Bill 24: Education (Alberta)

This video brings back memories. Just the mention of those 28 private schools reminds us all of the court challenge against Bill 24. The emails. The phone calls. The Gideon Project. The appeal hearing and ARPA’s intervention therein.

The requirements of the Alberta School Act added by Bill 24 caused confusion, tension, and a healthy fear about the future of Reformed education. The communication from the Alberta Education Ministry under the NDP government gave an even stronger indication that the Ministry was unwilling to back down on their demands that every school adopt a “Safe and Caring policy” with objectionable content.

If demanding that Reformed schools adopt terms like gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation, and allow “gay-straight alliance” clubs wasn’t enough, the Ministry demanded that Reformed schools remove from their policies all references to the Lord as the true source of wisdom and the infallibility of Scripture.

Reformed schools are safe schools. Perhaps the safest in the entire province, as the numbers suggest. Reformed schools protect all children, including those who struggle with gender dysphoria or are attracted to others of the same sex. Their safe and caring policies made this clear. And yet these policies were rejected and Reformed schools were told to post policies written for them by the government or risk losing funding in September of 2019. That’s where things came to a halt. Then along came an election.

Now we have a new government. A government that promised to bring the Education Act into force, which would eliminate the changes that Bill 24 made to education law. On June 5, 2019, Education Minister Adriana LaGrange introduced Bill 8, The Education Amendment Act. The Minister was attacked in the media and in the legislature. The debates in the legislature have been lengthy and heated. This video is just one example.

I’m sure this clip rekindled some emotions. A number of statements from the NDP are provoking: “28 private schools refusing to support GSAs.” “Push these types of discriminatory polices…” “We gave them time to come in line with Bill 24 and Charter rights.” “Transphobic school.” “Choose to discriminate against children.”

To be clear, we must always respect and pray for our government leaders including the leader of the opposition. But we must also hold them accountable. The previous government was driven and committed to an ideology that is an affront to God. We took a stand and made it clear that it is our Christian duty to raise children as God directs us. The Bible commands us to do this and our Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows us to do this.

“To be clear, we must always respect and pray for our government leaders including the leader of the opposition. But we must also hold them accountable.”

Bill 8. “Bill Hate”? “Bill Straight”? Well, the NDP can call it what they want, but it’s better than the old Bill Dictate. All the rhetoric, nastiness, and insults should never stop parents and students from speaking up for their freedom to have schools that remain true to the Christian faith and the Word of God.

And so, it was refreshing to hear our Premier support diversity, religious freedom, and school choice. If you have a moment, contact his office and thank him and encourage him. There is still more work to do and more legislation needed to protect faith-based schools and their religious freedoms.

Colin is away today, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have a show for you!

In this episode:
Mark promotes a brand new position within ARPA Canada
New developments on bill 24 in Alberta
Mike and Andre share their experience at a conference with 1200 Evangelical Christians.

The new year has just begun and already we have some encouraging news to share with you from Alberta! On Tuesday, January 8th, ARPA Canada applied for and was granted intervenor status in the court challenge to Bill 24, a bill which mandates unacceptable changes to school policies. You can read more about our concerns on Bill 24 here.

We praise the Lord for the court’s decision to grant us intervenor status, and the added privilege of presenting evidence in this case. We pray that God will bless these efforts.

Typically, a court intervention allows a third party to bring their perspective to the judge in the form of written, and sometimes oral arguments. What’s really special about ARPA’s intervention in this case is that Justice Kubic, the judge presiding over this case, also gave ARPA special permission to present evidence to the court, a case study of the effect of the law on the Reformed Christian community through affidavit evidence and oral arguments. This is a huge development, as allowing an intervenor to present evidence is a very rare occurrence. We are thankful that, in addition to the parental rights argument and general constitutional arguments brought forward by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, we now have the opportunity to present a distinctly Reformed argument.

André Schutten, ARPA’s Director of Law and Policy, was in the Lethbridge courthouse to argue for this intervenor status. Ed Hoogerdyk, ARPA’s Alberta Manager, was an observer in the courtroom and sent in this report:

André boldly and succinctly presented ARPA’s case. He clearly articulated that this case is not just about parental rights; the requirements of the new law affect our homes, children, churches, and schools – the entire Reformed community. André explained who the Reformed Christian community is, and how the legislation affects this community which has a unity of purpose between home, church, and school. He highlighted the fact that independent education is a hallmark of the Reformed Christian community. He noted the importance of parental authority and responsibility and that the state cannot replace parents in the education of their children.

