Manitoba Christian school opposed to anti-bullying law protecting homosexual clubs

A debate about how religious schools should handle homosexual students is at the forefront again, as a Manitoba Christian academy fights back against new anti-bulling legislation that would force them to allow the creation of a gay-straight alliance.

Staff, students and parents at Manitoba's Steinbach Christian High School are opposing the legislation on the grounds that it infringes on their religious freedom.

CBC News reports that educators at the independent religious school say there is a clause that would force schools to allow all anti-bullying clubs, including gay-straight alliances.

“Independent schools should have the right to direct and ensure any organizations meeting in their school will not be contradictory to their faith principles,” principal Scott Wiebe said, per CBC News.

[ Related: Manitoba's anti-bullying law opposed by religious schools ]

So what exactly is the deal with the legislation? Bill 18 — the Public Schools Amendment Act — defines bullying and outlines a school's responsibility to protect against it, and foster an inclusive environment.

Steinbach Christian High School, which receives partial funding from the province, would be required to comply with the legislation.

Opponents to the bill have compared it to Ontario's Bill 13 — which stirred a similar debate last year when that province's Catholic schools refused to allow anti-bullying groups to refer to themselves as gay-straight alliances.

[ More Brew: Alberta trustee’s answer to homosexual bullying: Act less gay ]

The current Manitoba debate does echo the Ontario fight, which ended with the province declaring students have the right to choose the name of the club.

In Manitoba, however, the question is not about the name, but about whether the clubs should exist at all. Opponents claim the definition of bullying is too broad and are urging for the government to limit the scope of the bill.

The Association for Reformed Political Action called it a "top-down, one-size-fits-all, heavy handed law."

So what is a school to do, exactly, hamstrung by its religious stance on homosexuality and yet most assuredly concerned about the well being of their students, even the gay ones?

For one, it could accept that a culture that doesn’t accept homosexuality is likely to fail to protect such students from bullying. It could go so far as to accept the need for such a club, and focus on sculpting its name and mandate to be less specific.

Or it could return the 50 per cent of its funding that comes from the province, and have a leg to stand on when saying the government shouldn’t interject in how they handle their students.

At least then, homosexual students will know where they stand.