い い >> It has
stood the test of
00:01:20.01\00:01:33.96
time. God's book, the
Bible. Still relevant in today's
00:01:33.96\00:01:40.43
complex world. "It Is Written,"
sharing messages of hope around
00:01:40.43\00:01:48.97
the world. い い
00:01:48.97\00:02:02.48
>> Dear friends, over the last
few weeks, we've been having a
00:02:02.48\00:02:05.69
wonderful discussion on the
issue of freedom of religion and
00:02:05.69\00:02:09.56
freedom of choice. Now,
if you've happened to miss
00:02:09.56\00:02:12.33
any of the shows, you can go to
our website ItIsWrittenCanada.ca
00:02:12.33\00:02:16.43
or to our YouTube channel,
www.YouTube.com/IIWCanada.
00:02:16.43\00:02:23.57
There, you can find archives
of these programs, where we've
00:02:23.57\00:02:28.41
discussed the very basis of
any orderly society, and that is
00:02:28.41\00:02:33.11
freedom of religion or freedom
of choice. But beyond that, it's
00:02:33.11\00:02:38.62
actually the very basis of the
government of God -- the freedom
to choose, God's love expressed
00:02:38.62\00:02:46.83
through the choice of saying
"Yes" or saying "No" to him. God
originally created that
00:02:46.83\00:02:53.27
choice right in the garden
of Eden. Gentlemen, I'm so glad
00:02:53.27\00:02:57.37
that you're here to join me. We
have Kevin Boonstra, lawyer from
Vancouver, Mark Johnson,
00:02:57.37\00:03:02.14
President of the Seventh-Day
Adventist Church in Canada,
00:03:02.14\00:03:05.68
headquartered in Oshawa,
Ontario, and Gerry Chipeur,
headquartered as a lawyer right
00:03:05.68\00:03:12.95
there in Calgary. You know,
Gerry, I've had wonderful times
in Calgary, spent about a month
00:03:12.95\00:03:16.93
in Calgary giving some Bible
lectures. Really appreciate the
00:03:16.93\00:03:19.86
city of Calgary. >> Glad you
enjoyed it. >> Glad all of you
00:03:19.86\00:03:23.26
are here today. By the way,
Kevin, that's not to say that I
don't enjoy Vancouver.
00:03:23.26\00:03:25.83
I've spent a fair amount of time
in Vancouver, and my home is in
Oshawa, so I'm thrilled to
00:03:25.83\00:03:31.41
actually be anywhere I can
in Canada. Here's the question,
00:03:31.41\00:03:36.41
gentlemen. As we talk about this
issue of freedom of choice, the
freedom of religion, we've
00:03:36.41\00:03:44.12
talked about institutions, we've
talked about individuals, but
then there is a very core
00:03:44.12\00:03:50.69
concept -- and I'm going to ask
you, Mark, to speak of it from
the Bible -- of a unit that also
00:03:50.69\00:03:57.03
should enjoy the expression of
freedom. And what is that unit?
And it's actually one of the
00:03:57.03\00:04:01.84
very core pieces of
how society's organized.
00:04:01.84\00:04:05.24
>> Well, the beginning of
the history of the world from a
00:04:05.24\00:04:09.64
Christian worldview starts in
the garden of Eden. And in that
00:04:09.64\00:04:16.79
context, you have the nuclear
unit of society, which is the
family. First Adam and Eve,
00:04:16.79\00:04:22.82
then, of course, children come
along. Scripture all the way
back deep into the Old Testament
00:04:22.82\00:04:29.40
really talks about the role of
the family, the role of
children, speaks about honoring
00:04:29.40\00:04:36.91
parents when it comes to
children in the Ten
Commandments. Also speaks to
00:04:36.91\00:04:41.98
parents on the other side and
suggests that you don't try to
provoke your children to wrath
00:04:41.98\00:04:47.95
in the words of the old King
James version of the Bible. And
so there is a mutual respect
00:04:47.95\00:04:53.46
and a sense that here is kind of
a building block of society --
children in the context of older
00:04:53.46\00:05:01.50
generations working together
toward a common good, having a
common focus that goes beyond
00:05:01.50\00:05:09.30
the interest of a generation.