André stressed to the court that our schools are protecting all students within their walls, including those who struggle with gender dysphoria or who are attracted to others of the same sex. However, the love and support for these students is done, and can be done, in a way that is true to the religious identity and theological commitments of the Reformed community. While this will look different than the approach preferred by the education minister and some activists, different approaches to protecting and supporting students should not only be tolerated but celebrated. And certainly, the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom requires the Minister of Education to accommodate religious differences.

You can watch the livestream video filmed outside the courthouse after the hearing below.

We praise the Lord for the court’s decision to grant us intervenor status, and the added privilege of presenting evidence in this case. We pray that God will bless these efforts and use them to strengthen and defend the Reformed Christian community so that this community can be a blessing to the people of Alberta and a faithful witness to the goodness of their Lord.

Alberta Manager Ed Hoogerdyk provides an update on ARPA’s Gideon Project.

The recent passing of Bill 24 could have a serious impact on the operation, governance, accreditation, and funding of Christian schools. Consequently, the state of Christian education continues to be of serious concern in our circles. Parents want to be engaged and informed about what goes on at their schools. However, it appears the Alberta government wants to limit parental involvement especially in the area of sexuality and gender issues. Understandably this has caused some stress, if not confusion, about what this legislation really means for the future sustainability of our schools. What follows is an FAQ highlighting questions and concerns that our supporters may have.

FAQ:

Remind me, what exactly is Bill 24?

Bill 24 is entitled An Act to Support Gay Straight Alliances (GSAs). It passed into law on November 15, 2017, amending sections 16.1 and 45.1 of the School Act. Its stated purpose is to provide a safe, caring, and inclusive environment for students who identify as LGBTQ+. In reality Bill 24 was a bill with an ideological bent, requiring all schools, including independent Christian schools, to adopt a view of sexuality and gender that is harmful and contrary to scripture.

What does Bill 24 actually require?

Bill 24 requires a school principal to immediately allow a Gay-Straight Alliance club (GSA) upon a student’s request. This is to be done without parental notification. The principal may not even consult the board in such a situation. Once a GSA has been formed in a school, students are allowed to organize Pride events or special LGBTQ+ events (posters, advertising, guest speakers, pride parades, etc.). Events organized by a GSA must be allowed by a principal, again without parental notification or consultation with the school’s board of directors.

Couldn’t a Christian school declare that they have a policy that conforms to the requirements of Bill 24, without having to follow it? Or, could a Christian school have a Bill 24 policy that they “interpret and apply” from a Christian perspective?

We don’t see how this is possible. First of all, if a Christian school declares they have a Bill 24 compliant policy, and post that policy to their public website (as required by the law), but have no intention of adhering to it, they not only break the 9^th commandment, but sully the reputation of the Christian community as liars in the process. This is not what Jesus was suggesting when he instructed us to be wise as serpents.

Furthermore, when we play out the scenario, it ends in disaster:

School implements a policy under s. 16.1 of the School Act (Bill 24), and proclaims to the Alberta government and Alberta public via their website that this policy is in force at their school
A student at the school requests a GSA club or activity (e.g. flying rainbow flag for pride week, or having a drag queen come to the school to read I Am Jazz to the grade 1-4 kids)
Principal must “immediately grant permission” for the requested club or event (s. 16.1(1)(a), which must be, verbatim, in the school policy as per s. 45.1(4)(b))
Principal can either:
comply (thus potentially compromising a Christian conviction on an ethical issue); or
not comply (thus violating the policy)
Assuming the principal does not comply, the student has the ability to go directly to the Minister of Education to ensure the initiative does happen.
The Minister has the legal authority to “inquire into and report on any appeal, complaint or dispute” (s. 40(1))
Depending on what that inquiry reveals, the Minister can “appoint a responsible adult to work with the requesting students in organizing the activity or to facilitate the establishment, and the ongoing operation, of the student organization at the school” (School Act, s. 16.1(4).)
The “responsible adult” referred to in s. 16.1(4) is most likely a person who holds views contrary to the school on issues of sexual ethics and identity.

