Tag: political correctness

Christian Teacher Fined $750,000 for Refusing to Agree That There Are More Than 2 Genders – Persecution in the First World

At this point, Canada hasn’t just done away with common sense. It’s dumped gasoline on it and set it ablaze for the world to see.

For example, former Chilliwack, British Columbia, school trustee Barry Neufeld must pay $750,000 for violating the Human Rights Code.

What exactly did Neufeld do for such a massive fine?

A Tribunal concluded he “invoked negative and insidious stereotypes about LGBTQ people, especially trans people, which denied their inherent dignity and, in some cases, reflected the hallmarks of hate against them as a group,” as the CBC reported Feb. 20.

“For five years, he publicly denigrated LGBTQ people and teachers and associated them with the worst forms of child abuse,” the Tribunal said further.

Neufeld had a complaint brought against him by Chilliwack Teachers’ Association and B.C. Teachers’ Federation after making Facebook posts, a speech, remarks at school board meetings, and comments to the media that the sentencing body felt would make those groups the target of hate.

One unnamed teacher said his comments had family members urging this person to reconsider career paths. The Tribunal said Neufeld “poisoned” the workplace.

He is a Christian, and his comments were relayed by The Christian Post. They aligned with historic Christian teaching on sexuality to which millions still subscribe today.

“It dawned on me that for a Christian, there are two approaches to take. The pastoral approach is one of compassion and empathy while firmly refusing to buy into their client’s delusional thinking. As one pastor said to a transgender person: ‘it is my responsibility to love you: but it is God’s job the [sic] change you’. However, while helping me grasp a better understanding of gender Dysphoria, the [issue] is so complex that it is hard to apply these insights in a debate at the political level, especially on Facebook,” Neufeld wrote.

He said his mission is to try “speaking out to the lawmakers in Victoria and trying to motivate lukewarm Christians who are sitting idly by as all of Society ‘Slouches towards Gomorrah.’”

Further, he spoke about the political ramifications of gender ideology, noting that it has “demonized people of faith who believe that God created humans male and female: In the Image of God.”

Keep reading

Mamdani ‘Comforts’ NYC Muslims After Outbreak of ‘Islamophobia’

New York City’s far-left Gothamist has the sads, because when one member of the left’s conglomeration of haters, traitors, freaks, parasites and psychopaths suffers, the whole coalition of the weird suffers. This time, however, there is a silver lining: one of the bright stars of the contemporary left, New York Mayor Zohan Mamdani, is on the case. 

The Gothamist headline on Friday was: “’We are enough’: After Islamophobic attacks, Mamdani comforts NYC’s Muslim community.” That’s superb, but left unanswered was the question of who comforts the victims of the nationwide Muslim community when some members of that community decide it’s time to wage jihad. 

Gothamist stated that “just hours before he was set to speak at an event marking Ramadan, Mayor Zohran Mamdani realized he needed to overhaul his prepared remarks.” This was because “in the last few days, Mamdani and Muslims throughout the country had been subjected to a torrent of Islamophobia.”

In discussing this alleged “torrent of Islamophobia,” Gothamist did not see fit to remind its readers — or inform them for the first time, since these are leftists we’re talking about — that there have been four jihad attacks in the U.S. in the last two weeks. Ramadan, after all, has been called the “month of jihad,” and with good reason. This year, the festivities began on March 1, when a Muslim migrant opened fire in a bar in Austin, Texas, killing three people and injuring 13 others.

Then on March 7, two Muslims screaming “Allah akbar” threw a homemade shrapnel bomb at a crowd of pro-freedom protesters in New York City itself, the home of Gothamist and Zohran Mamdani. Then on March 12, a Muslim crashed his car into a Michigan synagogue and opened fire, while another Muslim started shooting at Old Dominion University, murdering one person and injuring two others.

Steadfastly ignoring all this and much more that might lead the potential victims of more such attacks to be suspicious of Islam or even dislike it outright, Gothamist quoted Mamdani addressing a crowd of Muslims who had gathered at City Hall for an iftar dinner: “When I hear such hatred and disdain unchecked in its rancor, I feel an isolation and a loneliness that I know that many of you have felt as well.”

Keep reading

School Branded 1st Grader ‘RACIST’ Over ‘Any Life Matters’ Drawing; Court Slams Principal

When a 7-year-old’s heartfelt sketch promoting equality gets twisted into “racism” by leftist school officials, it’s a chilling sign of how far indoctrination has gone—now finally overturned in a resounding First Amendment victory.

