Tag Archives: Rep. David Cicilline

Coming to America: Canadian man fined $55,000 for misgendering a ‘transgender’

Yesterday, our Grif published an important post, “Democrats file legislation to force all Americans to accept the LGBTQ agenda,” on a bill in the House, H.R. 5: Equality Act, introduced by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), which would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as protected classes under federal civil rights law.

If the so-called Equality Act becomes law, it would impact essentially every part of American life. Everyday Americans, especially Christians, would be penalized for not conforming to the Left’s LGBT dicta and agenda, including:

  • Employers and workers must conform to new sexual norms or else lose their businesses and jobs.
  • Hospitals and insurers must provide and pay for “transgender”  therapies and surgeries against their moral or medical objections.
  • Parents would be forced to provide sexual reassignment treatments for their children who are confused about their sexual identity.
  • Religious (read: Christian) institutions would be forced to provide adoptions to permit same sex couples to adopt children.

Canada is already doing that — penalizing anyone who doesn’t conform to the LGBT dicta.

The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal is a quasi-judicial human rights body in British Columbia (BC), Canada. It was established under the British Columbia Human Rights Code and is responsible for “accepting, screening, mediating and adjudicating human rights complaints.”

The Tribunal is comprised of three members: Diana Juricevic, Norman Trerise and Devyn Cousineau.

On March 27, 2019, the BC Human Rights Tribunal fined Christian activist William Whatcott $55,000 CAD (US $41,298) for violating Section 7 of the BC Human Rights Code by misgendering Morgane Oger (birth name Ronan Oger), a male-to-female “transgender” and a 2017 New Democratic Party candidate, calling Oger a biological male (which is what he is) in street flyers and on the Internet.

In the Tribunal’s 105-page ruling, authored by Devyn Cousineau, Oger — a biological male — is referred to as “Ms.,” “she” and “her”.

The Tribunal says:

Mr. Whatcott created a flyer entitled “Transgenderism vs. Truth in Vancouver‐False Creek” [Flyer]. In it, he called Ms. Oger a “biological male who has renamed himself… after he embraced a transvestite lifestyle”. He expressed a concern “about the promotion and growth of homosexuality and transvestitism in British Columbia and how it is obscuring the immutable truth about our God given gender”. He described being transgender as an “impossibility”, which exposes people to harm and constitutes a sin….

When Ms. Oger and her team learned of the Flyer, they had to formulate a response during their election campaign. Ms. Oger went to the police, who advised her of safety protocols. She warned her children to be wary of strangers. She describes the effect of the Flyer as destabilizing, terrifying, and searing. Ultimately, Ms. Oger was not elected in her [False Creek] riding [or electoral district].

After the election was over, Ms. Oger filed a complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal [Tribunal], alleging that the Flyer violated ss. 7(1)(a) and (b) of the Human Rights Code [Code]. Those sections prohibit publication of any statement that “indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate” (s. 7(1)(a)), or “is likely to expose a person or group or class of persons to hatred or contempt” (s. 7(1)(b)). In response, Mr. Whatcott denies that the Flyer violates s. 7 and says that in any event his rights to freedom of speech and religion guarantee his right to distribute it. He says those freedoms are especially important during an election campaign….

In his constitutional argument, Mr. Whatcott argues that the “effect of the BC Human Rights Commission’s decision to proceed to the hearing stage in this case amounts to oppressive government action that violates the respondent’s s. 2, 15 and s.27 of the charter rights….

I can find no merit in Mr. Whatcott’s argument. The Tribunal is a creature of statute. It is bound to enforce and implement the Code, and the means by which it does this is to accept and adjudicate human rights complaints. In this decision, I have found that Ms. Oger has established a violation of s. 7 of the Code. A significant part of my analysis has entailed balancing Mr. Whatcott’s religious rights under the Charter and thus accounting for his religious freedoms. In Saguenay, the Court recognized that the application of human rights legislation may impose reasonable and justifiable limits on freedom of religion: paras. 89‐90….

Mr. Whatcott’s argument, if accepted, would require the Tribunal to reject any complaint for filing if it could impact on a person’s religious beliefs. Not only would this amount to an improper abdication of jurisdiction, but it would itself be an act of preferring one religious belief over another. “True neutrality” requires the Tribunal to abstain from such positions and rather adjudicate each complaint on its merits, weighing religious rights where appropriate: Sageunay at para. 134. That is precisely what it has done in this case.

This argument is dismissed.

I have found that Mr. Whatcott violated s. 7 of the Code. I declare that his conduct in publishing the Flyers was discrimination contrary to the Code and order him to cease the contravention and refrain from committing the same or a similar contravention: Code, s. 37(2)(a) and (b).

Ms. Oger seeks an award to compensate her for injury to her dignity, feelings, and self‐respect: Code, s. 37(2)(d)(iii). She argues that, given the nature of the discrimination in this case, the fact that it is ongoing, and that it had a serious impact on a vulnerable person, an award of $35,000 is appropriate. Mr. Whatcott opposes the award and argues it is unduly punitive….

I accept that the impact on Ms. Oger was serious….

More importantly, though, the Flyer and its potential ramifications terrified Ms. Oger….