And so God designs the family as
a part of the working component
00:05:09.30\00:05:17.35
of society as we see it today.
>> One of the things I enjoy
most about reading the
00:05:17.35\00:05:21.95
scriptures in the context of the
family is that the family is
constructed as a unit in which
00:05:21.95\00:05:27.56
parents are educating the
children to be orderly citizens
not only of Heaven, but orderly
00:05:27.56\00:05:36.16
citizens of this very world that
they live in, and it conveys
these principles and values as
00:05:36.16\00:05:42.07
it's passed on from generation
to generation, and I enjoy the
one text that talks about the
00:05:42.07\00:05:48.04
binding of the Ten Commandments,
so to speak, upon the forehead
of the child, just implanting in
00:05:48.04\00:05:55.15
their mind. And when you read
the Hebrew, it -- not to get too
00:05:55.15\00:05:59.25
in-depth, but talking about the
very forebrain which where our
decision and processing is
00:05:59.25\00:06:03.56
happening -- that the Ten
Commandments as values and
principles are implanted, that
00:06:03.56\00:06:08.10
an individual would be a
faithful steward of this Earth
and a good citizen both on this
00:06:08.10\00:06:13.10
Earth and in preparation for
Heaven. Now, Kevin, let's talk a
00:06:13.10\00:06:18.41
little bit about -- we've talked
about the biblical basis of
family, the importance of that
00:06:18.41\00:06:23.71
family unit. What does
the law say about family?
00:06:23.71\00:06:27.55
>> So, the law in our country
recognizes the family as a
fundamental building block of
00:06:27.55\00:06:31.89
our society.
There's very little question
00:06:31.89\00:06:34.49
about that. And
we've been talking about
00:06:34.49\00:06:36.83
freedom of religion, and one
of the things I bring out is how
00:06:36.83\00:06:40.26
the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms and specifically the
00:06:40.26\00:06:42.86
freedom of religion in our
Charter has been interpreted by
00:06:42.86\00:06:46.03
the courts to recognize the
right of parents to raise and
00:06:46.03\00:06:49.44
inculcate their children in
accordance with their religious
00:06:49.44\00:06:51.91
beliefs. So, we've seen a number
of cases, educational cases and
00:06:51.91\00:06:55.84
others, in which the courts have
said, "No, that is an important
principle that we need to
00:06:55.84\00:07:00.82
support and we need to continue,
is the right of parents to raise
their children as they see
00:07:00.82\00:07:06.15
best. That's not to say that
there aren't some tough cases
00:07:06.15\00:07:10.93
that come before the courts from
time to time, and I'm thinking
about a case from the 1990s
00:07:10.93\00:07:15.70
called the Children's Aid
Society, and just the initials
of the child are given in the
00:07:15.70\00:07:20.74
case, and it's a tough case. It
was a Jehovah's Witness family,
and they didn't, for
00:07:20.74\00:07:23.97
religious reasons, didn't want
to give their very young child a
certain medical care, and the
00:07:23.97\00:07:29.44
life of the child was, for that
reason, going to be in jeopardy.
And the question was, well, if
00:07:29.44\00:07:35.05
we recognize the right of the
parents to educate and raise
their child in accordance with
00:07:35.05\00:07:38.95
their religious beliefs, where
does the right of the child come
00:07:38.95\00:07:42.76
in? And there was a number
of decisions. So, there's nine
00:07:42.76\00:07:45.33
judges on the Supreme Court of
Canada, they don't always agree,
and so sometimes you end up with
00:07:45.33\00:07:48.60
split decisions, and I think in
that case, there was more than
two. There were more than two
00:07:48.60\00:07:52.67
decisions of different judges
breaking out on what is a really
tough issue in a variety
00:07:52.67\00:07:57.41
of ways. And some of the judges
said, "No, it's also the right
00:07:57.41\00:07:59.91
of the child to be raised by
their parents in accordance with
their religious beliefs."
