Lawyers oppose efforts by Trinity Western University to open a law school, saying the university's policies discriminate against the LGBT community.
Photo Credit: Trinity Western University

Lawyers fight proposed ‘anti-gay’ law school


A ban on “sexual intimacy” among homosexuals is part of covenant students and staff must adhere to at a Christian university in western Canada that wants to create its own law school. Lawyers, including civil rights advocate Clayton Ruby, oppose accreditation of the law school at Trinity Western University saying it would create a “queer quota” for law schools across the country.

There are a total of 3,547 places for new law students in Canada. The proposed school at Trinity Western would add 60 places. Toronto lawyer Angela Chaisson says that would leave a smaller total number of places for gay applicants compared to those available for straight students.

Lawyer opposes “two-tiered system”

“We know the competition to get into law school is extremely, extremely tough,” says Chaisson. “It should be based on the merits—grades, community involvement, your law school admission test scores, things of that nature.” Because Trinity would effectively bar homosexual students she says, creation of a law school there would result in “a two-tiered system.”

The covenant that Trinity students and staff must uphold says they may not lie, cheat or steal, or engage in “sexual intimacy that violates the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman.”

“Trinity Western doesn’t want to accept people on the
merits like every other law school in Canada,” says
Lawyer Angela Chaisson.
©  LV Imagery

Chaisson concludes “Trinity Western doesn’t want to accept people on the merits like every other law school in Canada. They want to exclude people based on sexual orientation, which of course would not be acceptable if they were excluding people on the basis of gender, skin colour, racialization. And it’s not acceptable on sexual orientation either.”

The Federation of Law Societies of Canada is studying the controversy and taking submissions from interested groups. It is also looking at the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to see if the proposed law school would discriminate against the LGBT community in their careers.

Chaisson is urging gay rights advocates and the public to make their concerns known to the advisory committee studying the matter by writing letters, signing petitions and speaking out about them.

“Freedom of religion does not trump equality”

“We’re not opposed to people practicing their religion. We’re not opposed to religious schools,” she says. “… For those who believe being gay is antithetical to Christianity, they are free to believe that, they’re free to speak about it, they’re free to pray about it. But we say that they cannot cross the line from belief into actual discrimination and exclusion of certain groups. Freedom of religion does not trump equality.”

Read the statement from Trinity Western University.

Categories: Society

Do you want to report an error or a typo? Click here!

@*@ Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available

Note: By submitting your comments, you acknowledge that Radio Canada International has the right to reproduce, broadcast and publicize those comments or any part thereof in any manner whatsoever. Radio Canada International does not endorse any of the views posted. Your comments will be pre-moderated and published if they meet netiquette guidelines.

Netiquette »

When you express your personal opinion in an online forum, you must be as courteous as if you were speaking with someone face-to-face. Insults and personal attacks will not be tolerated. To disagree with an opinion, an idea or an event is one thing, but to show disrespect for other people is quite another. Great minds don’t always think alike—and that’s precisely what makes online dialogue so interesting and valuable.

Netiquette is the set of rules of conduct governing how you should behave when communicating via the Internet. Before you post a message to a blog or forum, it’s important to read and understand these rules. Otherwise, you may be banned from posting.

  1.’s online forums are not anonymous. Users must register, and give their full name and place of residence, which are displayed alongside each of their comments. reserves the right not to publish comments if there is any doubt as to the identity of their author.
  2. Assuming the identity of another person with intent to mislead or cause harm is a serious infraction that may result in the offender being banned.
  3.’s online forums are open to everyone, without regard to age, ethnic origin, religion, gender or sexual orientation.
  4. Comments that are defamatory, hateful, racist, xenophobic, sexist, or that disparage an ethnic origin, religious affiliation or age group will not be published.
  5. In online speak, writing in ALL CAPS is considered yelling, and may be interpreted as aggressive behaviour, which is unpleasant for the people reading. Any message containing one or more words in all caps (except for initialisms and acronyms) will be rejected, as will any message containing one or more words in bold, italic or underlined characters.
  6. Use of vulgar, obscene or objectionable language is prohibited. Forums are public places and your comments could offend some users. People who use inappropriate language will be banned.
  7. Mutual respect is essential among users. Insulting, threatening or harassing another user is prohibited. You can express your disagreement with an idea without attacking anyone.
  8. Exchanging arguments and opposing views is a key component of healthy debate, but it should not turn into a dialogue or private discussion between two users who address each other without regard for the other participants. Messages of this type will not be posted.
  9. Radio Canada International publishes contents in five languages. The language used in the forums has to be the same as the contents we publish. The usage of other languages, with the exception of some words, is forbidden. Messages that are off-topic will not be published.
  10. Making repetitive posts disrupts the flow of discussions and will not be tolerated.
  11. Adding images or any other type of file to comments is forbidden. Including hyperlinks to other websites is allowed, as long as they comply with netiquette. Radio Canada International  is in no way responsible for the content of such sites, however.
  12. Copying and pasting text written by someone else, even if you credit the author, is unacceptable if that text makes up the majority of your comment.
  13. Posting any type of advertising or call to action, in any form, to Radio Canada International  forums is prohibited.
  14. All comments and other types of content are moderated before publication. Radio Canada International  reserves the right to refuse any comment for publication.
  15. Radio Canada International  reserves the right to close a forum at any time, without notice.
  16. Radio Canada International  reserves the right to amend this code of conduct (netiquette) at any time, without notice.
  17. By participating in its online forums, you allow Radio Canada International to publish your comments on the web for an indefinite time. This also implies that these messages will be indexed by Internet search engines.
  18. Radio Canada International has no obligation to remove your messages from the web if one day you request it. We invite you to carefully consider your comments and the consequences of their posting.


One comment on “Lawyers fight proposed ‘anti-gay’ law school
  1. Avatar Edward Schweikert says:

    The lawyers oppose it mostly because the “Bar” opposes anti-gay behavior. The “Bar” tells them when to go to the bathroom and how to argue in the court, how the court will rule, and etc. In America and Australia, “ambulance chasing” is prohibited and you will not see lawyers running / driving after emergency vehicles. I understand that everyone should see the judge’s chamber while two attorneys argue who has the rights to argue. One has the survivor’s family signature while the other one has a signed document with the victim’s blood (DNA).

    Stop with the soapbox!