BC’s John Cummins says Canadian GLBT don’t need human rights protection

BC Conservative Party leader candidate John Cummins says being gay is a choice. Cummins is the uncontested candidate for leader of the party, which holds it’s leadership vote May 28th.  Cummins made the remark during an interview on CFAX. The Times Colonist:

“I’m not a scientist” but “some of the research tells me that there’s more of an indication that that’s a choice issue,” he said.

Cummins went on to say homosexuals and lesbians do not need special human rights protection because “people are already protected under the human rights code. In my view it was not necessary to add another category.

“They have the same rights under the Human Rights Act as you and I. Nobody is coming to me and saying whatever I do behind closed doors is somebody else’s business.”

Cummins would not explain the basis for his views when asked before a rally at the Salvation Army Victoria Citadel in Saanich Wednesday night.

“I’m pro-life, I’m protraditional marriage, that’s my view, I’m not a scientist,” he said. “I’m not going to discuss that, they’re personal issues, private issues.”

If this is merely his personal opinion what is he doing discussing rights and choices in media interviews?

Asked by the Times Colonist if he believes crimes against homosexuals should be prosecuted as hate crimes, he said: “If there’s a crime against anybody, that crime should be dealt with to the full extent of the law and that’s it. Trying to determine motive, it puts it to a whole different level and I’m not comfortable with that.”

Cummins was a MP for Delta-Richmond East for 18 years. The fractious BC Conservative Party supposedly has about 8% voter support in the province according to polls, (Globe and Mail 12/28/10), and has about two thousand members.
via: Ex-Gay Watch


7 comments for “BC’s John Cummins says Canadian GLBT don’t need human rights protection”

  1. “Trying to determine motive, it puts it to a whole different level and I’m not comfortable with that.”

    Apparently he’s unaware that this is a normal part of the law, even without hate crimes. Or he’s just a trying to confuse the public.

    Posted by Randy | May 12, 2011, 11:04 am
  2. Ban the churches!! Lock up the ministers! We are way too tolerant of these Christians who are really closet Con supporters! Ban them!

    Posted by uber.liberal | May 12, 2011, 3:29 pm
  3. I am sure the BC Liberals are happy about his comments. Whenever the pro-free enterprise coalition fractures, the NDP wins, when united they always win and the more extreme the BC Conservatives appear the less the chances are of them splitting the vote and thus the better the chances are for the BC Liberals.

    Posted by Miles Lunn | May 12, 2011, 6:21 pm
  4. • My own questioning of ‘homosexuals’ in the early 1990s revealed that an inordinate number had been sexually abused during childhood, which would indicate a strong environmental factor, raising suspicion about claims of their inherent tendencies.
    • ‘Homosexuals’ seek to justify their practices and legitimize their claims of inherent tendencies under the maxims, “If it feels good, do it” and “I must have been born this way.” Yet, these claims are indistinguishable from those applicable to pedophilia, bestiality, adultery, and so forth. For example, most married men are physically attracted at times to women other than their wives, so adultery would be legitimized by the same assertions proclaimed by homosexuals. Further, as a Latter-day Saint, I ask how homosexuality could possibly be acceptable, while much more natural polygamy is somehow deemed unacceptable?
    • One or both of these maxims could similarly be used to justify a wide array of mental illnesses, but neither maxim legitimizes any other sexual perversion nor means that any mental illness should be left untreated. Why would homosexuality be given special status as the one tendency (inherent or acquired) that should be respected, allowed, and legally protected? Why not include pedophilia and bestiality? Conversely, why should homosexuality be any less repulsive than pedophilia and bestiality? Why not legalize plural marriage, which involves no perversion but instead involves highly responsible material provision and united devotion to the Lord Jesus Christ?
    • It is offensive that people who are pro-homosexual have managed to train society to label any objection to homosexuality as “homophobia” as if anyone who rejects that perversion is somehow fearful of it. Objection is not a phobia but rather an ability to penetrate the illogical argument that seeks to legitimize it.

    Posted by Andrew Jacobson | May 13, 2011, 12:14 am
  5. Well, he doesn’t need human rights protection, so obviously, that means no one else needs human rights protection, right?

    Posted by Guy | May 13, 2011, 8:46 am
  6. John Cummins is a bigot – his gig is to get under the skin of anyone that stands up to him. That attitude reinforces his tenent that “people are stupid” and that’s a quote.

    Posted by donna | May 16, 2011, 1:07 pm
  7. Homosexuality is far more about who one falls in love with; than sex acts “behind closed doors”.It is innate; a state of being; not a choice.He certainly is not a scientist.As both a man of science _ gay;I have a much better grasp of the associated realities.I’ve has three friends murdered over the past 25 years in crimes of breathtaking brutality that have never been solved.The conservative perspective on LGBT taxpayers had its defining ‘moment’ during the early years of the AIDS epidemic when the gay community worked alone, with no assistance to stem the spread of HIV.The conservatives also fought successfully in opposing the use of public funds for research into HIV. The subsequent delay in the development of effective treatment options denied thousands even a fighting chance at survival.Finally, it must be noted that said research; being in actuality; research into virology _ immunology; they will benefit from the spin off benefits to many diseases _ disabilities.That is the pinnacle of injustice.

    Posted by H. Bart Vincelette | June 14, 2011, 1:25 am

Post a comment