00:07:59.91\00:08:03.55
And so they found that if the
state would compel this medical
treatment, it would, in fact,
00:08:03.55\00:08:09.28
breach the freedom of religion
of that family. But the courts
00:08:09.28\00:08:14.29
went on and they said, "But in
these circumstances, the child
is not yet of an age where they
00:08:14.29\00:08:18.76
can choose that religion for
themselves, and their life is in
00:08:18.76\00:08:22.06
danger." So for that reason, the
court decided to override the
freedom of religion and say,
00:08:22.06\00:08:26.87
"No, we're going to allow the
mandating of this medical care
00:08:26.87\00:08:31.01
circumstances." in these
specific >> Now, that's kind of
interesting, and, Gerry, I want
00:08:31.01\00:08:34.81
to turn to you here, and I'm
gonna place a very difficult
question in your court. So,
00:08:34.81\00:08:40.12
we're talking about the breach
of religious freedom, the breach
of a freedom of choice here with
00:08:40.12\00:08:46.09
a family -- with regards to a
family in choosing how they are
raising their child.
00:08:46.09\00:08:51.63
Is that in accordance, from both
a biblical perspective and a
00:08:51.63\00:08:59.53
legal perspective? Is there room
in which we actually have to
breach that freedom of choice in
00:08:59.53\00:09:05.67
regards to a family?
>> Well, I think that the
00:09:05.67\00:09:08.34
Charter recognizes the idea that
there will be limits in a free
00:09:08.34\00:09:11.61
and democratic society because
it says so in Section 1 of the
00:09:11.61\00:09:14.88
Charter. The 1985 case that
we talked about a few weeks ago,
00:09:14.88\00:09:21.32
Big M Drug Mart, was really the
case that highlighted the
principles that will apply here,
00:09:21.32\00:09:27.50
and Chief Justice Dickson in
that case said that freedom of
religion guarantees you the
00:09:27.50\00:09:33.67
right to do anything that you
believe is important for
religious reasons --
00:09:33.67\00:09:39.87
anything that you choose to do
for religious reasons -- unless
00:09:39.87\00:09:46.65
it is harmful. And, of course,
that word "harm," that's the
test. So once you get into the
00:09:46.65\00:09:51.02
area of harm, then you get into
a balance, and the courts start
to balance the restriction on
00:09:51.02\00:09:57.86
your religious freedom, which is
harmful in and of itself, and
the harm of whatever it is that
00:09:57.86\00:10:02.96
you're choosing to do. It's like
my rights end at the beginning
of your nose if I'm
00:10:02.96\00:10:09.27
wanting to take a swing. So
that's the principle, and they
did apply -- the courts
00:10:09.27\00:10:15.68
have applied that in the case of
children in many cases. For
example, we have the issue
00:10:15.68\00:10:21.78
of polygamy that happened in
British Columbia, and one of the
problems with polygamy was child
00:10:21.78\00:10:27.89
marriage. That was a practice
that was part of the community
00:10:27.89\00:10:32.63
in Bountiful, and one of the
unfortunate instances that came
out in the case as it was
00:10:32.63\00:10:39.13
presented to the court was a
child marriage and rape in Texas
of a child from a family in
00:10:39.13\00:10:46.01
British Columbia. So these are
horrific things that occur, and
00:10:46.01\00:10:50.65
certainly the state, on behalf
of the children and on behalf of
society, has the right to
00:10:50.65\00:10:56.62
intervene where there is harm to
protect the vulnerable from
those who would abuse freedom of
00:10:56.62\00:11:03.19
religion for their own
gratification. >> And I think
that's -- so, we come to a
00:11:03.19\00:11:08.26
place, and I don't want to get
too heavy here, but I think it's
very important. You've mentioned
00:11:08.26\00:11:12.30
this word "harmful," both you
and Kevin have talked about this
in places where they would be
00:11:12.30\00:11:17.24
harm. Kevin, I'm gonna put you
on the spot just a little bit,
but let's talk about that
00:11:17.24\00:11:20.74
harmful aspect and maybe let's
define what that means. And I
know the courts kind of
00:11:20.74\00:11:26.05
define that, but what does that
mean to be harmful? And in
circumstances, how can
00:11:26.05\00:11:32.55
we, as thinking people, be clear
in our own minds that we might
have some black and white and
00:11:32.55\00:11:39.79
not a lot of gray issue when it
comes to these matters? Because
00:11:39.79\00:11:43.77
it can be kind of complicated
when we start talking about
different forms of schooling,
00:11:43.77\00:11:49.07
whether it be private schooling
or homeschooling or public
schooling. So, maybe talk a
00:11:49.07\00:11:53.68
little bit about this issue of
being -- of harmful, how that's
defined, and how we need to, as
00:11:53.68\00:12:02.12
thinking people, balance
the freedom of choice in that
00:12:02.12\00:12:07.46
context. >> Right. So, I think
you have to see harm on a
spectrum, right? You got extreme
00:12:07.46\00:12:12.76
harm on the one side, so the
case I talked about in the
Children's Aid Society, is the
00:12:12.76\00:12:17.00
life of the child is at risk. I
think most thinking people would
say, "That's a case -- if
00:12:17.00\00:12:21.87
there's going to be a case to
justify breaching freedom of
religion to protect a child,
00:12:21.87\00:12:26.74
that's about as clear a case as
you can get," because the life
of the child is in jeopardy.