When we play out the scenario, it seems to us that it will be impossible to maintain the integrity and character of a Christian school, at least as it relates to issues of identity and sexual ethics.

What kind of “teeth” does Bill 24 have?

Bill 24 pairs with Bill 10 (passed in 2015) and Bill 7 (passed in 2017). Bill 7 amended the Alberta Human Rights Act, adding gender identity and expression as prohibited grounds of discrimination. You can read more about that Bill here. Bill 10 had the same purpose as Bill 24 but was not as authoritarian. Under Bill 10 the minister of education could threaten schools with loss of accreditation and/or funding if schools decided not to comply. Therefore Bill 24 was passed to provide the minister of education with the power to remove accreditation and/or funding from schools, including private schools, should these schools not comply.

Do you have more information on the legal implications of Bill 24?

For specific details about Bill 24 including legal ramifications please check out these links:

Bill 24 Threatens Parental Rights in Alberta

Parental Rights are Human Rights: Alberta’s Bill 24 Violates Charter Freedoms

How Bill 24 Seeks to Isolate Children and Control Schools

Why is this a problem?

Bill 24 is a problem for many reasons:

It fails to recognize unconditional love that parents have for their children, whether they identify as LGBTQ+ or not (there are exceptions, but these are very few).
It puts the issues of sexual identity, gender issues, and sexuality in general in the hands of the state instead of the home.
It infringes on the rights of parents to educate their children according to their faith commitments.
It violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because it fails to balance parental rights with the governments objectives.
It allows for an individual’s (even a very young child) demands to trump parental rights and responsibility.
It insists on language that a school must adopt in their safe, caring, and inclusive school policies; this is concerning because policies define schools.
It forces faith-based schools to adopt the ideas and worldview behind the government policies being proposed.

Why is there pressure on schools right now?

All schools in Alberta were required to have their Safe, Caring, and Inclusive Schools policies compliant with Bill 24 and completed by April 1, 2018. The policies were also required to be posted on each school’s website by June 30. All Alberta schools must comply with Section 45.1 of the School Act as per the annual declaration found in the Annual Operating Plan (AOP). This AOP is submitted annually by all Alberta schools. By complying with Section 45.1, by “checking the box,” schools state that they agree with and comply with all the requirements of Bill 24. This puts a lot of pressure on those schools who are compelled by their faith beliefs to not “check the box”. Furthermore, Minister of Education David Eggen has repeatedly stated that allschools must comply or they may face loss of accreditation and/or funding.

A number of schools, including those in the coalition (more on that below) decided not to check the box. Letters from the Ministry of Education asked these schools to clarify their position and to respond by July 31. These schools submitted responses that inform Alberta Education that the schools feel their policies do comply with the standards and requirements of Bill 24 insofar as those requirements align with the Alberta Human Rights Act and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

At the beginning of August, the Alberta government relented somewhat. They elected to abandon their attempt to compel schools to attest to comply with the School Act in order to actually scrutinize the Annual Declarations/AOP submissions. Most schools were advised that their Annual Declarations would be processed. Some noted that this was a small, but noteworthy victory.

From what I understand then, Alberta Education has extended compliance deadlines a number of times after which they warn schools about potential loss of funding and accreditation. Are schools really under that much pressure? In other words, is the government not just “bluffing?”

This is a great question. We obviously can’t provide a direct answer as to whether or not the Alberta government is bluffing. However, we can inform you that the government continues to use strong language consistently in their correspondence with schools regarding deadlines and compliant policies.

On August 27 the Deputy Minister of Education informed schools that a 30-day deadline to post a compliant policy is being imposed, running from the date each individual school receives an email from Alberta Education providing detailed feedback on its policy. The Deputy Minister attached two template policies to assist schools.

Many Christians have expressed concern that these templates still undermine religious freedom and the parents’ rights and responsibilities for their own children. The lawyers assert that government has failed to indicate any flexibility in enforcing the implementation of Bill 24’s policy requirements on faith-based schools. If a school fails to meet even a single requirement of Bill 24, the government will hold that school not to be in compliance, and subject to the threatened repercussions.

