Nova Scotia court exposes anti-Christian prejudice of legal elite

Here's a salute to the courage of Justice Jamie Campbell of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, who ruled in favour of Trinity Western University on Wednesday. The judge found that the black-robed pharisees of the Nova Scotia Barristers' Society could not exclude TWU law grads just for rejecting same-sex marriage.

Will the N.S. Barristers' Society choose to appeal? Will courts in Ontario and B.C., where similar law suits are pending, follow this decision? All this remains to be seen, and so, the last word has not yet been spoken on the fate of law grads from Trinity Western University.

Very important though, as Kelly McParland points out in the National Post, is that Justice Campbell made it clear that:

"In trying to shun TWU students...the law society exceeded its authority. Its mandate to regulate legal practice in Nova Scotia does not include the power to order universities or law schools to change their policies. There is no indication TWU students would be inadequately trained, yet the law society would ban them anyway,...If TWU did not exist, the same students holding the same beliefs would be free to obtain law degrees elsewhere."

Ashley Bridges: true maternal love and the ultimate sacrifice for her unborn child

This post is about the inspiring tragedy of a mother who chooses to die so her baby can live - and who makes that choice long before the baby is ever born. It is a tragedy because it is hard, real death. It is inspiring because it is a witness to the infinite value of even one unborn human life.

If she were Catholic, we would surely call her a saint. But Ashley Bridges doesn't appear to have adhered to a religious faith. At 24 years old, she was cohabiting with her boyfriend and already had a young son.

Then she became pregnant, and 10 weeks into the pregnancy she was told by doctors that she had aggressive bone cancer in her knee. Surgery was planned and she was told to start chemo immediately.

At that point, her unborn baby was barely over an inch long but already growing tiny fingernails. Doctors told Ashley that her baby would likely not survive the chemo treatments. And here is what Ashley says about that:

"They told me what would likely happen to Paisley, that you know, she most likely wouldn't make it and I just knew. It wasn't a choice to me. It was like this is what needs to be done. She's first. I'm not going to kill a healthy baby because I'm sick. There's nothing wrong with her. Her life is just as important as mine if not more important. I mean as a mother my job is to protect my kids."

Pope Francis is wrong on free speech

Pope Francis has staked out his position in the free speech debate, so let's take a closer look.

Just like Bill Donohue and Bernard Toutounji, whom I wrote about earlier, the Pope argues that if you offend someone's religion then you are asking for a violent reaction. In other words, Charlie Hebdo had it coming to them. He says: 

“If my good friend Dr Gasparri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch. It’s normal. It’s normal. You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others.”

...And so many people who speak badly about other religions, or religions [in general], they make fun of, let’s say toy with [make into toys] other people’s religions, these people provoke and there can occur what would happen to Dr. Gasbarri if he said something against my mother. (full transcript here).

The implication here is that Charlie Hebdo was an insulting bully who taunted the terrorists, and they fought back in the most natural way that is to be expected. Not that it's good to punch anyone, mind you - the Pope doesn't go so far as to condone the resulting violence, but his stance can be summed up as: Charlie Hebdo, what did you expect? It's only "normal" that you got a punch in the nose.

Charlie Hebdo and the limits of free speech

I keep coming across people who seem to believe that Charlie Hebdo overstepped the proper limits of free speech. The trouble seems to be that aside from insulting Muslims by portraying Muhammad, Charlie was also publishing highly offensive cartoons which targeted Catholics.

A common opinion among Catholics thus appears to be that such insulting cartoons should not be legal, or at least, that Charlie Hebdo should have been self-censoring and not producing them. Some Catholic commentators have even gone so far as to suggest that Charlie Hebdo provoked the terrorist attack and that these journalists are in some way responsible for their own deaths.

Here in Canada, such reactions are to be expected. After all, Canadians have already become accustomed to living under the oppression of hate speech laws and arbitrary leftist Human Rights Commissions, We don't expect to have free speech anymore.

The lesson of Frozen: there is no right and no wrong

I've heard lots of good things about Disney's Frozen from a number of friends, including Catholic ones whose children love the movie and the Frozen songs. So I finally brought it out again for the children to watch. (We had gotten it as a gift last year and we did try to watch it earlier, but they didn't seem interested at the time).

The first time the children watched it, my husband and I didn't sit through it with them. They loved it. Our two girls started singing the songs around the house, dressing up and pretending to be the two sisters, Elsa and Anna. My husband and I thought it was so cute. Looks like a great movie, right?

Then, at my daughter's request, I found Elsa's song "Let It Go" on youtube. I didn't realize it at the time, but this is the main anthem of the movie. Due to the incredible popularity of this Oscar-nominated song, Disney has since produced a version in 25 languages.  My red flags went up when I heard Elsa sing the following:

...the fears that once controlled me

Can't get to me at all
It's time to see what I can do
To test the limits and break through
No right, no wrong,
no rules for me,
I'm free!

So the main character is now free of any concern for what is right and what is wrong? Interesting.

This Catholic is Charlie too

It is an embarrassment to Catholicism and badly misguided PR when the largest Catholic civil rights organization in the United States reacts to the Paris terrorist attack with a press release that focuses on why Charlie Hebdo deserved it. Bill Donohue, head of the Catholic League, responded to the mass murder with a press release entitled "Muslims are right to be angry."

Donohue says in part: "what happened in Paris cannot be tolerated. But neither should we tolerate the kind of intolerance that provoked this violent reaction." He continued:

Stephane Charbonnier, the paper’s publisher, was killed today in the slaughter. It is too bad that he didn’t understand the role he played in his tragic death. In 2012, when asked why he insults Muslims, he said, “Muhammad isn’t sacred to me.” Had he not been so narcissistic, he may still be alive. Muhammad isn’t sacred to me, either, but it would never occur to me to deliberately insult Muslims by trashing him.

Sadly, Donohue's own anger against Charlie Hebdo only comes across as giving legitimacy to the terrorist act.