00:12:26.74\00:12:31.28
>> Sure. >> At the other end of
the spectrum, you've got people
00:12:31.28\00:12:34.68
that would prefer to see other
families raising children in
accordance with whatever values
00:12:34.68\00:12:40.06
they hold. This moves from
actual, real harm to somebody
00:12:40.06\00:12:45.86
trying to impose on a family
their own conception of the good
life or their own conception of
00:12:45.86\00:12:51.23
morality or their own conception
of how children should be
00:12:51.23\00:12:55.64
raised. And they will view that
to be harm. They will view the
00:12:55.64\00:12:59.31
children raised in an
environment that they don't
quite agree with to be harm.
00:12:59.31\00:13:04.25
And I've seen arguments like
that from time to time, that
it's -- you know, the extremists
00:13:04.25\00:13:09.28
will call raising a child in
a certain way child abuse when
00:13:09.28\00:13:14.36
it's clearly not. So, you know,
when the physical safety and
health of the child is in
00:13:14.36\00:13:19.59
jeopardy, that's one end of the
spectrum. It's at the other end
where we start seeing arguments
00:13:19.59\00:13:24.33
where you're actually
interfering with the ability of
a family to inculcate its views
00:13:24.33\00:13:28.74
and raise children in accordance
with the values that that family
holds. And they need to -- those
00:13:28.74\00:13:34.14
families actually need to be
protected from others who wish
to impose on them their own set
00:13:34.14\00:13:38.91
of beliefs. >> Now, we were
talking before the show started.
00:13:38.91\00:13:41.88
I don't want to get into the
woods too quickly with a
hypothetical, but I think it
00:13:41.88\00:13:45.62
will help maybe clarify. In the
case that you spoke about where
we have a Jehovah Witness
00:13:45.62\00:13:50.16
family that have certain beliefs
on medical care and how that
medical care is administered,
00:13:50.16\00:13:56.06
the court intervened and said,
"Listen, the life, the health of
the child is at stake, and so in
00:13:56.06\00:14:02.67
this case, we're going to breach
that freedom of your choice."
However, where the court should
00:14:02.67\00:14:08.78
not and society should not
breach is that family should
still be able to raise the child
00:14:08.78\00:14:14.15
in accordance with Jehovah
Witness beliefs, that that
administration of health is
00:14:14.15\00:14:20.89
still a belief that they hold
dearly because, in their adult
life, they can make that choice.
00:14:20.89\00:14:27.30
Would I be clear on saying, in
that case, this -- and I know
it's a hypothetical, but does
00:14:27.30\00:14:33.00
that kind of clarify the issue?
They have the right to raise
their child to believe that way,
00:14:33.00\00:14:37.31
but they don't have the right to
necessarily enforce that -- and
I'll use the word "harm" in
00:14:37.31\00:14:41.78
quotation marks -- to "harm" the
child through not administering
00:14:41.78\00:14:45.65
that healthcare? >> Right,
right, and that's the sort of
balance that the court actually
00:14:45.65\00:14:49.28
did strike. There's nothing that
says they can't raise their
child to believe in that, to
00:14:49.28\00:14:53.42
believe that certain medical
care is inconsistent with God's
will. That's perfectly fine.
