than pay lip service to equity, and this prospect was unwelcome.
In short, Carasco believes the search committee, complete with Equity Assessor, a member of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, visible minorities and women, just didn’t want her because she wasn’t a white male. Throw in Moon further spoiling her chances with that plagiarism allegation, which Carasco claims was also racially motivated, and Carasco was out of the running. So what’s the clear resolution? Have the government step in and force the school to appoint Carasco dean of law, obviously. Indeed, it’s the only resolution.
The Ontario Human Rights Code prohibits employment discrimination based on factors that are unrelated to the job, including race, colour, ancestry and sex. But nowhere in it can I find a clause ensuring one’s right to “stick it to the jerks who denied you the job.” If Carasco was robbed of fair consideration based on race and sex, she should be compensated accordingly, but not given a five-year chair. Indeed, government shouldn’t appoint deans any more than teachers should be able to decide who’s “it.”
- Photo by Joe Gratz
Update on UBC Student Union complaint to the UN
Emergency Council meeting being set up to retract complaint, ask AMS President Blake Frederick to resign
For the first update on the story, click here.
Amazingly enough, student councillors don’t like finding out that they’ve launched a formal human rights complaint to the United Nations over press releases, and news stories, and tweets.
An motion to call an emergency meeting of AMS Council has been brought forward, with the following items being on the agenda:
1. That Council retract the complaint to the UN against the VC and Canadian governments, and direct the AMS Communications Department to issue a press release stating that this was not the will of the Society.
2. That Council prohibit the expenditure of any further AMS resources of any nature on this action.
3. That Council request that President Blake Frederick resign from Council.
4. That Council request that VP External Affairs Tim Chu resign from Council.
If the motion to ask for resignation passes, and Frederick and Chu choose not to resign, council will serve the two of them with notices of impeachment.
Why are they so upset? Well, filing an official human rights complaint with the United Nations is a pretty big deal. In their steps to do so, there was a pretty giant lack of communication.
— In March, the executive committee signed off on the following:
“The AMS will pursue a legal battle with the Province on the basis that the recent Education funding cuts are against the UN charter.”
— The AMS (meaning, Frederick and Chu) looked for firms that would take on the case. They decided upon Pivot Legal Society, which is pretty much a straight forward legal advocacy group for the disadvantaged.
— In October, Pivot Legal Society informed the AMS that the case was feasible, and they would go ahead pursuing the case with their consent. Frederick and Chu claimed that the executive committee agreed to go forward with the case, even though a specific motion was not passed. Two other members of the executive committee (VP Finance Tom Dvorak and VP Academic Johannes Rebane) disagreed that the question had even been brought up.
— The AMS collected affidavit from people concerned about high tuition rates, and gave them to Pivot Legal Society. They determined that Markle (who was no longer a student) had the best story—despite the fact Markle made upwards of $20,000 in 2008/2009 as an AMS Executive—and thus would be included in the complaint. The AMS is paying for Markle’s fees.
— The Communications Planning Group, which you would think would play a big part in this, was not notified of the press conference, the press release, or that this was even on the table. The student newspaper The Ubyssey wasn’t even informed of the press conference (other local media were). Nonetheless, the press conference happened. And the controversy began…
On the whole, it looks that at most 4–5 people within the student union knew what was going on, and that they deliberately tried to keep this decision as secret as possible. While it’s fair to argue that there were on-the-record minutes that said the AMS was investigating this, it seems absolutely preposterous that something of this magnitude (assuming you believe that the United Nations has legitimacy in the area of provincial post-secondary education, which is extremely questionable) would be kept so quiet, and never debated publicly. Oh, and the society is on the hook for thousands of dollars in legal fees. Given all that, don’t be surprised if a) This complaint to the United Nations is quickly retracted, and b) Blake Frederick’s reign as President ends within a fortnight.
The right to be an exceptional Canadian
Should religious freedom trump Canadian law?
No.
Ahem. Some context:
The Hutterites are a Christian sect who live by a strict code based on the Ten Commandments and the teachings of Jesus Christ. The group fled persecution in Russia in the early 20th century and some immigrated to Canada, settling in farming communities of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
Some Hutterians believe that to willingly have their photograph taken violates the second of the Ten Commandments, which forbids idolatry and graven images. It is on this belief that the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) was forced to rule just days ago.
In 1974, the Alberta government began issuing photo driver’s licenses. Special licenses were available for those with religious objections until 2003 when the Alberta government began requiring photos for all licenses. The change was made as a measure to protect against identity theft. The Hutterites won cases before the Alberta Court and the Alberta Court of Appeal, but the SCC ruled 4-3 on July 24 to uphold Alberta’s provincial rules. As it stands, all Alberta driver’s licenses must have a photo.
Now, back to the overarching question. Admittedly, the fact that this particular religious debate is so inexhaustible makes me think the hastiness of my initial “no” was a bit brash. I’m not suggesting we adopt the American melting pot, and I don’t support religious stifling in the name of conformity. If, for example, identity theft concerns would not be properly quelled by license photos—as lawyers for the Hutterites contend—I would see no reason to force religious objectors to have their pictures taken. But laws exist for a reason (yawn), which is (in theory) to promote the greater good. (Yes, I know what happened during the Dreyfus affair, yes I understand the concept of “scapegoating the innocent” and no, I don’t think this was a show trial.)
These debates seem to arise precisely when the authority of Canadian law is called into question. I’m not talking about whether or not new Canadians should paint flags on their faces on July 1st, I’m talking about whether citizens should be forced to uncover their faces while voting. (See Harper’s abandoned plan.) And frankly, I’m not sure. I don’t know enough about identity theft and voter integrity to authoritatively conclude. But I do think we should stop running scared when the issue sparks a little dissent. (Again, see Harper’s abandoned plan.)
