If Canada is serious about inclusion and diversity, then it must uphold its constitutional protections that protect pluralism in the public square, argues University of British Columbia assistant professor Brian Bird for Law & Liberty.
By having no high court rulings on the question of when individuals or organizations may conscientiously refuse to provide goods and services that would amount to endorsing or celebrating LGBTQ rights, Canada is leaving this foundational commitment vulnerable, he writes.
The two cases he examines in this piece expose these vulnerabilities: the Trinity Western University Supreme Court ruling from 2018, and an ongoing lawsuit in British Columbia in which a Pride society is suing a Catholic parish for refusing to rent their venue for a pride event.
Bird writes that disagreements on how to live the best life are inevitable in diverse societies. It is natural, therefore, to try and persuade our fellow citizens to live in the manner we think is most conducive to a good life.
These tools of dialogue, discourse, and debate are much better for liberal democracies to deploy than anti-discrimination laws that coerce people and invite unjust discrimination. Ultimately, though, for that to succeed, we must first recalibrate how we view those with whom we have differences, he concludes.
“For these interactions between citizens to stand any chance of being constructive, we must view our interlocutors as friends — yes, friends — rather than foes. This should lead us to reject the very idea of engaging in a so-called ‘culture war.’”
And if no one is convinced by the other?
“We do not impose our beliefs, no matter how correct we consider them to be. This posture of tolerance — of ‘live and let live’ — is foundational to a free and democratic society.”
