Immorality - An Ethos Of "Human Rights" Activists

The ethos of immorality reigns in the human rights commission at least in Ontario.

Their ruling that a code of conduct for behavior cannot be required or held to by an organization is tacit approval of immorality.

I wonder if Ohrc would also order businesses that have a zero drug policy or a no alcohol eight hours before working policy to rescind their rules and take indoctrination training?

It is obvious that a bias bordering on hatred for moral principles - especially if they are by a Christian organization are unacceptable in the minds of so called human rights activists. And make no mistake, every person involved in human rights commission work across Canada are activists. That is their mandate under legislation from government. In reality they are government legislated "rights" police. Except their concept of rights is decided not on rights but on agenda.

More >>>

Christian Horizons launched an appeal against the ruling but meanwhile, as reported by the Life Site News, the organization had to drop its requirement that employees sign their basic morality statement.

Of course the "human rights" activists will be quick to remind me about so called "separation of church and state". But Christian Horizons is a charitable organization, not a government institution. Similar restrictions are common in all faith-based organizations. And it's perceived as common sense that if you work in a Hindu organization or in a Muslim organization, you better show some tolerance, avoid beef or pork or any other food that's not welcome and follow the dress code as required by the organization. So why was the Christian organization singled out?

I think the answer is in the key phrase "separation of church and state". Notice that it says "church", not "religion". Nobody says that our governing elite isn't guided by the religious principles; it's just that Christian values have been replaced by secular fundamentalist dogmas. That's all.

And that explains the inconsistency in relationships between religion and state. Obviously, the secular fundamentalists are there to push forward their own dogmas. Of course, they'll show no mercy to those who reject their social engineering - especially when it comes to Socially Conservative Christians. But they may actively support other religious minorities which are not yet large enough to pose any threat to the secular fundamentalist hegemony (not just yet) and which they regard as allies in their battle against Canada's Christian values.