The government has informed schools, in writing, that failure to comply may result in consequences that can include a Ministerial Order establishing a policy and requiring the posting of the policy, an investigation or inquiry, and/or funding implications. An investigation or inquiry may result in the suspension or cancellation of accreditation, or any other order the Minister deems appropriate. Furthermore, Alberta Education has gone public to repeat these warnings and threats. In an interview on August 30th, David Eggen said if law-abiding policies aren’t posted by early October, he will impose policies on reticent schools. If the schools fail to post the imposed policy, he’ll withdraw their public funding before the end of the school year. You can read more about that here.

With repeated threats to accreditation and funding, schools will feel pressured to abandon their position defending the integrity of their faith-based programing and parent-child relationships. However, in a constitutional democracy such as Canada, it is critical that Canadians be willing to maintain principled stands against totalitarian governments and appeal to courts which are entrusted with the duty of upholding our free society.

I’ve heard about a coalition of schools taking the province to court. Who are they and what are they trying to accomplish?

There are a number of Reformed schools that have joined a coalition of other schools, individuals, educational organizations, and parent organizations. This coalition has joined a court challenge against the minister of education led by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF). The purpose of the court challenge is to take a stand for: religious freedom, conscience rights, freedom of association, and parental rights.

For more information on the original court challenge, check out this link.

The coalition of schools tried to get an injunction. What does that mean, and where does it leave them?

The coalition sought an injunction of Bill 24 and its requirements. The purpose of the injunction was to get a stay (which by default would also include the requirements under Bill 10). A stay is a legal term meaning that all requirements would be “stopped” until the case would get a proper hearing and ultimately a decision regarding Bill 24’s constitutionality.

Unfortunately, the judge did not grant the coalition an injunction. This decision was disappointing but hardly unexpected. What follows are some highlights of the decision:

According to the court there were no constitutional issues at stake. Furthermore, the court stated that religious rights are not being infringed.
The court also concluded that there is no threat for parental rights; the balance of convenience is on the side of the government.
There has never been a case in the country where broad rights of children clash with parental rights.
The court rejected affidavit evidence regarding harm to children and promotion of gender ideology.
The court claimed it needed to hear from the children directly. This is an unusual finding for a court as vulnerable children should normally have the right to have parents speak on their behalf.
Expert medical evidence was also rejected by the court (Experts warned that children are vulnerable re: gender issues).
The court also cited the Trinity case and rejected the notion of infringement of religious rights.

In light of all these developments, JCCF has filed an appeal. Front and center in the appeal will be the concern that the court is acting as an activist. JCCF has assured coalition schools that they plan to continue to stand up for parental rights, conscience rights, and religious freedom. At the time of writing, no specific date has been finalized yet but a hearing is expected in September, 2018.

Regardless of the outcome of the injunction appeal, how long can we expect the case to take?

In today’s “instant gratification” society we expect results and we expect them quickly. Court cases such as this can take a very long time. Both sides plan to be in this for the long haul. In other words, the court case will likely find its way all the way to the Supreme Court which could take three years or longer.

In light of ongoing pressure from Alberta education, what should schools be doing?

Schools should be going to the JCCF for any legal advice. Furthermore, schools should remain principled and stay the course without compromising core convictions regardless if other schools in the coalition do otherwise. We remind all schools that your policies define you. Therefore, ensure that your policies align completely with the mission, vision, and values of your school.

What is ARPA Canada’s role now?

ARPA will be contacting schools to assist in any way possible, without interfering with the JCCF’s court case. Our team has worked hard to challenge both Bill 10 and Bill 24 when they were debated in the legislature. We have met with government officials recommending amendments to Bill 24.

ARPA has provided pro-bono consultation with schools who sought input while creating Safe, Caring, and Inclusive Schools policies. Furthermore, ARPA created a document in order to assist schools in formulating solid language in their policies, so as not to adopt the required language under Bill 24. This document is entitled Protect Them All.

God has blessed ARPA with the hiring of an Alberta Manager, namely, Ed Hoogerdyk. One of Ed’s goals will be to build and sustain long-term relationships with government officials. It is our hope and prayer that this relationship building will bear much fruit and result in amendments which better reflect Biblical principles.

