From the Sun's comments:
_Short and sweet. Holding to a certain core of behavior within a particular situation should have nothing to do with how a lawyer will conduct him/herself in relation to those they represent or the rule of law. The BCTF and The Law Society of B.C. perhaps fail to see that their position is discriminatory. I think it springs from a premise that truth is relative and tolerance is supreme. Ironic that this tolerance is only for those who hold the same beliefs as themselves. In fact such beliefs are very closed to any person, organization or group of Canadians who believe in absolute truths, which in my opinion means the BCTF and Law Society of BC are closed to the beliefs of many Canadians.
Can such lawyers properly represent all clients, even those who hold to absolutes, like a Christian who believes that homosexuality is a sin? In turn can a lawyer coming out of TWU properly represent someone who has beliefs different than their own, say for example a homosexual? Is not this the issue? What TWU requires of their students goes no further than that community. Anyone smart enough to become a lawyer is smart enough to make up their own mind, hold to their own beliefs and still objectively represent their clients. I would prefer a lawyer who had a similar worldview to my own, but if push came to shove I would prefer a competent lawyer who doesn't hold to my worldview over one who holds my worldview but is a poor lawyer._
What a load of crap. Tolerance does not mean tolerating intolerance.
When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity.
When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called religion.