Agitation for Attention
This is where sympathy for the sensitivities and sensibilities of the alternative-gendered wears thin. When two mature men, joined in a blissful union of the flesh whose relationship has been formalized under the Province of Quebec's civil union law - with a history of pursuing lawsuits against people whom they purport have insulted their orientation - have gone out of their way to foment trouble under clearly false pretexts.
On a previous such adventure, seeking to avenge what they claim to be homophobic attitudes in non-gay people they complained of harassment from a neighbour, laying criminal charges against him in 2001. But not before they managed to mount a 4,000-person-strong neighbourhood anti-homophobia march through the neighbourhood they shared with the man they accused of harassing them.
A year and a half later, the neighbour was acquitted for the charge that Roger Thibault and Theo Wouters lodged against him. The judge hearing the case evidently was of the opinion that the gay men's credibility was in question. Eventually the men sent a letter of apology to the accused neighbour, admitting the complains that they laid against him had been 'baseless'.
In 2007 the Quebec Human Rights Commission recommended damages to the tune of $10,000 be awarded in compensation of a neighbourhood teen insulting them by festooning their trees with toilet paper, then seting off a firecracker and making violent threats against them.
(One wonders why they were so detested by their neighbours, since they had lived on the property for several decades without problems surfacing.)
But then the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal was involved again when the pair lodged a complaint against another neighbour whom they decided would have to pay "moral and punitive" damages after having been accused by Messrs. Wouters and Thibault of calling them "faggots" during an altercation that took place in 2006.
Gordon Lusk, the neighbour ruled against by the Commission, had already been acquitted of those same charges in a court of law, five years earlier. "It makes no sense that Mr. Lusk could be acquitted in a Quebec court and then found liable for moral and punitive damages in front of a human rights tribunal", the lawyer for Mr. Lusk stated.
It doesn't make any logical sense, does it? Mr. Lusk had approached Mr. Thibault to discuss with him neighbourhood concerns with his behaviour. Mr. Thibault appeared to be in the habit of driving much too fast and carelessly - even running stop signs - on the street. Neighbours with young children who played road hockey were alarmed at the potential danger to their children.
That Mr. Thibault habitually drove recklessly down the street where they live while the safety and welfare of neighbours' children appeared to be of no concern to him whatever was a topic of resentment among the neighbours. Evidently their resentment and fears for their children's safety was no match for the resentment the gay pair felt upon the infringement of their liberty to disport themselves as they would.
They accused Mr. Lusk of bad manners, showing up at their home shouting, and then accusing the gay partner who hadn't been the one driving their vehicle of dangerous driving, and endangerment of the lives of his children. They accused him also of calling Mr. Wouters a "f---ing faggot", claiming that he uttered the threat, "I will kill you. I will kill you both here."
Mr. Lusk absolutely denied any such claims. Although criminal charges were laid, he was subsequently acquitted. But the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal knew better than the legal justice system. And Mr. Lusk, who continued to deny the accusations made against him must now pay to the plaintiffs $12,000 for "homophobic comments".
Must be a whole lot of people living there hoping and praying that the estimable gay couple pick up and leave for other pastures where they can begin to search for other likely 'homophobic' prospects they can bring to the attention of the Commission to increase their earnings potential.
Talk about giving the gay community a bad name...
On a previous such adventure, seeking to avenge what they claim to be homophobic attitudes in non-gay people they complained of harassment from a neighbour, laying criminal charges against him in 2001. But not before they managed to mount a 4,000-person-strong neighbourhood anti-homophobia march through the neighbourhood they shared with the man they accused of harassing them.
A year and a half later, the neighbour was acquitted for the charge that Roger Thibault and Theo Wouters lodged against him. The judge hearing the case evidently was of the opinion that the gay men's credibility was in question. Eventually the men sent a letter of apology to the accused neighbour, admitting the complains that they laid against him had been 'baseless'.
In 2007 the Quebec Human Rights Commission recommended damages to the tune of $10,000 be awarded in compensation of a neighbourhood teen insulting them by festooning their trees with toilet paper, then seting off a firecracker and making violent threats against them.
(One wonders why they were so detested by their neighbours, since they had lived on the property for several decades without problems surfacing.)
But then the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal was involved again when the pair lodged a complaint against another neighbour whom they decided would have to pay "moral and punitive" damages after having been accused by Messrs. Wouters and Thibault of calling them "faggots" during an altercation that took place in 2006.
Gordon Lusk, the neighbour ruled against by the Commission, had already been acquitted of those same charges in a court of law, five years earlier. "It makes no sense that Mr. Lusk could be acquitted in a Quebec court and then found liable for moral and punitive damages in front of a human rights tribunal", the lawyer for Mr. Lusk stated.
It doesn't make any logical sense, does it? Mr. Lusk had approached Mr. Thibault to discuss with him neighbourhood concerns with his behaviour. Mr. Thibault appeared to be in the habit of driving much too fast and carelessly - even running stop signs - on the street. Neighbours with young children who played road hockey were alarmed at the potential danger to their children.
That Mr. Thibault habitually drove recklessly down the street where they live while the safety and welfare of neighbours' children appeared to be of no concern to him whatever was a topic of resentment among the neighbours. Evidently their resentment and fears for their children's safety was no match for the resentment the gay pair felt upon the infringement of their liberty to disport themselves as they would.
They accused Mr. Lusk of bad manners, showing up at their home shouting, and then accusing the gay partner who hadn't been the one driving their vehicle of dangerous driving, and endangerment of the lives of his children. They accused him also of calling Mr. Wouters a "f---ing faggot", claiming that he uttered the threat, "I will kill you. I will kill you both here."
Mr. Lusk absolutely denied any such claims. Although criminal charges were laid, he was subsequently acquitted. But the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal knew better than the legal justice system. And Mr. Lusk, who continued to deny the accusations made against him must now pay to the plaintiffs $12,000 for "homophobic comments".
Must be a whole lot of people living there hoping and praying that the estimable gay couple pick up and leave for other pastures where they can begin to search for other likely 'homophobic' prospects they can bring to the attention of the Commission to increase their earnings potential.
Talk about giving the gay community a bad name...
Labels: Canada, Human Relations, Life's Like That, Sexism
posted by Pieface | 6:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home