ARPA will also attempt to receive intervenor standing in the case, when that is possible. Please pray for this effort as intervenor status requirements in Alberta appear to be much more restrictive compared to other provinces. An ARPA intervention would argue a Reformed perspective on education, the role of parents, the community aspect of our religion (the doctrine of the communion of saints, and how that’s counter to the individualism of our current culture), the doctrine of the Imago Dei and the Reformed view on the separation of church, state and family and how Bill 24 undermines all of this, indeed, threatens it in an existential way.

ARPA will continue to do our best to keep grassroots informed on developments. Stay tuned for monthly newsletters, our Quick Updates, and our regular Facebook posts. If you require a face-to-face visit or consultation from the Alberta Manager, don’t hesitate to contact Ed Hoogerdyk. His contact information can be found below.

What can I do?

Pray! Heed our call to prayer. Pray for our government officials. Pray that God will provide them with wisdom and discretion. Pray that God will continue to provide parents with the freedom to establish Christian schools that educate their children according to Biblical principles.

Encourage school leaders and school personnel. This is a very challenging time for them. Write letters to your school board thanking them for their courage and encouraging them to stay the course.

Stay principled. Take the time to read and meditate on Scriptures related to the responsibility appropriated to parents, the obedience required of our children, and the duties assigned to the state. Some suggestions include: Deuteronomy 6, Ephesians 6, Colossians 3, Psalm 78, Psalm 127, Romans 13.

Conclusion:

It has been a privilege and a blessing to operate and govern our Christian schools here in Alberta. God has blessed these schools with capable leadership, quality teachers, and engaged parents. Our concerns and fears are understandable. But we have a place to lay these concerns and fears. And this place is the throne of God, the throne of our Heavenly Father. He will hear our prayers (Psalm 116:1). He will execute justice (Psalm 103:6, Psalm 146:7). He will bless us and protect us (Psalm 84:11). Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the Lord our God (Psalm 20:7).

Here’s a 5 minute update on what ARPA’s been up to this week.
On this episode,
– Colin elaborates on euthanasia
– Ed Hoogerdyk speaks up about bill 24
– Mike Schouten is live in Abbotsford BC to give an update about the We Need A Law billboard campaign.

by Mark Penninga

Many of us are ready to disengage for the summer, leaving behind the stress of our regular lives. But before doing so, please take a moment to reflect on yesterday’s Alberta court ruling against the application for an injunction on Bill 24.

This may sound like Greek, and largely irrelevant to you. But it isn’t.

For starters, have a look just at page 1 of the decision. Look at the names of the schools listed in the court challenge. Do any of them look familiar to you?

This may be the first time Reformed schools have ever taken the government to court in this country. And these schools have joined this legal challenge because they understand that their fundamental freedoms are at stake, including the freedom to live in accordance with their Christian faith.

The focus of the case is on Bill 24 (an Act to Support Gay-Straight Alliances), which applies to all schools in the province. School authorities were given the deadline of June 30 to make their “safe and caring” policies publicly available. Under the capable organization of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), these schools challenged the legislation in court. The coalition also applied for an injunction which would delay the effect of this law until the court makes a final decision which will not be before the June 30 deadline. The schools want this injunction fearing the consequences for not complying with the law knowing education Minister David Eggen went on record saying “Schools that don’t follow the law will risk having their accreditation and funding stripped, period.”

Yesterday the court dismissed the injunction, and cited the recent TWU decision in doing so (more on that here). We are thankful that the JCCF will appeal this. And it is also important to realize that the final decision on the constitutionality of Bill 24 itself won’t be rendered until next year.

But this means that June 30 deadline is going to come and go. We don’t know what this will mean for these schools. But it is not going to be easy.

I commend the schools for their principled and faithful stance. At least twice the ARPA team has addressed the theme of civil disobedience when touring through Alberta to discuss the challenges we are facing in education. We explained that Scripture calls us to stand up against the State and even disobey the State should it require that we and our children follow its doctrines rather than God’s. But we also said that civil disobedience has to be civil. We may only disobey on the very specific point at which the State tells us we must do something that God forbids. And we must also exhaust the legal options that are open to us. That includes appealing this week’s ruling. You can learn more about this topic here. I believe these Alberta schools are doing an excellent job being faithful to their convictions and making use of every legal means possible to comply with the state’s requirements.