This case exposes the hypocrisy at the heart of progressive education: punishing a child for daring to change “Black Lives Matter” into a message of universal value, all while claiming to champion inclusion.

In 2021, at Viejo Elementary School in California, a first grader identified as BB created a simple drawing after her class learned about Martin Luther King Jr. and “Black Lives Matter.” The artwork showed four oval shapes in shades from orange to brown, representing friends holding hands, with the words “Black Lives Mater” above and “any life” below.

BB gifted it to a black classmate in a show of friendship. The child thanked her and showed no signs of offense. But the child’s mother complained to Principal Jesus Becerra, writing, “My husband and I will not tolerate any more messages given to our daughter because of her skin color. As the administrator we trust you know the actions that need to be taken to address this issue.”

Becerra confronted BB, telling her the drawing was “not appropriate” and “racist,” according to her account. He allegedly forced an apology, banned her from recess for two weeks, and prohibited her from giving drawings to classmates—without notifying her parents.

BB didn’t even fully understand “Black Lives Matter,” but added “any life” because she believed “all lives matter.” This innocent twist on the slogan clashed with the school’s apparent BLM doctrine, turning a gesture of friendship into a so called ‘microaggression’.

The family eventually sued the Capistrano Unified School District in 2023, but a lower court dismissed the case, with U.S. District Judge David O. Carter ruling that BB’s drawing “trampled on her classmate’s right to be left alone in school” and, remarkably, that First Amendment protections didn’t apply to such young students.

Keep reading

TDF sounds alarm over imminent passage of Bill C-9

Proposed “Combatting Hate Act” expands the legal definition of hatred and removes key free expression safeguards in the Criminal Code.

The House of Commons has closed debate on Bill C-9, the “Combatting Hate Act.” The Bill expands and codifies the definition of “hatred,” departing from the Supreme Court’s strict requirement of “vilification and detestation.” It removes the longstanding good faith religious speech protections for sincerely held religious opinions and expressions based on religious texts in the Criminal Code and eliminates the requirement for Attorney General consent before charging individuals with certain hate crime offences. The Bill also creates a new offence that applies when an underlying offence—even a non-criminal one—is motivated by hatred, potentially doubling the penalties for the underlying act.

The Bill has faced opposition from civil liberties groups and religious organizations. TDF was invited to testify before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights and filed a brief outlining its serious misgivings. 

“Ironically, the government has moved to end debate on issues of public concern for a bill that would end debate on issues of public concern. The Bill empowers prosecutors to bring charges based on the merest suggestion that the impugned conduct is motivated by an ill-defined concept of “hatred,” massively increasing potential jail time and legal jeopardy for defendants. In our experience, these types of offences tend to be laid against marginalized and working-class people rather than powerful elites and political insiders. However, all Canadians can expect greater digital censorship and increased online police surveillance if the Bill becomes law. We only have to look at the UK example, where police make approximately 12,000 annual arrests for online “hate incidents” under similar legislation.” 

The Bill now moves to a vote at the justice committee. After that, it will proceed to the report stage and third reading before advancing to the Senate.

TDF will continue to oppose the Bill and all attempts by the government to censor Canadians.

Keep reading

Georgia Legislature Can’t Vote For Clean Elections, But Has Time To Change The State Flower

The Georgia Senate has passed a bill to change the state flower from the Cherokee rose to the sweetbay magnolia.

The sweetbay magnolia is native to Georgia, while the Cherokee rose is not.

“The Cherokee Rose was adopted as the state flower in 1916 under the incorrect assumption that it was native to the state and also a legacy of the Cherokee people,” Rep. Deborah Silcox, who carried the bill in the House, said. “It is neither.”

“While the Cherokee Rose is not sold or encouraged as a landscaping plant because of its invasive tendencies, the Sweetbay Magnolia is widely available and can be planted in all regions of the state,” the Georgia Native Plant Society said, reported WRDW.

The vote comes on the heels of the legislature refusing to vote for paper ballots for the November election. Georgia is well known for its corrupt elections that are influenced by voting machines, dirty voter rolls, and illegal immigrants.

Georgia senators shot down a bill that would have switched the state’s voting method to paper ballots filled out by hand before this November’s elections.

The bill’s defeat sets up a scramble for Georgia lawmakers to find a way to remove computer QR codes from ballots this year, as required by a state law passed two years ago, reported WABE.

The Senate voted 27-21 on the bill, two votes short of the majority needed for legislation to pass in the 56-member Senate. Seven senators skipped the vote following warnings of election “chaos” if it passed.

