Joint statement from Christian Legal Fellowship, The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, Rabbinical Council of America, Canadian Council of Christian Charities, The Catholic Women’s League of Canada, Canadian Council of Imams, and The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and there be any praise, think on these things.

"Requiring someone to participate against their will in ending another person’s life is unconscionable in a free and democratic society." - Derek Ross

"Some may wonder what the 'kerfuffle' is about, and assert that, in 2018, it is not unreasonable to expect Canadians to get in line with contemporary values. That may be satisfactory as long as one’s ideological allies form the government of the day. But what happens when a new government articulates a contrary set of 'values'?"

Charter rights are not competitors in a zero sum game. They can be fully exercised in co-existence, as this Court recognized in 2001. And since that time, both equality rights and religious freedom have enjoyed expanding interpretations: in tandem, not competition. In the very context of expanding equality rights on the grounds of sexual orientation, religious freedom has been strongly affirmed

"The judgment will certainly be a significant one, and will likely find its way into the next edition of constitutional and administrative law casebooks read by all Canadian law students."

On November 10, 2017, the Government of Manitoba passed The Medical Assistance in Dying (Protection for Health Professionals and Others) Act. The legislation specifically protects the rights of those who refuse to aid in the provision of medical assistance in dying on the basis of his or her personal convictions.

"The right of parents to care for their children and make decisions for their well-being, including decisions about education, is primary, and the state’s authority is secondary to that parental right."

"The retention of section 176 in the Criminal Code demonstrates Canada’s ongoing societal commitment to protect the fundamental freedoms of religious expression and association.”

The Federal Government is currently cleaning up the Criminal Code, but are they going too far with some of their proposed revisions?

Christian Legal Fellowship invites its members and their congregations to join with believers across the country and around the world this month to pray for the Church.

"The right to autonomy of religious communities is a fundamental principle recognized in international law. Canada has agreed to uphold this principle in its international commitments. The present case demonstrates a need and presents an opportunity to expressly affirm religious autonomy in Canadian jurisprudence."

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Canada reaffirmed that government actors have a duty to specifically consider religious freedom concerns when raised by claimants in its Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia decision. This historic case – the first Indigenous religious freedom claim to be heard by the Supreme Court - raised questions about the scope of religious freedom, and the means by which religious communities can practise and manifest their faith. Christian Legal Fellowship (CLF) and The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC) jointly intervened in the case.

"[C]itizens must be free to meet, worship, and collectively express themselves without fear of being silenced by reprisal or intimidation. Canada’s historical reality regarding the oppression of religious and other minority groups – some of which has been effectively prosecuted under section 176 – must not be forgotten. The Supreme Court of Canada’s recognition that section 176 protects the public interest remains a salient one. The inclusion of section 176 in the Criminal Code demonstrates Canada’s ongoing societal commitment to protect the fundamental freedoms of religious expression and association."

"This Council must consider the rights and interests of those who will be adversely affected by expanding EAS, including the broader societal impact and the implications of determining that certain lives are not worth living."

"The fundamental freedom of religious groups to determine their own membership, free of State interference, [is] necessary to protect the autonomy of believers, the proper functioning of religious institutions, and even democracy itself."

CLF files intervener factum in joint appeals of Law Society of British Columbia v Trinity Western University and Brayden Volkenant and Trinity Western University and Brayden Volkenant v Law Society of Upper Canada. CLF's oral arguments will be heard during the appeals (Nov 30-Dec 1).

Christian Legal Fellowship will make written and oral submissions as a friend of the court at the Supreme Court of Canada appeal of Judicial Committee of the Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses et al v Randy Wall on November 2, 2017

The appeal for Judicial Committee of the Highwood Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses et al v Randy Wall will be heard November 2.

The joint appeals of Law Society of British Columbia v Trinity Western University and Brayden Volkenant and Trinity Western University and Brayden Volkenant v Law Society of Upper Canada will be heard November 30 - December 1.