When it comes to empowering the developmentally disabled, one would think that organisations should put the welfare of their charges first, above sectarian employment preferences. Surely, in such circumstances, organisations should select and maintain employment on the basis of merit and carer qualifications.

In the case of Canada’s evangelical/fundamentalist developmental disability carer’s group “Christian” Horizons, apparently not.

Connie Heintz became an employee of Christian Horizons in 1995, before she came out in 2000. As this was in violation of a so-called morality and lifestyle contract, she was sacked in 2001.

The Ontario Human Rights Commission found that Heintz was entitled to redress as her sexual orientation had nothing to do with her employment status, and moreover, Christian Horizons was receiving public funds for caring for non-fundamentalist developmentally disabled people. She is entitled to receive financial redress for her experiences of unlawful dismissal, related financial hardship and  general psychological harms related to the case.

It’s all very reminiscent of the Eric Sides case here in 1977, involving a daft fundamentalist garage owner who only wanted to employ his own kind at a garage. Muldoon agreed with him and bent the Human Rights Commission Act 1977 to accomodate him. Fortnately, the matter was put right in 1993.

The Christian Horizons case seems to show that if you let fundamentalists take liberties with other’s rights, they will certainly do so. Unless you don’t. Congratulations, Connie.

Recommended:

Krishna Rau: “Christian business told it can’t discriminate ” Xtra: 08.05.08:http://www.xtra.ca