Persecuted
Christian teacher Chris Kempling in his own words
By Chris
Kempling
April 9,
2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - On the first day of the counselling psychology class,
the instructor asked us to share what was the most important fact about
ourselves. Jim (not his real name) identified himself as gay. I identified
myself as a Christian. I decided to befriend him and we went through the
two-year program together. I even stayed overnight at his house when we had a
weekend seminar in his town.
Fast
forward to the present. I encouraged my high school-aged son, a social leader,
to befriend gay classmates, protect them if they were bullied and invite them
over if he wished. He did (and was harassed for doing so). After graduation,
his friend "Andy" moved away, but stayed overnight at our house on
two occasions when back in town visiting.
I mention
these anecdotes, because some people are convinced that I am "homophobic."
They believe this because I publicly express opinions consistent with socially
conservative views of sexual behaviour. I have been suspended, without pay,
twice from my job as a school teacher - once for one month, and once for three
months. It was hard on my family. Yet I maintain that people can hold, and
express such views but still treat those who practise different values with
decency. I do, and so does my son.
The British
Columbia College of Teachers won a court decision against me in 2006 for
"conduct unbecoming a member." The reason: Between 1997 and 2000, I
wrote several letters to newspapers, outlining research data related to
homosexual behaviour, and what position major world religions take on the
matter. There was a vigorous exchange of views on the editorial pages of my
local newspaper, the Quesnel Cariboo Observer. I had thought that was the place
where people are free to debate the issues of the day.
The College
of Teachers, and my employer, the Quesnel School District, believe that my
published opinions had the potential to "poison the atmosphere" in my
school. I provided letters from five school administrators which said that my
letters had no impact whatsoever on the school atmosphere, but they were
ignored.
The
college's lawyer stated categorically that "everything you have written,
in its entirety, is derogatory and discriminatory." I continue to find
that a bewildering statement, because I was quoting peer-reviewed research
data, including research done by investigators who are homosexual themselves. Furthermore,
I have never had a human rights complaint laid against me.
In fact,
all sides agreed that there was no negative impact in my school. No parent,
student or homosexual person complained to the college or my employer about my
letters. I never raised the issue in my classroom or with students with whom I
worked. I have even received two letters of commendation from my principals for
my work with sexual minority students. Nevertheless, the courts ruled that no
"evidence of harm" is required to discipline a member. Having
wrong opinions is sufficient reason to deny a worker his paycheque for four
months.
One would
think that the B.C. Civil Liberties Association might be concerned about this
attack on free speech. On the contrary, they were granted leave to intervene
against me on the side of the College of Teachers.
On Jan. 28
of this year, the college issued a new citation of "conduct
unbecoming," with 12 new offenses for items written between 2003 and 2005.
Once again, no evidence of "harm" was alleged, and in fact, there
isn't even a complainant.
My offenses
include signing two letters to the editor as "the local representative of
the Christian Heritage Party." This is true. I did run as a candidate in
the last federal election for the CHP, and came in fifth out of eight
candidates. I wrote the letters in question, after the national leader of the
CHP asked me to be the candidate. In my role as CHP spokesperson for my riding,
I outlined the party's position on the nationally debated issue of same-sex
marriage. If a teacher can be sanctioned for letting the public know what his
party's position is on matters of national debate, does this not make Section 3
of the Charter of Rights and Freedom meaningless?
Chief
Justice Beverley Mc-Lachlin of the Supreme Court of Canada, writing in the
Figueroa decision stated: "Section 3 should be understood with reference
to the right of each citizen to play a meaningful role in the electoral process
…Full political debate ensures an open society benefiting from diverse opinions
… Marginal or regional parties tend to raise issues not adopted by national
parties."
The
possibility that a political candidate may be sanctioned for representing his
political party is alarming to say the least. I think citizens of a free
democracy need to be able to join and speak for the party of their choice,
notwithstanding their occupation.
I have also
been censured for writing an essay on the philosophical differences between
social liberals and social conservatives, and for discussing the therapy
services of my private Christian counselling practice, in a CBC radio
interview.
Frankly, I
find it disconcerting that my professional body wishes to sanction me for my
political involvement, for conduct in a completely different profession
servicing my own faith community and for opinions published in other provinces
or countries. This action has potentially alarming consequences, not only for
Canadian teachers, but for all regulated professions (social workers,
psychologists, nurses, etc.), for whom such cases end up establishing legal
precedents.
I refuse to
be marginalized as a second-class citizen, simply because I publicly state
social conservative opinions or represent a "fringe" political party.
And I don't think publicly espousing the Christian worldview should be
prohibited for public school teachers. If I don't have free speech, or freedom
of political association, then no Canadian does.