by Peter Baklinski
OTTAWA, Ontario, June 5, 2013 (LifeSiteNews. com) – As the
transgendered bill C-279 makes its way through the Senate, having
passed second reading last week, a leading women’s organization is
warning the country that passage of the bill would open a Pandora’s
box eventually leading to the normalization of “problematic sexual
activities, including pedophilia”.
“It’s all in how the word ‘gender identity’ is defined,” said Gwen
Landolt, National Vice-President of REAL Women of Canada, to
The bill <http://parl. gc.ca/HousePubli cations/Publicat ion.aspx? Language= E&Mode=1&DocId= 6053237&File= 24>
, put forward by NDP LGBTT Critic Randall Garrison (Esquimalt—Juan de
Fuca, BC), defines “gender identity” as an “individual’s deeply felt
internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not
correspond with the sex that the individual was assigned at birth.”
Landolt explained that “gender identity” is a catch-all phrase that
could be interpreted by activist courts to legitimize “any kind of
“This could include pedophilia, if that’s their deeply felt experience
of gender and if that’s their sexual preference.”
Landolt said that if Canada passes the bill, it will join Australia in
the ranks of sexual anarchy. The Australian Human Rights Commission
has defined “gender identity” as a “broad term to refer to diverse sex
and or gender identities and expressions. It includes being
transgender, trans, transsexual and intersex. It also includes being
androgynous, agender, a cross dresser, a drag queen, gender fluid,
genderqueer, intergender, neutrois, pansexual, pan-gendered, a third
gender, and a third sex…”
“It would seem, therefore, that this bill may have been brought before
Parliament for purposes other than promoting sound public policy,”
stated REAL Women in a press release yesterday.
“Rather, it will be used to extend legal protection to other
questionable sexual activities without having these matters exposed to
“This devious manipulation, using the smokescreen of the transgendered
bill to expand legal protection for other problematic sexual
activities, is unacceptable as it is contrary to all democratic
principles and to the health and safety of Canadian citizens.”
Pedophilia: The next ‘Sexual Orientation’
Landolt said that a movement already exists that is lobbying western
governments to enshrine adult sexual activity with children as the
next “sexual orientation”.
The North American Man/Boy Love Association <http://www.nambla. org/>
(NAMBLA), a prominent pedophilia advocacy group, exists
<http://www.nambla. org/welcome. html> to “end the extreme oppression
of men and boys in mutually consensual relationships” .
When FBI undercover agent Bob Hamer infiltrated NAMBLA as an aging
“boy lover”, he discovered
<http://bobhamer. net/pdf/sample_ chapters. pdf> what he describes in his
2008 book The Last Undercover as an “organization of men seeking to
legitimize their sexual attraction to boys”.
“I was unable to view the group I’d be infiltrating with anything
other than revulsion. How could I pretend to actually be one of them —
without becoming physically ill or physically violent,” he wrote.
A 2011 academic conference in Baltimore, MD brought together
researchers from several prominent universities to examine
<http://www.lifesite news.com/ news/academic- conference- seeks-to- normalize- pedophilia/>
ways that adults who have sex with children could be destigmatized by
rebranding them as “minor-attracted persons”.
Conference attendees were told
<http://www.lifesite news.com/ news/sexual- anarchy/> by researchers and
experts in various fields that pedophiles are “unfairly stigmatized
and demonized” by society, that “children are not inherently unable to
consent” to sex with an adult, that an adult’s desire to have sex with
children is “normative,” and that the “majority of pedophiles are
gentle and rational.”
In Canada, Dr. Hubert Van Gijseghem, a retired psychologist from the
University of Montreal, told the House of Commons Justice Committee in
2011 that pedophilia is a “sexual orientation”.
“Pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offence from time
to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual
orientation just like another individual may be grappling with
heterosexuality or even homosexuality,” he said.
“True pedophiles have an exclusive preference for children, which is
the same as having a sexual orientation. You cannot change this
person’s sexual orientation.”
In a 2011 newsletter, REAL Women of Canada argued that legalizing
pedophilia is the next logical step for activists pushing the
“Members of the homosexual community have also long been agitating for
unrestricted sexual access to minors. This requires an amendment to
the Criminal Code, which now prohibits pedophilia.”
The article titled Homosexuals demand changes to Criminal Code stated
that just as the media “worked effectively in the past to make such
repugnant acts as abortion, homosexuality, and same-sex marriage
acceptable to the mainstream” it has now “begun its campaign to make
pedophilia morally, socially and legally acceptable.”
“We know from experience that yesterday’s unthinkable taboos are
today’s ‘alternative lifestyles’. The journey to normalize pedophilia
has begun,” the article concluded.
Diane Watts, researcher for REAL Women of Canada, told LifeSiteNews
that “pedophilia activists use the same rights language as the other
With the bill’s ambiguous language, Watts said that it will be up to
the “courts and tribunals to decide what is included in ‘gender
identity,’ because it hasn’t been defined clearly.”
Opposition to the bill in the Senate
The bill has received opposition from some in the Senate.
Hon. Nancy Ruth, Canada’s first openly lesbian Senator, spoke against
<http://publications .gc.ca/collectio ns/collection_ 2013/sen/ Y3-411-167- eng.pdf>
the bill last week, saying that it would “privilege men who choose to
become women over women who are born female.”
“While I do not question the good intentions of the sponsor and the
supporters of the bill, I simply do not understand how they could
advance this bill without including all women. Passage of Bill C-279
will mean that only if a woman is born a man who later chooses to
identify as a woman will she receive protection, but a woman born a
woman will not receive the same protection.”
Hon. Don Meredith joined Ruth in speaking against the bill.
“I am concerned about the hazy definition of the terminology within
the bill,” he said, calling the bill’s language “problematic” because
it will lead to “court rulings based on speculation and assumption.”
“It is not the job of tribunals and courts to wade through murky
terminology, honourable senators. It is our job to introduce
legislation that is clear, concise and meaningful. If we cannot
navigate confusing jargon, we cannot reasonably expect tribunals and
courts to do so.”
Meredith also noted how Mr. Ian Fine, Acting Secretary of the Canadian
Human Rights Commission, had told the House of Commons last December
that the bill “isn’t necessary” since “gender identity and gender
expression” are already protected by the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Meredith said that the bill could be used by “certain individuals who
could use this proposed legislation to prey on society’s most
vulnerable — our youth.”
“There has been much controversy about granting transgendered
individuals, especially transgendered men, access to women’s public
washroom facilities and locker rooms,” he said, adding that a “threat
to women and children must be dealt with seriously.”
Numerous pro-family organizations have opposed the bill, dubbing it
the “bathroom bill” since it could give biological men a legal alibi
to use women’s bathrooms, shower rooms, and changing rooms. They worry
that such a bill will lead to an increase in sexual assaults.
Bill C-279 is expected to be voted on by the end of June. Liberal
Senator Grant Mitchell told Xtra that 16 members have told him that
they would vote for the bill.
“I’ve had 16 say they would vote with us. But you don’t know until you
actually get there. If all 16 voted with us then it would pass. It
would be a little bit close but it would pass,” he said.
Copyright 1997-2012 LifeSiteNews. com, all rights reserved.