The woke war on freedom of speech continues in Canada.
In mid-February 2026, the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal ruled that Barry Neufeld’s repeated public criticisms of the province’s SOGI 123 program (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity resources used in schools) constituted hate speech and discrimination against 2SLGBTQ+ individuals, particularly transgender people. Mr. Neufeld, a former school board trustee in Chilliwack, British Columbia, was ordered to pay $750,000 in damages to affected teachers in the Chilliwack Teachers’ Association who identify as LGBTQ+ (covering the period from October 2017 to 2022), citing harm to their dignity, feelings, and self-respect.
Neufeld’s comments began around 2017 when British Columbia updated school codes to address bullying based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In various Facebook posts, interviews, and public statements over several years, he described SOGI as a “weapon of propaganda” promoting the “absurd theory” that gender is a social construct rather than biologically determined. He also claimed that allowing children to change gender amounted to “child abuse,” warned that teaching about gender diversity “undermines social order and primes them for abuse,” and invoked stereotypes portraying transgender people as predatory or mentally ill.
Neufeld plans to challenge the ruling, arguing it violates his freedom of expression.
The woke war on speech wokels is not confined to Mr. Neufeld, alas:
Amy Hamm, a nurse in British Columbia, faced a lengthy disciplinary hearing before the B.C. College of Nurses and Midwives after complaints about her off-duty online statements between 2018 and 2021. She argued that biological sex is immutable, criticized gender ideology as harmful to women and children (e.g., allowing men into women’s spaces like prisons or sports), and identified herself as a nurse in some posts. A panel found six statements discriminatory and derogatory toward transgender people, ruling they constituted professional misconduct with a sufficient nexus to her profession due to potential harm to patient trust. In March 2025, she was deemed guilty; in August 2025, she was suspended for one month and ordered to pay $93,639.80 in costs to the college. Hamm appealed the decision to the B.C. Supreme Court, arguing it infringed on her freedom of expression, with the penalty stayed pending resolution.
Sandie Peggie, a nurse at NHS Fife, in Scotland, was suspended in 2024 after complaining about sharing a female changing room with Dr. Beth Upton, a transgender doctor (biologically male) who had permission to use it. Peggie expressed discomfort based on her belief that sex is biological and immutable, citing privacy and dignity concerns. She faced an 18-month internal gross misconduct investigation, during which she was barred from work. Cleared of misconduct in July 2025, she sued NHS Fife and Upton for discrimination, harassment, and victimization under the Equality Act 2010. In a December 2025 employment tribunal ruling, her harassment claim against NHS Fife was partially upheld on four grounds (e.g., the board’s failure to revoke Upton’s access temporarily during investigation), criticizing the board’s handling as creating a “hostile” environment. However, claims of direct/indirect discrimination and victimization were dismissed, as were all claims against Upton personally. A remedy hearing is pending, and Peggie plans to appeal the dismissals.
Päivi Räsänen, a Finnish MP and former interior minister, faced multiple hate speech charges for expressing Christian-based views skeptical of gender theory and same-sex relationships. Key statements included a 2019 tweet questioning her church’s support for Pride events (citing Bible verses on gender as binary and divinely created), a 2004 pamphlet arguing homosexuality contradicts “God’s design” for male-female complementarity, and a 2019 radio interview criticizing gender ideology. Prosecutors argued these incited hatred against LGBTQ+ people under Finland’s criminal code. After acquittals in district court (2022) and appeals court (2023), the Supreme Court acquitted her unanimously in 2024, ruling her statements were protected speech not amounting to hate. However, she endured years of investigations, trials, and appeals, describing it as a “chilling” ordeal that tested free expression limits in Europe.
Paul Jacob has written about the Finnish case a couple of times.
