We are reminded daily that we should be thankful for living in Canada, a nation where democracy, human rights, and freedom of speech flourish– a country where anti-discrimination and hate laws protect everyone in our multi-cultural society a mosaic of which we are told to be proud. All that sounds magnanimous, noble, and good. However, in their overzealous efforts to lavish kindness and generosity on all, our establishment has bestowed special rights to minority interest groups and taken away the fundamental rights of the individuals representing the democratic majority.

Something within our system has run amuck. In recent years and especially lately, under the guise of multi-culturalism , human rights, and for the sake of political correctness, special interest groups have gained alarming concessions that threaten the very fabric of our democratic society and the basic rights of the average citizen. Homosexual activists– about two percent of the population– have won special protection under new "hate laws," and in accordance with more recent supreme court rulings, they now enjoy spousal benefits and rights. This is a case where a behavioural disorder, wrongly, has been given the same status and considerations bestowed on married heterosexual couples that form the traditional family– the basis for procreation– the most essential element of an enduring society.

Protecting our children, we assume, has always been the aim of our society and our justice system. Alarming decisions handed down by our courts over the last few years indicate exactly the opposite. In British Columbia a judge ruled that it was alright for any person to be in possession of child pornography. The judge seemed to think that possessing "something" was an expression of self, a basic human right not to be interfered with. He didn't look at the underlying reason why anyone would want to possess such vile material, or how and at whose expense it was generated. With his line of reasoning, one has to assume it would be alright to be in possession of a bomb— for whatever reason.

Homosexual pedophiles have been treated with kid gloves by our bleeding-heart liberal judges. Some years ago, Keith Leger a homosexual pedophile and a serial rapist had his sentence for murder reduced to a meager three years because it was reasoned by the judge that he was not in total possession of his faculties. In a more recent case in the Durham region of Ontario, judge Alf Stong sentenced Marlin Roy, a homosexual pedophile, to serve no time in jail, but to perform 240 hours of volunteer work and write letters to newspapers about his crime of sexually molesting a nine year old boy– a boy, whom Roy "shared" with Garry Sharrard, another homosexual pedophile and serial rapist, who was strategically placed as a children's aid society worker. Forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Hy Bloom, testified at the trial that Roy was not a pedophile, but simply had a preference for partners with a "youthful physique." Does society have to tolerate cynical judges and psychiatrists who protect these perverted child rapists and murderers– judges that mock morality and offend all common decency? Whose human rights are they protecting, anyway?

It is dismaying to see the double standards our schools employ in dealing with democracy, human rights, and freedom of speech– how they cater to political correctness instead of the needs of all the students. Our public education system claims that the system must meet the needs of every student. "Educators" preach that students must learn to tolerate all and respect everyone– learn to be non-judgmental and cooperative. In 1988 the Lord's prayer was banned from all public schools across Ontario after a Jewish mother (representing a minority group) complained that her children should not have to listen to a Christian prayer in public school. On the other hand, "educators" have argued, successfully, that schools must teach EVERYONE about homosexuality, even though homosexuals represent only about two percent of our population. "Educators" argue that ALL students must learn about homosexuality and their "lifestyle" in order to combat homophobia and help students confused over their sexuality make informed choices. So, schools now teach that homosexuality is just another normal alternative lifestyle that some students might like to explore. Why should 98 % of students who are heterosexual have to learn about homosexuality– a harmful lifestyle– yet no one is allowed to hear the Lord's prayer? Are our educators not resorting to a dangerous, undemocratic double standard?

Legalizing a behavioural disorder such as homosexuality does not make it right or desirable. Legislating against negative emotions ( including hate) against the lifestyle is about as reasonable and effective as passing legislation against bad weather. Sodomy to most people, including students, is repugnant and morally incorrect. Intolerance and discrimination against aberrant behaviour are natural reactions and serve to protect individuals, the family and society. Dignity, acceptance, special rights, and respect are earned and cannot be granted by legislation or inculcated by teachers. The surest way to breed discontent, resentment and hate is to unfairly legislate the protection of wrongdoing. Yet, this is the political-correct crap that our students must endure. The burgeoning education establishment, brimming with "experts," does a lot of hand-wringing over calamities like the Littleton shooting. Yet, in the end, they simply blame intolerance, racism and homophobia for violence in schools and redouble their efforts to create a tolerant politically-correct class of students, hopefully with no moral opinions of their own.

In a nutshell, the values of democracy, human rights, and free speech have taken a downhill turn in our modern society. And nowhere is it more evident than in our public schools. Homosexual and AIDS education, which is mostly disinformation, must be listened to by all, but intended for the benefit of a possible two percent. Yet, the Lord's prayer– a prayer that takes about thirty seconds and is part of our fading Christian moral heritage– can be recited no longer in our schools for fear it may offend some vindictive minority group. It's a clear case of meeting the wishes of students belonging to special interest groups while actively suppressing the needs of the majority. We have democracy in reverse. We are being Politically Correct.

Jann Flury