The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum TWU Denied Law School Accreditation

TWU Denied Law School Accreditation

Well it is official, after years in the courts Trinity Western University has been denied Law School accreditation.
The basic reason is according to the Law Societies of Canada is that TWU's covenant prohibits sex outside heterosexual marriage by their students and faculty. Also the law societies says it is impossible for a Christian lawyer to represent their clients fairly.
The societies say the covenant amounts to discrimination.

I am not a big fan of TWU, however I commend them for not compromising on their covenant. Which to me is a no brainer for any organization that calls itself "Christian."
This ruling does not surprise me in this day and age; where in Alberta, a Christian couple were refused being able to adopt because they believe marriage should be between one man and one woman.
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4707240

As I think about the ramifications of this ruling; I am not sure it is too much of a stretch that this kind of ruling will effect Churches. For example Church membership. What happens in the future if a homosexual is denied membership because they are a homosexual. Would the Church win a court case on this issue?
I can see a time where the only Churches are government sanctioned liberal Churches. (Which of course are not real Churches at all.)
All others will need to go under ground. This of course isn't new in the history of the Church.

Tom

Does Canada have something akin to our Bill of Rights?

We have freedom of religion, but just like in the USA we are seeing things like this take priority over freedom of religion.
It also appears that our Prime Minister has more respect for Islam than Christianity.

Tom

Canada has the "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms".

See Constitutional Act, 1982.

also this Wikipedia article: Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Pilgrim
Thanks, I had forgotten about the Canadian Charter of Rights.
Some time ago I was talking about the Alberta case where the Christian couple were refused adoption because they believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman.
The conversation I was having was with a couple of men from my Church. The answer I received back surprised me. One guy said unfortunately the government of Alberta was acting in accordance with the laws of land and it was their right to rule that way. Another man nodded in agreement.
Had I had time I might have pressed him further on the issue and still might in the future.
I am trying to find out where the Canadian laws support such views.
Do you have any idea?

Tom

I could only guess that those in power in Canada; Trudeau & co., view the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a "living document", much like the Leftists in this country view the Constitution of the United States. What that means is that those documents are to be interpreted and applied NOT according to the framers' original intent, but rather according to the contemporary social climate, aka: Situation Ethics. Throw in the idea of "cultural boundness" and you basically ignore what the documents actually mean. The true intent and meaning of the U.S. Constitution is easily proven from the writings of the actual framers, i.e., the Federalist Papers where their reasons for what the Constitution says is made known. But in the eyes of the Leftists, such things are nothing more than the musings of unenlightened men which have no relevance today and thus they can be ignored and have no authority to today's advanced society.

As I have mentioned here numerous times, there is a frightening parallel between secular government and ecclesiastical policies.

Thank you Pilgrim, that makes a lot of sense. I plan on continuing the conversation with the men who I was having the conversation with.

Tom

Hi Pilgrim
I just found out a little more applicable information concerning this matter.
In this particular case it only applies to British Columbia and Ontario; which amounts to about half the population of Canada.
I also found out that this also applies to existing lawyers in these two provinces. They need to sign a document upholding the LBGQ rights as opposed to old traditional rights; or lose the right to practice law. I find it hard not to read into the future ramifications such a stand.
I was also talking to some parents after Church today during coffee time. A woman was talking about how she was taking courses to learn more about home schooling. She was saying that in public school parents no longer have a say about what is being taught to their children. It is now mandatory for them to be taught about LBGQ, in keeping with the government agenda. She also said it looks like in the future, anyone homeschooling their children might be forced to teach that agenda to their children as well. I told her about a family that came to Canada from Germany, that came here basically because in Germany home school was not allowed and that their children were not their own, they belonged to the government.
Her response was, it did not surprise her, because it looks like Canada in headed that way as well.
As an aside note; I listened to a short video clip of the Prime Minister of England saying to the British people basically that they do not own their children, the government does.
Tom