So where do we go from here?

I urge readers to pray! Pray for a softening of heart for Alberta’s government. That includes the Premier and Education Minister, but it also includes those MLAs who simply are not being as courageous and principled on social issues as they should.

Please pray for the schools and organizations impacted, that they may move forward with courage and wisdom, relying on the LORD. Please also pray for the JCCF, which is leading the coalition of schools, that they may do a good job in their defence and also act with wisdom and faithfulness.

Also, please encourage the schools, including the administrators and school boards, as they will be feeling stress and will have to be very careful in their communication with the Ministry of Education in the coming weeks and months. And please encourage the JCCF, as they have such a huge weight on their shoulders.

If you live outside of Alberta, realize how quickly Alberta went from being the province that had the most educational freedom in the country just four years ago, to the province most hostile against parental authority and Christian schools. In other words, please don’t assume that your province is somehow immune to similar challenges. On the contrary, when it comes to social policy it is evident that provinces have been keen to quickly copy and paste laws and policies from each other, especially if it appears they can get away with it while also making the opposition parties squirm.

We don’t know what lies in store for Alberta schools and parents. But we should not fear. God is watching over us, as He always has. He calls us to be faithful, alert, and awake. May these words from 1 Peter 5 be on our minds, also through the summer:

Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you. Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world. And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you. To him be the dominion forever and ever. Amen.

Yes, let us enjoy the summer. But we should do so awake, and sober-minded.

[Learn more about a Christian case for eliminating lists of special identity groups in school policies, and find a sample bullying prevention policy in ARPA’s “Protect Them All” document available here.]

TWU ruling cited as precedent

Update: We have published a new article with analysis of this decision here.

Less than two weeks after the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision against Trinity Western University, a coalition of parents and independent schools in Alberta, including all of the Reformed schools in the province, has lost an application for an injunction to delay implementation of Bill 24, “An Act to Support Gay-Straight Alliances”. Among other things, the law makes it illegal for anyone in the education system – be that in public, private, or parochial schools – to inform parents if their children have joined a Gay-Straight Alliance support group.

The law is being challenged on the grounds that it infringes on parental rights, but that hearing won’t happen until sometime in 2019. Last week, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms applied to a court in Medicine Hat for a temporary injunction to halt the implementation of that law until the main court case is heard.

The independent schools are worried that they may lose their funding and accreditation if they don’t sign forms by the end of this month, promising to abide by the new legislation. For that reason, the coalition argued, an emergency temporary injunction was needed to allow time for the main case to be heard.

However, in a ruling issued in Medicine Hat this morning, Madam Justice Johnna C. Kubik denied the application for an injunction, writing that – based on testimony from an Assistant Deputy Minister of Education in last week’s injunction hearing – “there is no evidence to suggest that the schools will be defunded or de-accredited for the upcoming school year, and there is no reason to take prohibitive steps to prevent defunding or de-accreditation.”

On the broader issue of parental rights as they are informed by the Charter guarantee of Freedom of Religion, Justice Kubik cited part of the recent Supreme Court of Canada ruling on the Trinity Western Law School case, writing that “minor limits on religious freedom are often an unavoidable reality of a decision-maker’s pursuit of its statutory mandate in a multicultural and democratic society.”

The JCCF said in a press release that an appeal is being considered.

ARPA Canada urges readers to pray for wisdom and strength for the JCCF team, the school administrators and boards, and all those impacted by this. We heartily thank the JCCF for their sacrificial leadership on this case and encourage readers to make the JCCF aware of their appreciation and to consider financially supporting them so that they have the means to continue their important work. They are being very generous in leading this challenge at no cost to the schools. If you can help them cover their costs and press on in spite of setbacks, please consider doing so.

(Lighthouse News – June 26, 2018): A ruling is expected by the end of this week in the first round of a court battle over Alberta’s Bill 24. That is the bill that mandates every school to institute gay-straight alliance (GSA) clubs on request from any student, and to hide information about students from their parents, along with a threat of denying funding or accreditation if they don’t comply.