Given the high levels of violence and hatred that are still perpetrated against transwomen in our society, it was not unreasonable for Ms. Oger to fear a violent outcome from this Flyer, even though – as Mr. Whatcott, JCCF, and CAFE repeatedly argued – there was no express call to violence within the Flyer itself. As Ms. Oger explained, it was not necessarily Mr. Whatcott she had to worry about, but the person who might be emboldened by the Flyer to act on their own hatred for transwomen….

By using her birth name, Ronan, Mr. Whatcott further caused Ms. Oger to feel hurt and angry….

I accept that the injury to Ms. Oger’s feelings, dignity and self‐respect was severe, and that the effects are ongoing. The circumstances warrant a higher award than in previous cases arising out of s. 7….

I find that an award of $35,000 for injury to dignity, feelings and self‐respect [plus $20,000 in costs incurred by Oger] is appropriate….

In my view, the severity of Mr. Whatcott’s conduct, the fact that it was intentional and flagrant and persisted for the entire duration of the complaint, and the possible deterrent effect it could have on other transgender complainants seeking recourse at this Tribunal, mean that a high award is warranted in this case….

H/t FOTM reader-commenter William and Mass Resistance

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Radical feminist kicked off Baltimore LGBTQ Commission for referring to male rapist as male

Trans ideology has allowed a male rapist into a female prison. It has allowed males to compete in female sports. It has forced women to accept men into showers and locker rooms. It has allowed a man to be named Glamour Magazine’s Woman of the Year. Women who object are vilified and harassed on social media; they lose friends, social standing, and even jobs.

The transgender fiction is too much even for some Leftists.

Last November, a self-described Progressive playwright said she was blacklisted for dissenting from the transgender groupthink.

The latest inmate to break free from the Left’s thought-gulag is self-described radical feminist Julia Beck.

Austin Ruse reports for Crisis Magazine, Feb. 1, 2019, that Julia Beck, a lesbian and a self-confessed “radical feminist”, told her story on a recent Heritage Foundation panel, convened to encourage opposition to a Congressional bill called the Equality Act.

HR 2282, The Equality Act, introduced by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) — who was the first openly “gay” mayor of a U.S. state capital — would enshrine the transgender ideology into American law under the legal concept of public accommodation, wherein the federal government will take away any and all women-only spaces in the country.

Julia Beck said she was booted from the Baltimore LGBTQ Commission because she referred to a male rapist, who claims to be female, as male. The authorities put the male rapist in a woman’s prison, where he proceeded to rape more women.

The logical question to ask the prison authorities and Baltimore’s LGBTQ Commission is this:

How can a man rape women unless he is male?

For correctly referring to the rapist as male, Beck was accused of “violence” and voted off the LGBTQ Commission. Leading the attack on Beck was the Commission chairman — a man who also claims to be female, and a lesbian.

During the hearing to kick Beck off the LGBTQ Commission:

  • A gay man announced that “biological sex is a thing of the past.” To which Beck sensibly responded, “How can we be homosexual if sex is fake?”
  • Testifying against Beck was a woman who identifies as a man, insisting she is not and had never been a woman despite having a vulva because “It does not make me any less of a man that I have a vulva. It’s there and it’s masculine.” Alas, as described by Beck, the woman-who-calls-herself-a-man had “just survived a hysterectomy and was shaking and complaining of hot flashes.”

Beck told the largely conservative audience at Heritage Foundation:

“There are only three sexualities: homosexual, heterosexual, and bi-sexual. All the hip new identities in the alphabet soup like non-binary, gender fluid, pansexual, are not real sexualities. Sexualities are based on sex while gender identities are based on stereotypes.”

To underscore her point, Beck points out that so-called “trans-women”, i.e., biological males, usually present themselves in the most exaggerated and even grotesque caricatures of women.

Beck was one of four radical feminists on the Heritage panel, all of whom have virtually nothing in common with conservatives other than opposition to the trans ideology.

Beck’s co-panelists also had horror stories to tell:

(1) Jennifer Chavez, of the Women’s Liberation Front, told several stories of desperate mothers whose kids were hijacked into the trans-cult. A 14-year-old girl “spontaneously” decided she was male and, according to her mother, went from a “sweet loving girl to a foul-mouthed hateful pansexual male.” The girl ran away from home and moved to Oregon, where she was given a double mastectomy and a radical hysterectomy, even though she had been diagnosed previously with ADHD, depression, and anxiety. She is now living on the streets and planning a surgery that would take part of her arm in order to create a crude penis with a mechanism to fake an erection.

Chavez said much of this contagion is spread via YouTube and other social media sites by Jazz Jennings and someone named Riley J. Dennis, who is famous for saying it is bigotry for males to avoid sex with “trans-women” such as himself. Dennis, one of the sickest and most dangerous people on social media, has a huge YouTube following where he discusses all manner of vile things such as how to have sex with someone in various stages of “transitioning.” A short clip of Jazz Jennings was shown at Heritage in which he was celebrating his impending castration. It showed a “penis” cake that Jennings gleefully sliced to cheers from his family and friends.

(2) Kara Dansky, also of the Women’s Liberation Front, said that the issue is really about the intellectual bankruptcy of gender identity ideology and the importance of language. No one really knows what these words mean; all definitions of gender identity either reinforce sexist stereotypes or are completely tautological and rely on regressive sex-based stereotypes. Referring to men who identify as female because they see themselves as nurturing and compassionate and like to wear dresses, Dansky said this is insulting to women who worked hard to get into the workplace, dress the way we like, and that women are not defined by what we wear.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0