Re: “Law societies can deny accreditation to Christian university’s school: court,” June 16.
Many of us might not be able to comply with the “community covenant” set by Trinity Western University, yet still find the Supreme Court of Canada’s recent ruling in favour of the Law Society of B.C. rather troubling.
It’s important to note that nobody is forced to enrol at Trinity Western, so its moral code obviously must be acceptable to all those who do. The Catholic Church would fully endorse what Trinity’s covenant says, yet there doesn’t seem to be any issue about where the graduates of Catholic schools end up.
This decision is the reverse of what our own Court of Appeal decided; it had two very strong dissenting judges.
One of the majority judges (Beverley McLachlin) said the court arrived at the right decision for the wrong reason; the majority judges decided the way they did for four different reasons. All this makes it one of our highest court’s less commendable decisions.
That the law societies of six other provinces support Trinity’s accreditation is a further reflection of the court’s muddled unanimity. It’s truly an Orwellian scenario when the law society has the legal sanction to require its members to think the same way on a controversial moral issue.
A diverse legal profession should be able to tolerate among its members the moral views that are still maintained by a substantial proportion of Canada’s population. This decision cannot be consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms with respect to both freedom of religion and expression.
Barry Gaetz
Victoria