00:14:53.42\00:14:57.83
I talked about the spectrum. If
you're gonna go to the middle of
the spectrum, is the spanking
00:14:57.83\00:15:02.83
case. Some of the spanking
cases that we've seen, where the
00:15:02.83\00:15:06.17
Criminal Code has historically
allowed corporal punishment of
children. People have very
00:15:06.17\00:15:11.81
strong views on corporal
punishment when it comes to
children, and some people view
00:15:11.81\00:15:16.95
it as abuse, and other people
will view it as legitimate
discipline, and the question
00:15:16.95\00:15:21.72
there is, "Is it harm?" And
there, I think, there's some
intelligent debate that can be
00:15:21.72\00:15:27.62
had, but the harm question's, I
think, a lot more difficult
there. I think it's easy at one
00:15:27.62\00:15:31.06
end and it's easy, from my
perspective, at the other. But
on the spanking case, that
00:15:31.06\00:15:35.23
sort of thing becomes a bit
more difficult. >> Gerry, any
00:15:35.23\00:15:38.87
thoughts? >> Sure, and, you
know, the one issue that we
haven't talked about yet is the
00:15:38.87\00:15:44.47
fact that many provincial
governments across this country
have started to take the side of
00:15:44.47\00:15:52.65
maybe being too aggressive in
intervening. For example,
they've intervened where they
00:15:52.65\00:15:59.52
think the child is going to be
taught something that may not be
politically correct, and the
00:15:59.52\00:16:05.89
provinces have justified their
interference on the basis that
it's best for the child to be
00:16:05.89\00:16:13.10
raised to believe certain
things, and I think that's where
they cross the line.
00:16:13.10\00:16:16.60
I think that that is a line that
the courts have clearly drawn,
00:16:16.60\00:16:22.08
and the provinces,
unfortunately, are starting to
cross that line across the
00:16:22.08\00:16:27.72
country, and I see this issue
coming to court in the near
future, where the courts are
00:16:27.72\00:16:32.69
going to have to reset the
provincial governments and
remind them that they must
00:16:32.69\00:16:37.83
respect the rights of the
children to be raised by their
parents. >> And, Mark, let's
00:16:37.83\00:16:42.06
talk about, from a biblical
perspective, that freedom for a
family to raise their child.
00:16:42.06\00:16:46.67
And you've touched on it
briefly, but let's talk a little
bit more from a biblical
00:16:46.67\00:16:50.01
perspective. What kind of
allowances did the Bible -- does
00:16:50.01\00:16:54.28
the Bible make for that freedom?
>> Well, scripture's very
interesting because there are
00:16:54.28\00:16:58.45
different parts of the Bible
that reflect different eras.
They also reflect a different
00:16:58.45\00:17:05.32
type of message. When you read
the history books of the Old
Testament, there are
00:17:05.32\00:17:10.76
numerous statements which
basically say that the business
of making a child walk through
00:17:10.76\00:17:18.53
the fire, for instance, in
observance of a religious rite
is not appropriate because of
00:17:18.53\00:17:26.78
the implication of harm and
things of that nature. It is
interesting, in the time
00:17:26.78\00:17:34.38
of Christ and his ministry how
many times he was directly
involved in ministry that
00:17:34.38\00:17:40.76
related to children. They show
up in all sorts of narratives,
00:17:40.76\00:17:49.20
and the purpose of the family is
to create an environment where a
child can begin to figure out
00:17:49.20\00:17:57.27
how you live in this world. How
do you go about that? What is
00:17:57.27\00:18:01.51
reasonable? And that is,
essentially, a faith-based sort
of a situation, isn't it?
00:18:01.51\00:18:08.32
Because there is a context in
which families talk about what
is right and what isn't and all
00:18:08.32\00:18:13.52
of that kind of thing. So I
think it becomes a very
important thing in God's Word to
00:18:13.52\00:18:20.90
make the family the place where
the conversation takes place.
You can't abdicate the role of
00:18:20.90\00:18:26.90
the parent who brought the child
into the world to have a
considerable component in the
00:18:26.90\00:18:34.18
training of that child. That's
part of what God designed.
