1 / 21

Barriers to Equality III

Barriers to Equality III. Sexual Orientation and Socio-Economic Status. Issue #1: Sexual Orientation. 20 th Century has seen significant legal change in this area Until 1967 – Canada regarded homosexuality as a criminal offence

venice
Télécharger la présentation

Barriers to Equality III

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Barriers to Equality III Sexual Orientation and Socio-Economic Status

  2. Issue #1: Sexual Orientation • 20th Century has seen significant legal change in this area • Until 1967 – Canada regarded homosexuality as a criminal offence • 1960s – beginning of gay rights movement – wanted legal rights and social acceptance • Paralleled human rights movements for other groups (women, racial minorities)

  3. 1967 – Trudeau decriminalized homosexuality • 1996 – federal government added “sexual orientation” to list of protected rights in Canadian Human Rights Act • But not to Charter • Significance? • 1996 – Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ordered federal government to extend employment benefits to partners in same-sex couples

  4. 1997 – federal government offered same-sex benefits to its gay and lesbian employees • 1999 – Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have the same legal rights and responsibilities as heterosexual couples ruled that Ontario’s Family Law Act (definition of “spouse” excluded same-sex relationships) was unconstitutional • 2005 – Civil Marriage Act legalized same-sex marriage in Canada

  5. New Legal Questions • Should same-sex couples receive employment benefits? – i.e. medical/dental • Other legal rights of couples? Families? • Included sexual orientation as an equality issue has huge ripple effect on other aspects of law

  6. Case: M. v. H. (1999) • P. 488 in textbook • Significance?

  7. M. v. H: • Result: legal definition of “spouse” questioned • Many laws changed to give same-sex couples equal standing with unmarried heterosexual couples (common-law)

  8. Religious Freedom vs Equality Rights? • Case: Trinity Western University v. College of Teachers, 2001

  9. Trinity Western University v. College of Teachers (British Columbia), 2001 SCC 31 • Basic Facts – Trinity Western University (TWU) established a teacher training program offering baccalaureate degrees in education. TWU applied to the B.C. College of Teachers (BCCT) for permission to assume full responsibility for the teacher education program. The BCCT denied the application because it was contrary to the public interest for the BCCT to approve a teacher education program offered by a private institution which appears to follow discriminatory practices. The practice at issue forced students, faculty, and staff sign a policy which condemned, among other sins, “homosexual behavior”. The trial judge granted an order of mandamus directing the BCCT to grant accreditation to TWU.

  10. Main Issues – Did the BCCT have jurisdiction to consider discriminatory practices in its approval process? Was the decision of the BCCT to deny TWU its application justified? Was the decision of the trial judge to order accreditation to TWU justified?

  11. Main Holdings – The appeal was dismissed. The court held that it was within BCCT’s jurisdiction to assess TWU practices when considering its application in accordance with provisions of the Teaching Profession Act. The BCCT did not however, have expertise to deal with issues of human rights. The Human Rights Code provided that religious institutions were not considered to have breached the Code by preferring adherents of their religious constituency. “The freedom to hold beliefs is broader than the freedom to act upon them, and tolerance must be shown to the off-duty conduct of teachers as long as discriminatory conduct does not occur on duty.” “The college acted unfairly in considering the religious precepts of the university instead of the impact of those religious beliefs on the learning environment in the public schools.

  12. The college properly considered equality concerns pursuant to its public interest jurisdiction, but the right to freedom of religion must be reconciled with the guarantee against discrimination based on sexual orientation contained in the Charter. The trial judge acted judicially in granting the order of mandamus and in directing the college to grant accreditation to the university.” BCCT inferred without sufficient evidence that TWU’s views would limit consideration of social issues by TWU graduates and have a detrimental effect on the learning environment in public schools.

  13. Issue #2: People with Disabilities • Mental and physical disabilities – barriers to gaining social and legal equality • By the end of WWII, parents were more interested in having their children fit into society; adults with disabilities wanted a say in their futures • 1981 – UN declared “International Year of Disabled Persons”

  14. Canada – goal to allow everyone in Canada to live with dignity in the community, not in isolation • Today, many schools cannot meet the needs of people with disabilities • More access is needed so that people with disabilities can participate equally in society • Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 – aim to provide accessibility by 2025

  15. Legal disabilities in Ontario • Brain injury Substance abuse • Learning problems Deafness • Epilepsy Blindness • Mental illness Obesity • Developmental disability • Behavioral problems • Physical disability

  16. Is assistance with accessibility a legal right? • What criteria for assistance should be in place? • What should the role of the government be in assisting people with disabilities?

  17. Issue #2: Poverty • In past – the poor regarded as lazy, criminal, weighing society down • Recently – change is perspective, that poverty is barrier to equality and laws should help protect rights of poor • 2003 – estimated 5million people in Canada are living in poverty

  18. Eliminating Barriers to Opportunity • Suggestions: • Guaranteed Annual Income (GAI) – would replace social assistance, employment insurance, etc., but never proposed as formal bill • Social Housing – gov’t building subsidized housing (but now responsibility has moved to private businesses) • Effectiveness?

  19. Is social assistance a legal right? • What criteria for assistance should be in place? • What should the role of the government be in preventing/correcting poverty?

  20. Cost of Going to Court • Is legal aid out of financial reach? • What can we do to have equal access to justice for all?

More Related