To many, the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in the case of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission vs. William Whatcott was a triumph for the rights of vulnerable groups to be protected from the harm caused by extreme expressions of hate and discrimination.
To others, it was a triumph of censorship and a blow against the democratic principles of freedom of expression and religion.
The unanimous ruling handed down by the country's highest court on Wednesday upheld the commission's 2005 finding that Whatcott, a stridently conservative Christian activist, had violated Saskatchewan's Human Rights Code by inciting hatred against homosexuals in the invective-laden pamphlets he distributed to thousands of homes in Regina and Saskatoon in 2001 and 2002.
"The tribunal's conclusions with respect to (two of the four flyers) were reasonable," Justice Marshall Rothstein wrote on be-half of the court.
"Passages of (the flyers) combine many of the hallmarks of hatred identified in the case law."
The vilifying and derogatory representations used in the flyers created a "tone" of hatred against homosexuals, said Rothstein.
"It delegitimizes homosexuals by referring to them as filthy or dirty sex addicts and by comparing them to pedophiles, a traditionally reviled group in society," he wrote.
David Arnot, chief commissioner for the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, said the decision vindicates the organization's position that Whatcott's words and behaviour "crossed the line between critical speech and hateful speech - the type of extreme speech that has the potential to incite violence against others, challenge their safety and human dignity, and in fact actively promote discrimination."
The "very real connection between hate speech and hate crime" justifies the narrow limits on freedom of expression contained in the province's human rights code, Arnot told a news conference.
The court's decision struck down a portion of the code that bans any speech that "ridicules, belittles, or affronts the dignity of any person." However, Arnot noted that particular part of the legislation has not been enforced since the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal made a similar ruling in 1994.
Arnot offered thanks to the four complainants in the case, "who came forward with courage, in what was absolutely a sea of hatred, to stand up for their rights, and we're thankful we were able to help them maintain and protect their rights."
The court's decision means Whatcott, a former nurse who currently lives in Weyburn, is now liable for $7,500 in civil damages - a reduction from the $17,500 originally ordered by the commission - as well as the commission's costs for bringing the case to the Supreme Court. Whatcott said his battle with the human rights commission has cost him "hundreds of thousands" in expenses and lost income over the last 10 years.
"There's been career loss because of all the media coverage, some of my own money, a lot of my friends put money in and I think (my lawyer) would have a bigger loss in net dollars, although he was quite happy to do it," he said.
"This completely changed my entire status in life and I really wanted to give Canadians a legacy of free speech and freedom of religion. If I could have won, I would have accepted all of this loss quite joyfully. As it stands now, I still don't regret it because I am a Christian and I do believe I'm on the right side of truth. But it's extremely disappointing, of course."
Whatcott said he has no assets that could be seized, "so the homosexuals and the human rights commission can have at it, I suppose ... If they wanted to take (the money) right now and I wanted to give it to them, I don't have it."
Even if he had the money, "I wouldn't give it to them," he said.
"I don't recognize the legitimacy of this judgment and to voluntarily pay that fine would be an admission on my part that there's some legitimacy to their whining that I hurt their feelings and exposed them to hatred ... and so the only thing I can do is not co-operate. Now, if they manage to garnish something off of me, I'm not going to cry too much. Christians have lost property before, but at least I can rest assured that I didn't voluntarily give it."
Calling the Supreme Court justices "socialists and disgraces," Whatcott said the court's decision will not change his future behaviour or word choices.
© Copyright (c) The Regina Leader-Post
Read more: http://www.leaderpost.com/life/Whatcott+flyers+were+hate+speech+Supreme+... - See more at: http://www.leaderpost.com/life/Whatcott+flyers+were+hate+speech+Supreme+...