An advertisement campaign in southern Ontario is raising awareness of the fact that the fundamental freedoms of Ontarians are being threatened by provincial and federal human rights commissions and tribunals. Several cases are highlighted in the ads, which at first sound absurd and possibly even humorous. But the erosion of our Charter rights is no laughing matter – which is why we invite you to join us in standing up for our freedoms.

Hurt feelings: Human rights bureaucrats insist that they are not in the business of policing hurt feelings. Yet that is exactly what they do. They have the power from the Ontario Human Rights Code to order thousands of dollars in reparations. Moreover, case law dictates that the primary evidence of discrimination is not in objective evidence, but rather in the “effect of the actions on the respondent”, i.e. hurt feelings.

Marijuana Consumption: Ted Kindos, an owner of a Burlington bar, was found to be in breach of the Code when he asked a customer who was smoking marijuana on his premises to leave. The customer had a valid medical marijuana licence from the federal government, but Ted’s establishment was under Ontario’s liquor licence act, which forbade the consumption of any marijuana in liquor-serving establishments.  And the precedent is clear – medical marijuana users can smoke wherever they please in Ontario.

Unconscious Racism: Faced with an exemplary policeman with no record of doing anything racist, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal nevertheless found Constable Michael Shaw guilty of “unconscious racism” for questioning a black man in a white neighborhood, hurting his feelings in the process.

Pre-operative transsexuals: Fitness club owner John Fulton hesitated to accept the application of a male-to-female transsexual who had not yet undergone any physical operations, because he requested to use the womens’ change room. He believed that his other female customers would be alarmed if someone who was physically a man walked into their change room. A complaint was launched through the HRTO. After two years and tens of thousands of dollars, the complaint was eventually dropped. But the Tribunal never ruled on whether Fulton was at fault or not, and the length to which they pursued the complaint indicates they believed he was.

Girls on Boy’s sports teams: Ever since the 1986 Blainey decision, in which a judge unilaterally modified the Ontario Human Rights Code to expand its scope, sports teams in Ontario have come under fire if they prohibited girls from their teams. Recently the Tribunal found that the girls have a right to change with the boys, too!

Ability to Pay the Rent: The Ontario Human Rights Commission issued a guidance for landlords in which they stated that it is illegal to use rent-to-income cutoff ratios.

Adults-only Pool Hours: A condominium mostly occupied by seniors had a rule prohibiting children under 2 from using the pool. When challenged, the strata council offered to designate some time each week for children to use the pool. This wasn’t good enough, according to Ontario’s tribunal, who mandated that children of any age cannot be barred from strata facilities like pools, at any time, with out a bona fide reason.

Non-profit directors can lose their homes: There was an absurd case of a disabled man claiming discrimination because the volunteers at a food bank wouldn’t drive him and his free groceries home. It was, thankfully, dismissed by the tribunal on a technicality. But the complaint prompted real fears for the volunteer directors at the food bank. If a non-profit organization cannot cover the costs of a tribunal award, the tribunal can go after the assets of the directors, including selling their houses if necessary.

These are but a few illustrations of the problems with the human rights system as it is currently being administered. See our Problems page for more.