Time Immortal

Stephen Boissoin himself writes in with a comment — and perhaps even a clarification — concerning the letter by him which was cited in this article.

Just so people are aware, that letter was not just some baseless anti-homosexual rant. The newspaper gave it the title and it was published in the middle of the heated gay marriage, hate crimes bill, gay school books being added to the public school curriculum yadayadayada debates all across Canada. Had the gay activist not pushed for so much and destroyed so many or my liberties, that leter would not have been necessary.

In my own Province, the gay group Alberta — PFLAG had received funds from the AHRC, the same group of thugs that prosecuted me, to promote their very biased agenda to young people that homosexuality was “normal, necessary, acceptable and productive and has been for thousands of years.” To top it off, a pro-gay teacher in my city, same guy who filed the complaint against me, was inviting a gay minister to come into the public school to teach what he called “the pro-homosexual interpretation of the Bible.” He refused to invite a minister that held the traditional view so as to ensure his students had a balanced presentation.

Enough was enough….that letter was written to open the Pandora’s Box. To get people thinking and asking questions about the present imbalance of ‘gay rights’ which are agressively hindering the rights of others.

That letter, though the cause of my present persecution, has done what it was designed to do and I thank God that I had the opportunity to stand for truth and do my part. Had [Darren Lund] not filed that complaint, the letter and my views would have been contained to my Central Alberta community and the debate would have most likely ended in 2002. Instead, the world has access to my letter and I have been provided with a global pulpit for six years going.

Blessings,
Stephen Boissoin

One could not, I think, ask for a better reason to speak out than Pastor Boissoin’s closing paragraph. The issue of homosexuality is a complex one, involving moral theology and natural law as well as many other considerations, and certainly the present progressive tendency to rush in “with guns blazing” to make homosexuality “mainstream” is very concerning. People should have a right to speak out about the issue from every angle, including the moral angle, and in defence of what could be called traditional sexual norms. As Chesterton noted, “progress is a comparative of which we have not settled the superlative”, and progress for its own sake has in all ages of history been ruinous to the societies that have sought after it.

We, as Canadians, should have the right to have heady, long-winded, and powerful debates about matters which affect the fabric of our society, which threaten to alter it in ways that may be destructive to it. We should have had that debate about divorce. We should have had that debate about abortion, common-law partnerships, and a whole host of other things which have chipped away, little by little, and the centrality of the family in stable society. We need to have that debate about homosexuality, if only to avoid repeating past mistakes. When people are silenced, the opportunities for such debates shut down.

But silencing someone only works if a) you kill him or b) he agrees to be silenced. Pace what Ezra Levant noted previously, the one who speaks out anyway, in spite of being ordered to shut up, is something of a dashing rogue…and, as Pastor Boissoin notes above, it is precisely because he was initially silenced that he elected to speak out even louder, spreading his side of the debate much farther than it probably would have gone had events transpired even slightly differently.

It’s things like this which will, in due time, be the end of the human rights commissions — or, at least, the end of the role of HRCs as an office of censorship, both nationally and provincially. More and more, Canadians are beginning to wake up and realize that regardless of what the government says, human beings possess natural human rights that exceed those mere things which governments privelege citizens to do. These rights can’t be taken away by anyone short of God Himself.

So why not speak out? Why not act out? Like the Poles in the 1980s, the moral authority is not possessed by those who would demand order, censorship, and obedience to government stipulations and obscure tribunals. The moral authority belongs to the people who will not give up those rights which are theirs regardless of the government’s opinion. Let us not give that up.

Update: Welcome, Sleepy Old Bear readers, and thanks for the kudos, Stillman! I like that term of yours…”pansexual”. Mind if I borrow it occasionally for future use?

Meet the Update: Welcome, Steynians!