The World Post Section 13

I have confirmed from several sources that this story is basically correct.  Arthur Topham, publisher of The Radical Press, was indeed recently arrested for hate crimes, for among other things publishing material like The Biological Jew and The Protocols of  The Elders of Zion on his website.  So post section 13--assuming parliament finally passes Brian Storseth's private member's bill repealing that part of the Canadian Human Rights Act--all the players remain the same.  B'nai Brith, for example, has said quite clearly that they will continue their efforts to fight anti-Semitic  speech on-line via the  criminal code.

The only  difference is that the police will sub-in for officers from the various human rights commissions and tribunals, and folks like Mr. Topham will wind-up going to the pokey rather than getting a letter in the mail.  Somebody explain to me how this is an improvement.

Whatcott Triumphant

One-time Free-D denizon "Wild" Bill Whatcott, who I've written about here, has won his appeal in the Whatcott vs. Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal case:

In a decision released February 25, the 3-member court ruled that William Whatcott did not violate section 14(1)(b) of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code by distributing flyers to oppose the teaching of homosexuality in Saskatoon’s public schools.

The decision, which I haven't read, is here. From the Canadian Constitution Foundation's (CCF) response, it doesn't sound like it touches on the constitutionality of the law.

Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal: Public Officials Check Your Religion At The Door

[55] I agree with the tribunal’s finding that Mr. Nichols performs a governmental activity when he acts as a marriage commissioner. As a government actor, he is not permitted to consider his personal religious views when performing his public functions.

So a marriage commissioner in Sask. cannot refuse to marry same-sex partners. At least not yet. But, given given the rulings cited in that judgement, it is difficult to see how "conscientious objection" exemption would survive a test of constitutionality under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.