VANCOUVER, BC—Charter protections of freedom of religion will be rendered meaningless if a ruling that found a Christian teacher guilty of discrimination against homosexuals is allowed to stand, the B.C. Court of Appeal has been told.

David Brown, lawyer for the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance, says people of faith tend to speak out publicly on moral issues—and that right should not be abrogated just because others may be offended by their views.

“If we can’t offend, then there is no more free speech on issues of morality,” Brown told a three-member Court of Appeal panel hearing the case of teacher and counsellor Chris Kempling.

The alliance, which includes the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, the Catholic Civil Rights League, the Christian Teachers Association of B.C. and the Christian Legal Fellowship, was formed to intervene on Kempling’s behalf.

The British Columbia College of Teachers earlier found Kempling guilty of “conduct unbecoming” a teacher because he had written letters and essays questioning curricula that presented homosexuality in a positive light, and despite no indication of harm to anyone either inside or outside his Quesnel high school. It handed him a one-month suspension that has yet to be served.

In February 2004, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Ronald Holmes rejected Kempling’s appeal of the decision and affirmed that his statements were discriminatory. Kempling appealed that ruling to the B.C. Court of Appeal. That court has reserved its decision.

Brown argues Holmes “erred significantly” in coming to his conclusion. “Just because you’re morally critical doesn’t dump you into the basket of discrimination,” he says.

Chilling effect
Ruth Ross, executive director of the Christian Legal Fellowship, said outside the court that CLF got involved in the case because of the potential “chilling effect” of Holmes’ decision on anyone who belongs to a professional association.

“Lawyers are subject to regulations the same as teachers, the same as doctors, accountants and so on,” she says. “So there would be no reason to expect a different result were we to express ourselves similarly in a public environment—and apart from no evidence of harm, as there was in this case.”

Kempling’s lawyer, William Clarke, argues that the BCCT exceeded its mandate by making itself the sole arbiter of the core values of public education—to the exclusion of the government, parents, teachers and students—and then deciding that non-discrimination was the highest core value.

“It would be like the College of Physicians and Surgeons determining the policies of the Canada Health Act,” he says.

But Bruce Lawton, counsel for the college, counters that it had “not strayed at all” from its mandate to enforce standards of professional conduct that ensure the community does not lose confidence in the integrity of public education.

Lawton says not only were Kempling’s writings clearly discriminatory as defined by the Supreme Court of Canada, but that Kempling is “a man whose mission is to discriminate.”

“Debate can be engaged in without descending into the gutter of discrimination—and that’s what Mr. Kempling did not do,” he told the court. “The hallmark of discrimination is to treat someone on the basis of stereotypes…and judging them not on their individual worth.”

Fight continues
“I deny that,” Kempling told ChristianWeek. “What I wrote is entirely supported by independent research in peer-reviewed journals. I do agree that what I said was critical, but it’s an informed position.”

While calling the intervention of the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance “fantastic,” Kempling holds out little hope of winning this latest round. “I think this is headed to the Supreme Court of Canada, either way it goes,” he says.

Kempling is also fighting an immediate three-month suspension handed him last month by the Quesnel school board. At issue was a letter published in the town’s newspaper in which he argued against same-sex marriage.

The board says the punishment was warranted because Kempling violated a directive barring him from publishing or distributing any materials that reflect his views on homosexuality.

Kempling plans to appeal to the B.C. human rights tribunal.