Keep reading

DC Bar Files Disciplinary Charges Against DOJ Official Ed Martin – DOJ Responds

Justice Department official Ed Martin is facing ethics charges after he sent a letter to Georgetown University Law Center related to its DEI policies.

Ed Martin sent the letter last year while he was Interim US Attorney for DC.

The DC Bar is targeting Ed Martin for pushing to end the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies at Georgetown.

Martin may be sanctioned.

“The DC bar’s attempt to target and punish those serving President Trump while refusing to investigate or act against actual ethical violations that were committed by Biden and Obama administration attorneys is a clear indication of this partisan organization’s agenda,” a statement from the DOJ to CBS said.

CBS News reported:

The office that polices attorney misconduct in Washington, D.C., has filed ethics charges against Justice Department pardon attorney Ed Martin, after Martin last year sent a threatening letter to the Georgetown University Law Center that raised questions about its diversity and inclusion policies while he was serving as interim U.S. attorney, according to court filings made public Tuesday.

In a Feb. 17 letter to the law school, Martin told university officials that a whistleblower claimed Georgetown was teaching DEI and asked about the practice. Without waiting for a response, he told the school he was imposing sanctions by instructing his office staff not to employ any students from the school as fellows, interns or employees at the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, D.C.

In response, the school’s now-former dean, William Treanor, told Martin, who is a devout Catholic, that his letter represented “an attack on the University’s mission as a Jesuit and Catholic institution.”

In filings made in the D.C. Court of Appeals’ Board on Professional Responsibility dated Friday and made public on Tuesday, Disciplinary Counsel Hamilton “Phil” Fox III of the D.C. Bar alleged that Martin’s conduct as a government official violated the First and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution by making demands that the law school change what it teaches students and how it teaches them.

Ed Martin was the Interim US Attorney for DC but his confirmation got derailed by GOP Senator Thom Tillis.

Martin is currently the DOJ’s pardon attorney.

Keep reading

Critics Say New Definition of Anti-Muslim Hostility Is ‘Assault’ on Free Speech

Critics have said that a new UK government definition of anti-Muslim hostility is an “assault” on free speech.

On March 10, the Labour government adopted a new non-statutory definition of anti-Muslim hostility as part of its “Social Cohesion” strategy, aimed at tackling hate crime and strengthening community relations.

The guidance, titled “Protecting What Matters,” sets out a definition intended to help institutions identify and respond what they call to anti-Muslim hatred and discrimination.

The Free Speech Union (FSU) said the initiative could represent an attempt to revive blasphemy-style laws in Britain. The FSU offers legal help to people disciplined or arrested for lawful expression.

“What we are seeing is an attempt to reintroduce Britain’s blasphemy laws, 18 years after they were abolished by Parliament, and the biggest assault on English liberty, particularly free speech, in over 800 years,” it said in a March 10 post on X.

According to the document, the definition, laid out over three paragraphs, says anti-Muslim hostility includes “intentionally engaging in, assisting or encouraging criminal acts—including acts of violence, vandalism, harassment, or intimidation, whether physical, verbal, written or electronically communicated, that are directed at Muslims because of their religion or at those who are perceived to be Muslim, including where that perception is based on assumptions about ethnicity, race or appearance.”

Keep reading

Woke California professor calls to abolish terms ‘gay’ and ‘lesbian’ to avoid offending the transgender community

A California professor laid out an argument for tossing out sexual identifiers, as terms like gay and lesbian ‘harms trans people,’ they claimed. 

Brandon Andrew Robinson, an associate professor at the University of California, spoke on the matter with the university while promoting their book, ‘Trans Pleasure: On Gender Liberation and Sexual Freedom.’

Robinson, who uses they/them pronouns, argued that ‘identities limit us’ and the ongoing creation of unlimited new identities demonstrates how such labels ‘fail to capture the full complexities of gender, sexualities and desire.’ 

They particularly noted hyper-specific identities, such as gynosexual, sapiosexual, asexual or pansexual. 

‘It’s a several-fold argument,’ Robinson told UC Riverside. ‘First, I want people to question why we privilege gender and genitals above all other attributes – like height or race – when we conceptualize our sexual identity.’

They continued on to argue that the term ‘gay,’ referring to a man being attracted to a man, ‘assumes a man is a stable, inherent category.’

‘When history shows the definition of manhood is constantly changing,’ they said.

‘Gender essentialism [the belief that men and women possess inherent, fixed traits determined by biology that define their identity and gender roles] also harms trans people, who often complicate those binary boundaries.’

