Punished for Speaking the Truth
Tue, April 09, 2019 | Author: Rod Taylor | Volume 26 Issue 14
Our nation has crossed into the twilight zone of unreality. Where once we based our judgments on truth and scientific facts as well as on biblical morality, we now criticize and vilify people who refuse to adjust their speech to conform to current deceptive phraseology.
In a recent ruling of a BC Human Rights Tribunal, the HR adjudicators ruled that referring to Ronan Oger (who is now using the name Morgane Oger) as a man, using masculine pronouns when referring to him or refusing to accept his new self-identification as female qualifies as “hate speech”. The judges ordered Mr. Whatcott to pay $55,000 for Mr. Oger’s hurt feelings. This is the level of lunacy to which our society has sunk and if we allow this judgment to stand, we can expect the downward trend of national self-deception and compelled speech to continue.
George Orwell’s oft-quoted 1984 presented to readers in the last century a world in which history was being rewritten daily by mindless bureaucrats to conform it to the changing backdrop of official government policy positions. As long as the citizens were compliant and submissive, the whole nation could be led to believe a history that was patently untrue, even denying their own memories. If history can be changed, the present can be manipulated and the future controlled. That’s what it’s all about: control. Why let citizens make the rules when politicians and bureaucrats can do it for them?
Today, in our nation and many others, there are assertions and opinions that are being put forward as factual and “undeniable” understandings of social and scientific realities. Based on these false premises, policies are developed, along with socially acceptable responses to certain situations; those who comply—those who abandon their own convictions and kowtow to the demands of the ruling class, the mainstream media and the virtue-signalling moulders of minds—are allowed to express their “opinions” as long as they do not differ in any substantial way from the opinions of the ruling class.
If however, someone dares to express a sentiment that does not support the latest social experiment or that questions the science behind a belief, he or she is rapidly and rabidly taken down the hall where the torturers, the extractors of confessions, will torment, threaten, fine, bribe and pressure the misguided individualist in an attempt to produce docility, compliance and submission.
In Canada, where freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of association have long been the hallmarks and the evidence of our democratic values, the uttering of true statements used to be seen as honourable and essential in the quest for justice. When men and women were sworn in to testify in any court case, the purpose was to make untruthfulness less likely and even punishable as an offence.
Yet in this Human Rights Tribunal, three judges themselves chose to ignore reality and called upon the defendant, Mr. Whatcott, to do the same. They insisted that he use female pronouns when referring to Mr. Oger, a biological male. This obviously has nothing to do with scientific facts, such as DNA or the real history of the case that began with the birth of a male person who still has the DNA of a biological male.
In Orwell’s book, common terms were given new meaning . . . which, of course, makes the English language nearly meaningless. Slogans such as “War is Peace” and “Freedom is Slavery” were meant to deceive and to influence behaviour. Today, the manipulators of thought tell us that “gender is fluid”, that “a nine-month old pre-born baby is not a person”, that “the entire universe, the stars, planets and every species, including man, came about by cosmic accident” and that telling the truth is “hate speech”.
Jesus gave us a different example. He said: “For this cause I came into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth”. John 18:37 If He placed such a high value on truth, so should we. The punishment of a man for speaking the truth is itself a crime. Those who use their positions of power—whether as judges, politicians, teachers or members of the media—to pressure their fellow-citizens and to silence them or to force them to say things that are not true . . . those who do such things are guilty of heinous crime against the consciences of those they torment. They should be held accountable. Such things are done in dictatorships where the people are ruled by fear, not in peaceful democracies.
By the grace of God, Bill Whatcott is not easily terrorized. He has sacrificed much over the years in his consistent defence of the truth. The judgment against him by this panel can be overturned in a real court of law. I encourage everyone who values the truth, everyone who values free speech and everyone who values justice to contribute to his defence. You can do so at GoGetFunding.
You may have a different approach or different tactics than Bill. Each of us has our own part to play in the defence of freedom. Bill has chosen a difficult road, one that very few of us would choose. Yet the judgment against him is a judgment against all of us.
Of course, we in the Christian Heritage Party also need your help as members and supporters so that we can defend Life! Family! and Freedom! in the political realm. If you’re not already a member, we invite you to join us here. Let’s not allow social manipulators to take away our freedom. This Fall, CHP candidates will be speaking at campaign platforms across the country. Help us defend your freedom.
Other Commentary by Rod Taylor:
- Rolling Away the Stone
- Punished for Speaking the Truth
- Politically-Correct Discrimination
- New York Emulates Canada’s Open Season on the Pre-born
- By-Elections or Buy Elections? The SNC-Lavalin Scandal Nobody’s Talking About
- The PM’s Reign Fails the Just and the Unjust
- Venezuela: The Tragic Tatters of Socialism
- The PM’s Filthy Money
- New Year, New Challenges, Same Faithful God
- From the Stable to the Throne
- Justin and the Beanstalk: Free Trade, Fair Trade and Failed Trade
- “Following This Law Is Not Optional . . .”