Daaaamn this is nuts. I can’t look away.

Commissioner welcomes decision protecting LGBTQ people from hate speech

For the millionth time: what on earth are LGBTQ people? There are no such people, because it’s not possible to be both a lesbian and a gay man, let alone be lesbian and gay and bi and trans and whatever tf Q means at any given moment.

Forced teaming. Way to sneak the T in there whether the L and the G and the B like it or not. The Q is just a decorative whorl.

The BCTF v. Neufeld case began when the BCTF filed a complaint with the Tribunal after Barry Neufeld, a then-Chilliwack School Board Trustee, made a series of statements about trans and queer-inclusive education. The Tribunal found that some of these statements amounted to hate speech and that Mr. Neufeld discriminated against LGBTQ teachers based on their sexual orientation and gender identity and expression in relation to their employment, given Mr. Neufeld’s role as a school trustee.

The Tribunal found that six of Mr. Neufeld’s publications expose LGBTQ people to hatred or contempt based on their sexual orientation or gender identity, and 24 were in violation of discrimination protections. The Tribunal differentiated between statements constituting hate speech and those that indicated discrimination, although some statements fell into both categories. The Tribunal agreed with the Commissioner’s submission that a political opinion that is based on mis or disinformation and that is expressed publicly may cause harm by seeking to promote laws and policies that entrench barriers for equality-seeking groups and that such opinion can be discriminatory or hateful.

So men who claim to be women are an “equality-seeking group” now?

The Commissioner intervened in this complaint before the Human Rights Tribunal to provide submissions on the legal test for discriminatory speech. Previously, it was not clear that publicly expressed political opinions could be considered discriminatory, as opposed to just offensive speech that does not breach B.C.’s Human Rights Code. The decision makes clear that all forms of public speech that cause harm to a person based on a protected characteristic may be found to be discriminatory, even if they do not name that specific person.

Well doesn’t that just sum it up. “Before, we hesitated, because we’re not supposed to squelch political speech, but now we’ve come up with a way to squelch political speech every day and twice on Sunday. Go us!”