00:18:34.18\00:18:37.68
>> And so, Kevin, let's follow
that up a little bit, and we're
going to return to something you
00:18:37.68\00:18:42.02
said in our very first show
because -- and just a comment
00:18:42.02\00:18:45.99
you made before. So, what do we
do about this reality where
individuals or families are
00:18:45.99\00:18:54.83
trying to enforce, so to speak,
their value because they don't
value another parent's values?
00:18:54.83\00:19:00.14
How do we do wrestle around with
that? What do we do with that in
00:19:00.14\00:19:03.61
the context of we're seeing this
rise of moral relativism? >>
00:19:03.61\00:19:09.14
Right. I think you start with
the idea that we do, in fact,
recognize the family as a
00:19:09.14\00:19:15.12
fundamental social unit upon
which our society is
constructed. And we recognize
00:19:15.12\00:19:21.09
that those relationships are
deserving of respect and
deserving of protection.
00:19:21.09\00:19:26.09
And that the transmission of
morals happens within that
relationship for the reasons
00:19:26.09\00:19:31.03
that Mark was talking about. And
if you start from that premise,
00:19:31.03\00:19:35.94
that this is a fundamental
building block within our
society and that it's deserving
00:19:35.94\00:19:41.48
of respect and it's deserving of
protection, you start to build a
wall around the family and say,
00:19:41.48\00:19:47.02
"Only the clearest incursions
past that wall are gonna be
permitted." Gerry talked about,
00:19:47.02\00:19:53.15
you know, the level of
interference that we see from
the state. Now, the state has a
00:19:53.15\00:19:58.79
legitimate role in protecting
children when their parents are
abusive and that sort of thing,
00:19:58.79\00:20:02.83
and we can all think of clear
cases around that. But when the
00:20:02.83\00:20:07.07
state starts to impose a set of
morals into the family that
aren't necessary, strictly
00:20:07.07\00:20:13.84
speaking, for the physical
health of the child, it's on
dangerous grounds. So, there was
00:20:13.84\00:20:18.01
a case in the media, and because
it was in the media, I can't --
I don't know that everything
00:20:18.01\00:20:23.18
that's reported is true, but it
documented how one foster
family, it had their foster
00:20:23.18\00:20:27.82
children taken away 'cause they
said, "We're not gonna teach
these children about the Easter
00:20:27.82\00:20:32.53
Bunny 'cause we, as a
fundamental in our family, we
don't condone lying to the
00:20:32.53\00:20:36.83
children, and we view that to be
lying." And so their foster
children were taken out of the
00:20:36.83\00:20:39.90
house, and there was a dispute
about that. That's -- to me,
that's -- that level of
00:20:39.90\00:20:45.27
intrusion by the government is
too much, right? If this is a
foster family which was suitable
00:20:45.27\00:20:51.91
in which to put vulnerable
children and they're
transmitting a certain set of
00:20:51.91\00:20:57.15
values within their own
religious beliefs, then they
should be left to do that. >>
00:20:57.15\00:21:01.99
And just to -- you know, I'm
finding this -- and it's a very
interesting balance that takes
00:21:01.99\00:21:07.36
some thinking, but it's an
important balance in that
individuals must understand that
00:21:07.36\00:21:14.50
while we may not agree with
one's given moral code, and
let's just use Christianity as
00:21:14.50\00:21:19.67
an example. If I don't agree
with a family raising their
child up with Christian values,
00:21:19.67\00:21:24.28
whether that come through their
education in the home, their
education through schooling, and
00:21:24.28\00:21:31.25
whatnot, and I want to enforce
on them my secular view or
whatever view that happens to
00:21:31.25\00:21:37.09
be, we must understand that when
we begin to raise that flag and
we begin to enforce morality --
00:21:37.09\00:21:42.53
and I'll return to something
that I said before -- we begin
to ask the question "Whose
00:21:42.53\00:21:46.84
morality are we going to
enforce?" Because eventually,
once we remove that right for a
00:21:46.84\00:21:51.07
family to raise their child up
with Christian values or Jewish
values or Buddhist values,
00:21:51.07\00:21:55.54
whatever they may be, we must
understand that at some point --
and we've seen this before --
00:21:55.54\00:21:59.88
we talked about the case in
Quebec where, all of a sudden,
now in schools, there may be
00:21:59.88\00:22:04.05
people who don't want their
children educated in religion,
but now it's going to be
00:22:04.05\00:22:08.56
enforced. And so we need to
be very careful on this that,
00:22:08.56\00:22:11.46
although we may not agree, we
must agree to... not to make it
00:22:11.46\00:22:18.50
too simple, but we must agree to
disagree that we may each have
different values and we need to
00:22:18.50\00:22:23.14
respect those values, even
though we may not agree with
them. >> And that's really the
00:22:23.14\00:22:27.51
fundamental point, and to those
that would seek to impose a more
secular perspective onto a
00:22:27.51\00:22:33.92
religious family, I would say,
"What would you do if the
majoritarian group was Christian
00:22:33.92\00:22:39.29
and they were to insist that
your children be raised with a
certain set of Christian
00:22:39.29\00:22:43.49
principles and Christian
teachings, and would that be
acceptable within the confines
00:22:43.49\00:22:47.23
of your family?" If the answer
to that question is "No," as I
00:22:47.23\00:22:50.80
expect it would be, then the
converse must be true, as well
-- that the Christian family has
00:22:50.80\00:22:54.90
to be protected, to raise their
children in accordance with
their beliefs equally.