A coalition of parents, Christian schools (including the Reformed schools in the province), and others are taking the Alberta government to court over the issue of parental rights that are raised by the Bill. The main court hearing on that challenge won’t be heard until next year, but last week, that coalition was in court in Medicine Hat, Alberta. They applied for a temporary injunction to stop the government from actually implementing the bill until the main court case is heard.

John Carpay

The group’s lawyer, John Carpay of the Calgary-based Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, says the timing is critical. “We’ve got a June 30^th deadline by which – under the law as it’s drafted – these schools have to sign what amounts to kind of an attestation saying that they are going to comply with this legislation, and if they don’t (do that), they going to lose their funding and accreditation.” He says the Alberta government is essentially telling schools and parents that if they’re seeking to assert (their) constitutional rights and freedoms in court, they’re going to be punished with the removal of their funding and accreditation.

The injunction application came less than a week after the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against Trinity Western University’s Law School application in a judgement that many considered a blow to religious freedom in Canada. But Carpay says the two cases are substantively different. “Legally,” he says, “there ought not to be any impact”, because the Supreme Court was ruling about whether Law Societies had the authority to regulate law schools. “Why that would have any bearing on the right of a parent to know what is going on with their five-year old child in regard to GSA’s… there shouldn’t be any impact.”

In an interview with Lighthouse News, Carpay also said he doesn’t think the TWU ruling will be able to be consistently sustained in other cases going forward, as the ruling is primarily made up of “political rhetoric and repetition of mindless slogans about ‘diversity’ and ‘equality’. I mean legally, since I went to law school in 1995, it is the worst Supreme Court decision that I have ever read, and not just because I disagree with it. There’s (just) not much legal reasoning in the majority judgement, and there’s a complete disregard for the facts on the ground.”

He says it’s “impossible” to know how last week’s court hearing went. The judge “simply listened to both sides, and said she would be issuing a ruling by the end of the month.”

ARPA Canada is urging readers to pray that the judge grants the injunction and that Alberta schools and educational leaders respond to the court’s decision with wisdom and courage.

You can listen to the full Lighthouse News broadcast here.

by Lighthouse News

The Alberta government is facing a lawsuit over Bill 24. That’s the law – passed late last year – which expressly forbids school teachers, principals, or other school employees from telling parents about whether their own children join so-called “gay-straight alliance clubs”. The government claimed at the time that the prohibition is about “protecting children from abusive parents”.

But now, a group of 24 religious schools, eight parents and a pair of non-profit groups have launched a constitutional challenge of the law. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announced the court challenge last week.

In announcing the suit, the JCCF’s John Carpay told a Calgary news conference that “Bill 24 is a threat to the safety of vulnerable and at-risk children in Alberta.”

Lawyer John Carpay for the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

Carpay told Lighthouse News in a subsequent interview that the suit is based on several basic legal principles, including the fact that Canada is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. “(The Covenant says) that the government must respect the freedom of parents to educate their own children according to their own moral and religious convictions.”

Further, Carpay says, the bill violates parental rights as guaranteed in sections 2 and 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. “The Charter right to life, liberty, and security of the person (includes) parental rights. (And) section 2 protects freedom of conscience and religion, which means the right of parents to educate their children in religious schools, and the government has to respect the character and culture of these faith-based schools.”

The actual case likely won’t be heard for at least a year, but there is a court date looming at the end of this month, in which Carpay’s group will be asking for an injunction to stay the effects of the law pending the outcome of the full court process, which could take up to two years. “We want a court order that this legislation is null and void while the court action is taking place.”

ARPA Canada plans to file for intervenor status in the case. André Schutten, ARPA’s Director of Law & Policy, indicated that getting intervenor status in Alberta is particularly difficult but that “we don’t know if we don’t try and so we will.” When asked what the main thrust of ARPA’s argument would be, Schutten explained, “We hope to present the court with a distinctly Reformed perspective on the issue of parental rights, with reference to our covenant obligations particularly made at baptism. We have a strong commitment to parent-directed education that needs to be explained to the court.”

ARPA Canada is excited for this development and hopes that, with God’s blessing, the courts will protect the right and responsibility of parents to direct the education of their children without state interference. Schutten asks, “Please do pray for a blessing on our efforts.”

You can listen to the full interview with John as featured on our Lighthouse News broadcast here.