I also think us feeble sideline commoners should take some perspective. In my opinion, the question should not be “What right does the government have to interfere with religious belief?” but, “Why is the government interfering with religious belief?” If the answer is a valid one (and to some, it will never be) maybe we should put our tissues away.
The great thing about Canada (yawn) is that we have choices. If you really don’t want your picture taken, hitch a ride. (Yes, I know, “but driving is a right” and “we should strive to accommodate” and other like claims…) If you don’t like the education system, send your child to private school. Eat fish on Friday, if you want, and only watch satellite television. Believe what you will about life and death and holy texts and pray to whomever or whatever you wish—as long as you stick to the law. If you can’t, it’s on you to find a way to make it work, not the government. In Canada, we live by Canadian law. If you don’t like it, find a way to live with it. Because if I step into your mosque, I’m going to take off my shoes.
For more, see CBC News Indepth, the Toronto Star and the National Post.
robynoncampus@gmail.com
The new head of the class?
A controversial bill gives Alberta parents more of a say in school
Soon after the Alberta Tories began discussing how to revise the province’s human rights legislation early this year, Lindsay Blackett, the cabinet minister stickhandling the issue, received a visit from an interfaith delegation of religious leaders—evangelicals, Anglicans, Mormons and Muslims—led by Frederick Henry, the outspoken Roman Catholic Bishop of Calgary. Henry, who in the past has been less than shy about discussing such things as the future of Jean Chrétien’s eternal soul, laid out for Blackett the group’s concerns about including sexual orientation in Alberta’s Human Rights Act—and particularly how the topic would be dealt with in schools.
He argued parents should have more of a say in shaping sex-ed curricula, which he and others fear may encourage homosexuality and contravene parents’ own values. As it stands, Alberta children get lessons on the changes of puberty in Grade 4, the perils of blood-borne diseases like HIV in Grade 6, and “safer” sex in Grade 9. Though sexual orientation isn’t specifically addressed in the curricula set out by Alberta Education, the teachers’ union website encourages teachers to create “safe, caring and inclusive environments” by including the topic. In talking with Blackett, Henry sought more control for parents. “We felt it’s high time that there be some attempt on behalf of parents to push back, because many of their rights are seemingly being ignored,” he says.
It’s always tricky to figure out how much social or moral education is just right and how much too much. Alberta is the first province to wade into the issue by giving parents what amounts to a veto. Even here it happened by accident. An update to the province’s human rights law was overdue: more than a decade ago, the Supreme Court’s ruling in Vriend vs. Alberta called the legislation unconstitutional because it failed to include sexual orientation as a ground for discrimination. And many on both the left and right hoped the Tories, under Premier Ed Stelmach, might excise Section 3, which deals with publications “likely to expose a person or a class of persons to hatred or contempt” and has led to controversial human rights cases.
Then Blackett did the unexpected. His Bill 44 added sexual orientation to the act but kept Section 3 intact. More mysterious still—and to the delighted surprise of social conservatives—he included provisions granting parents the right to remove children from lessons in which teachers plan to discuss religion, sexuality and sexual orientation—the only provincial human rights legislation to do so. Specifically, the bill permits mothers and fathers to pull kids out of sex-ed classes, though not from academic classes where, say, evolution is taught. And it grants them the power to file human rights complaints against teachers and school administrators who don’t notify them in advance of these topics.
Alberta may make evolution classes optional
Opposition says province is headed towards its own Scopes Monkey Trial
Educators and human rights experts in Alberta are worried that a proposed change to human rights legislation could make it tough to teach a number of controversial subjects.
The change says parents should be notified when classes “include subject matter that deals explicitly with religion, sexuality or sexual orientation,” and should have the right to ask that their child sit out that part of the class.
The term “religion” is extremely broad and could edge its way into almost anything that comes up in the classroom, said Dan Shapiro, research associate with the Calgary-based Sheldon Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership.
“It’ll be like a kind of Monty Python skit. You have to say: ‘Well, today we have to think about the Hindu student’s going to object to this and tomorrow the Jewish student to this and then the Catholic student to this,’ ” said Shapiro.
“It’ll be madly off in all directions. (Teachers) are strapped enough for resources and time to do their job properly and help educate children.”
Frank Bruseker, head of the Alberta Teachers Association, said he’s also concerned about what the new rules could mean. He’s worried that some parents might think mentioning different classes of worms would constitute a reference to evolution. He said a discussion of ancient geologic formations can’t be had without mentioning the world is billions of years old, much more than a literal reading of the Bible would suggest.
Meanwhile, history and literature from around the world are chockablock full of references to religious upheaval.
“Religion is kind of a fuzzy thing, in a sense, in that what some people see as religion others might not,” Bruseker said.
Opposition parties have hammered the government on the issue, saying the province is headed back to the time of the 1925 Scopes trial, in which a high school biology teacher in Tennessee was tried for teaching Darwin’s theory of evolution.
Premier Ed Stelmach conceded to reporters last week that the provision could be used to pull students out of classes dealing with evolution if parents preferred their kids be taught what’s in the Bible instead.
“The parents would have the opportunity to make that choice,” he told a news conference.
But Lindsay Blackett, the Tory minister responsible for human rights, said in an interview that the intention of the law is to only allow parents to pull children out when the curriculum specifically covers religions, something that only happens for a few hours each school year.
“It’s talking about religion (such as) Hindu, or Muslim, or that type of religion, not … the curriculum with respect to, for instance, evolution,” he said. “That’s science and we’re not arguing science.”
The rule wouldn’t apply to any topics that come up spontaneously in a classroom, he said.
“It’s not discussion, it’s curriculum. You cannot be the thought police, and we would never ever advocate that.”