00:22:54.90\00:22:59.74
>> What are your thoughts on
that, Gerry? >> Well, I think
00:22:59.74\00:23:03.85
that if we go back again to the
decision of Chief Justice
Dickson in Big M Drug Market, we
00:23:03.85\00:23:10.09
find the answer to the question
that you posed, and he said that
what we do is we ask whether or
00:23:10.09\00:23:16.26
not the thing that's being
objected to, the thing that the
government wants to regulate, is
00:23:16.26\00:23:22.06
it in and of itself harmful? Is
it something that is otherwise
00:23:22.06\00:23:28.40
neutral? Is it otherwise
something that would not be
wrong? And if something is not
00:23:28.40\00:23:36.31
otherwise objectionable, then
just because it has a particular
moral or religious...
00:23:36.31\00:23:47.62
I guess you could say character
does not make it wrong. In other
00:23:47.62\00:23:55.80
words, if you have someone, with
respect to the Easter Bunny,
whether one has an Easter Bunny
00:23:55.80\00:24:02.27
or doesn't have an Easter Bunny,
those things, in and of
themselves, are not harmful.
00:24:02.27\00:24:07.18
So, in that case, the
government, looking at it,
should simply say, "We're not
00:24:07.18\00:24:11.81
going to get involved." And
I can tell you there's a recent
00:24:11.81\00:24:16.45
decision from the court of
appeal of Alberta where that
court of appeal was dealing
00:24:16.45\00:24:23.02
with, again, one of these cases
involving child custody. And the
social worker came to the court
00:24:23.02\00:24:30.47
and said, "I have a better plan.
I have a better person to take
care of this child than the
00:24:30.47\00:24:37.44
parents of the child." And it
was just a question of who's
better, one or the other,
00:24:37.44\00:24:43.48
and the court said, "That's not
the test. That can never be the
00:24:43.48\00:24:47.32
test because we go down a road
we can never come back from when
the court starts to measure one
00:24:47.32\00:24:54.52
parent against another. That can
never be the test." And the
court said it will never
00:24:54.52\00:24:59.66
be the test in Alberta. The test
is harm. If, in fact, a child is
00:24:59.66\00:25:04.93
being abused and is being
subject to actual harm, then the
state has a duty and a right to
00:25:04.93\00:25:13.24
intervene and take custody of
that child. Absent harm, absent
that level of intervention,
00:25:13.24\00:25:21.22
there is no role for the state
in measuring one set of parents
against another or one parent
00:25:21.22\00:25:26.52
against another or one social
worker against one parent.