Keep reading

Waste of the Day: DEI Contractors Remain in Military’s K-12 Schools

Two teachers gave a presentation about how “elementary school is the perfect time” to “show students the diversity of gender expression and gender activity.” Educators were encouraged to hold “critical conversations” about “the relationships between identity and power” and “privilege,” which were meant to result in “crying” and “explicit confrontations.”

Many DEI consultants were removed after President Donald Trump took office in 2025 and ordered a ban on federal funds being used to teach or implement DEI principles, but some of the companies hired under Biden remain.

DoDEA paid $30,175 last year to continue gym teachers’ membership in the professional society, SHAPE America, which instills its National Health Education Standards in gym classes. Board member Cara Grant said of the health standards, “We recognize that systemic disparities exist within our educational systems, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities. Our approach is not simply to level the playing field but to dismantle the structures that perpetuate inequality.”

During a DoDEA presentation on the SHAPE standards in 2021, one teacher instructed her colleagues that “talking about heterosexuality as the norm” can “inherently cause conflict.”

DoDEA also paid $141,000 last year to the curriculum development company thinkLaw.

Keep reading

Bad Faith Noncompliance: Virginia Schools Flout Supreme Court And Trump With DEI ‘Rebrand’

Just over a year ago, President Trump issued two executive orders banning destructive diversity ideology (a.k.a. “DEI” or “diversity, equity, and inclusion”) from the federal government and its contractors, including colleges and universities. The EOs sought to restore merit as the basis of hiring, advancement, and college admissions.

Both EOs reinforced prior actions by the president as well as by the Supreme Court: In his first term, Trump signed EO 13950, Combatting Race and Sex Stereotypes, which banned divisive concepts based on race and ethnicity, a measure duplicated in many states; and in June of 2023, the Supreme Court decided Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard (“SFFA”), which found that diversity rationales for racial preferences in admissions were themselves discriminatory and therefore unlawful.

Notwithstanding these major legal developments against DEI, colleges and universities, especially in Virginia, are continuing business as usual to promote it, albeit under different names, a move known as rebranding. “To avoid scrutiny,” said one official at the University of Virginia, diversity offices are now called offices for “community and belonging,” while “queer brunch” is now marketed as “cozy brunch.” At George Mason University, the DEI office is now called the Office for Access, Compliance, and Community—same staff, same stuff. They do this even though Trump’s EO explicitly banned rebranding, stating such programs are illegal “under whatever name they appear.”

Obviously, bad actor schools are engaged in bad faith noncompliance.

In this 250th anniversary year of America’s founding, we should remember that the word “diversity“ is absent from our foundational documents: it does not appear in either the Declaration of Independence or in our Constitution.

How, then, did “diversity” become so ubiquitous—in education, government, and corporate America—and what does it really mean?

“Diversity” is in fact a top-down, divide-and-conquer strategy pitting Americans against each other based on race, ethnicity, and sex (and now including “gender” and gender ideology). It distracts from—and detracts from—talent and excellence, actually encouraging racial discord as everyone must have skin color or race in mind, rather than achievement or moral character. Accordingly, it destroys nations. Only corrupt politicians, owned and controlled by anti-American handlers, could parrot the lie that “Diversity is our strength.”

Many date the debut of diversity ideology from the 1978 Supreme Court case, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, where the medical school of the University of California at Davis had a special admissions program reserving 16 of its 100 open spots for minorities, often with lesser qualifications than white applicants, such as complainant Allan Bakke. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell announced in this opinion that “diversity” was a legitimate governmental interest. But he and the other justices rejected the medical school’s rigid quotas to get there—insisting, instead, that race should be one of many different criteria for admission even while stating that “racial and ethnic considerations are inherently suspect” under the Constitution.

These ambiguities guaranteed more fights about the role of race in college admissions and elsewhere.

In 2003, the Court made matters worse in Grutter v. Bollinger, where Justice Sandra Day O’Connor elevated “diversity” from a permissible state interest to a compelling one, finding that the University of Michigan law school’s racial preferences in admissions were lawful, provided they were tailored and individualized.

Historically, “compelling state interests” concerned public safety, national security, or the protection of minor children. With no history, tradition, or textual basis to do so, the Grutter Court not only shoved diversity onto this list but also put it above a citizen’s right to equal protection of the law guaranteed by the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment. For this reason, many called the decision illegitimate. In practice, this case was the official government stamp of approval for discrimination against Christian, heterosexual men of European descent, as they are the only demographic said not to contribute to diversity.

Keep reading