Skip to main content

How much for bruised feelings?

Let it Bleed offers analysis of the recent Kinghts of Columbus versus the gay crusaders (in small caps!) trial:
A couple of items to note: the panel acknowledges that the complainants were publicity hungry (para. 31: one of the first things they did was type a letter and then send it to "the media"), and seems to acknowledge that the complainants aren't terribly bright:
"There is no question that these items ["the crucifix, a picture of the ascension of the Virgin Mary, a picture of the Pope and pictures of the leaders of the Knights"] were displayed in the Hall. However, the Panel accepts the evidence of the complainants that they did not take notice of these items. ... Even if the complainants had noticed those items, the Panel is not persuaded that they would have made the connection between them, the Knights, and the fact that the Hall was a building with religious significance that may have had restrictions as to the types of events that could take place there." [emphasis added] (para. 83)
Laughably (well, not really, but what else can you do?) the Court awarded $1,000 to each of the complainants "for injury to their dignity, feelings and self-respect" (para. 151). What's pathetic is that the panel is not able, even once, to identify the actions which lead to these supposed injuries. There is absolutely no enumeration of what the Knights actually did to injure the complainants. Other than a reference at para. 42 to one of the complainants feeling "that their comments were offensive" (which "comments" these are is never explained), and noting that the Knights didn't offer a written apology (although everyone agreed that multiple verbal apologies were offered), it's unclear what the Knights did wrong.
More:
The panel's reasoning on other issues is just as lame and contradictory. They essentially fault the Knights for not doing something they are forbidden to do: restrict access to their premises to people who share their faith (see paras. 70-78). It's not even clear how the Knights could do this: what are they gonna do, make people present their laminated "I'm a Catholic" certificate? Nevertheless, the fact that the Knights don't "screen" people who enter their premises is used as a argument against the Knights being able to restrict activities that conflict with their core religious beliefs.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Hiatus will be blogged

This hiatus thing isn't going to plan. As I'm reading (books and blogs) I find things I think are interesting, or things I would like an opinion on, and bingo, my hiatus is in a shambles. So, *coughs*, until further notice, I'm blogging again. The main editorial difference that I can see coming from my few weeks away is that I do not expect to resume posting six out of seven days a week. There could be, at any time and without warning, a break of a week or two between posts. Really, I think that is the only way I can start to get some books behind me, and is also inevitable in the summer season when one wants to get out and enjoy it all. Here's a few things that got my attention this past week. Chris Taylor is blogging once again and has recruited an air force for the Red Ensign Brigade. Heh. Dennis Prager asks, Are you a liberal? Anglicans and Catholics are getting closer to reconciling -over the role of Mary in the Christian faith. Quote: A working group c...
Post a Comment
Read more

Ghost in the machine

In writing up this post I have to mention that I am very impressed with the quality of discussion that one finds on blogs. This truly is a remarkable medium. Thanks go to all three of the bloggers mentioned here for providing such good reading and thinking for the rest of us to try and learn from. I have not had a chance to read all of the entries linked to here, but I do intend to. ***** George Will compares two views of man in his latest column . One is novelist Ian McEwan, who places the following words into the mouth of the leading character in his latest novel, Saturday : Endless and beautiful forms of life, such as you see in a common hedgerow, including exulted beings like ourselves, arose from physical laws, from war or nature, famine and death. This is the grandeur. And a bracing kind of consolation in the brief privilege of consciousness. This character is a neurosurgeon. The quote reminds me that there may be some truth to the observation that those in the biological and...
Post a Comment
Read more