20 years ago: Activist Supreme Court of Canada invents sodomite rights in provincial legislation

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. Romans 1:24-32

On April 2, 1998, the blackshirts in black robes known as the Supreme Court of Canada ruled 7-1 in Vriend vs. Alberta that sodomites couldn't be excluded from the provincial Individual Rights Protection Act. The case was instigated by former lab instructor Delwin Vriend, who was fired by The King's University College (now known as The King's University) because his voluntarily chosen lifestyle violated the college's code of behaviour. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the exclusion of sodomites from provincial human rights legislation was a violation of Section 15 of the Orwellian-named Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The fact that the politicians who cobbled together the Charter deliberately left sodomite rights out made no impression on the court.

The ruling was widely misunderstood as being a ruling against The King's University College's right to fire Mr. Vriend; in fact, that wasn't the case at all. All Mr. Vriend won was the right to have sodomites included in provincial human rights legislation.

By the way, this blogger has it on good authority that The King's University College's position regarding Mr. Vriend wasn't as purely biblical as they made it out to be. It seems the college knew about Mr. Vriend's lifestyle and made no attempt to enforce discipline, but a local Christian who wasn't affiliated with the college heard about this, and wrote a letter to The King's University College threatening to notify all the churches who supported the college, and ask these churches if they knew about the situation. When The King's University College received the letter, they were suddenly shocked--shocked!--to find that they had an unrepentant, active sodomite in their employ.