There's no role for the state
00:25:26.52\00:25:32.49
until we get to that harm test
and we pass it. >> Mark, in our
00:25:32.49\00:25:37.20
final two minutes here, maybe
give us some final thoughts on
this issue of the family and
00:25:37.20\00:25:42.60
freedom of choice. >> God has
blessed us with a revelation of
00:25:42.60\00:25:50.45
Himself. We have the sense that
while we do not understand God
perfectly, He has a design for
00:25:50.45\00:26:00.79
humanity. And that leads us to
embrace a faith and a trust in
Him as the establisher of what
00:26:00.79\00:26:10.50
is appropriate, the convener of
how to live in real time between
the weekends, as we have said
00:26:10.50\00:26:18.64
before. And so the role of the
family, the role of parents to
00:26:18.64\00:26:24.71
children, and the role of
children to parents, by the way,
on the other side, is a divine
00:26:24.71\00:26:30.09
trust from God to people who
live in real flesh and blood in
00:26:30.09\00:26:36.96
a real world. >> Gentlemen,
powerful study today, and we
come away understanding that
00:26:36.96\00:26:42.80
whether we believe in God or
whether we do not, it is of
paramount importance to protect
00:26:42.80\00:26:49.04
the freedom of choice in the
context of family that all of us
may enjoy the freedom to live
00:26:49.04\00:26:57.05
with that choice. Mark, would
you close in prayer for us?
00:26:57.05\00:27:02.18
>> God, we thank you for giving
us the family and for giving us
00:27:02.18\00:27:08.02
choice. Thank you for the
freedom which comes with living.
We pray that you will guide each
00:27:08.02\00:27:14.56
one who may be listening to this
program and thinking how they
relate to this, that in real
00:27:14.56\00:27:20.80
time, in real life, they will be
able to figure out how best to
live as people in a real world
00:27:20.80\00:27:28.84
with a real God. In
Christ's name, amen. >> Amen.
00:27:28.84\00:27:34.55
Dear friends, the family unit is
one of the most important
aspects of a society.
00:27:34.55\00:27:40.62
It is through the family that
values are conveyed. Whether
00:27:40.62\00:27:44.53
those values be Christian
values, other religious values,
or secular values, values are
00:27:44.53\00:27:50.30
conveyed, and what is most
important in that family unit is
the freedom to choose, the right
00:27:50.30\00:27:55.97
and the freedom of religious
choice. Today, friends, I want
to offer you the DVD of this
00:27:55.97\00:28:02.74
program. I would encourage you
to utilize this program not only
in your own education, but share
00:28:02.74\00:28:08.98
it with friends that we would be
a society that is orderly
through our freedom to choose.
00:28:08.98\00:28:15.32
Here's the information you
need to receive today's offer.
00:28:15.32\00:28:18.19
>> To request
today's offer, just log on to
00:28:18.19\00:28:20.76
www.ItIsWrittenCanada.ca.
That's www.ItIsWrittenCanada.ca.
00:28:20.76\00:28:28.30
And select the TV Program tab.
For Canadian viewers, the offer
00:28:28.30\00:28:32.87
will be sent
free and postage paid.
00:28:32.87\00:28:35.24
For viewers outside of Canada,
shipping charges will apply.
00:28:35.24\00:28:39.11
If you prefer, you may call
toll-free at 1-888-CALL-IIW.
00:28:39.11\00:28:44.95
That's
1-888-CALL-IIW. Call anytime.
00:28:44.95\00:28:49.29
Lines are open 24 hours
daily. That's 1-888-CALL-IIW.
00:28:49.29\00:28:54.93
Or, if you wish, you may
write to us at It Is Written,
00:28:54.93\00:28:58.50
Box 2010,
Oshawa, Ontario, L1H 7V4.
00:28:58.50\00:29:03.47
And thank you for your
prayer requests and your
00:29:03.47\00:29:05.97
generous financial support. >>
Gentlemen, thank you so much for
joining me today and
00:29:05.97\00:29:10.35
providing such content for all
of us to think upon. And to you,
00:29:10.35\00:29:17.15
my dear friend, I would invite
you to prayerfully consider this
freedom to choose and religious
00:29:17.15\00:29:23.49
freedom and may all of us value
that choice. I hope you enjoyed
00:29:23.49\00:29:28.03
today's program. I invite you to
join us again next week. Until
then, remember, it is
00:29:28.03\00:29:32.57
written -- "Man shall not live
by bread alone, but by every
word that proceeds from the
00:29:32.57\00:29:39.21
mouth of God." い い
00:29:39.21\00:29:59.49
い い
00:29:59.49\00:30:18.45