In Canada, To Say That There Are Only Two Biological Sexes Costs $750,000: The Barry Neufeld Case
A former administrator of the Chilliwack Board of Education, Barry Neufeld, was fined $750,000 by the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal for expressing his belief that there are only two sexes. The Tribunal ruled that Neufeld's comments, posted on Facebook in 2017 regarding gender identity programs in schools, constituted discrimination and hate speech. The fine is intended to compensate LGBTQ employees who suffered damage to their dignity and self-respect due to Neufeld's statements. Neufeld was also ordered to pay $442.00 to an anonymous teacher for lost wages related to attending a hearing on the matter. The Tribunal concluded that 24 of Neufeld's publications were discriminatory, asserting that not believing gender identity is separate from sex assigned at birth is a form of existential denial.
5 days ago
Barry Neufeld, a former administrator on the Chilliwack Board of Education in British Columbia, Canada, faced legal action after criticizing the district's Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) program.1
In October 2017, he posted on Facebook that the program promoted a "biologically absurd theory," aligning with the American College of Pediatricians' view that allowing children to change gender is child abuse.1
The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal ruled that Neufeld's 24 publications constituted discrimination and hate speech.1
It argued his belief in only two biological sexes amounted to "existential denial" of transgender people, as it rejects gender identity separate from birth sex.1
Neufeld was ordered to pay a $750,000 fine to compensate LGBTQ-identified staff (45-163 employees from 2017-2022) for harm to their dignity, with payouts ranging from $4,601 to $16,667 per person.1
He must also pay $442 to an anonymous "Teacher C" for lost wages from attending a hearing.1
Neufeld compared disbelief in gender identity to not believing in Christianity, stating acceptance requires endorsing a mismatch between gender and birth sex.1
He framed his comments as a call to "lukewarm Christians" against society's drift toward moral decay, rooted in faith that God created humans male and female.1
Activist Chris Elston ("BillboardChris") criticized the ruling on X, claiming it mandates belief in gender identities for all British Columbia residents.1
Neufeld has appealed, with the Rights and Freedoms Fundraising Society raising funds for his legal costs.1
Assess Catholic teachings on gender identity versus biological sex
Catholic doctrine affirms that biological sex—male or female—is a God-given reality integral to human dignity and identity, willed by the Creator as part of the complementary order of creation. Gender identity, understood as one's self-perception, must align with this biological sex; ideologies promoting a separation between the two, often termed "gender theory" or "gender ideology," are rejected as they undermine the anthropological foundation of the human person, family, and society. This teaching draws from Scripture, Tradition, and Magisterium, emphasizing equality in dignity while upholding sexual dimorphism.
The Church teaches that God created humanity male and female in perfect equality as persons, yet distinctly in their "being-man" or "being-woman." This distinction is not arbitrary but reflects the Creator's wisdom and goodness, endowing each with inalienable dignity directly from God.
Man and woman have been created, which is to say, willed by God: on the one hand, in perfect equality as human persons; on the other, in their respective beings as man and woman. "Being man" or "being woman" is a reality which is good and willed by God: man and woman possess an inalienable dignity which comes to them immediately from God their Creator. Man and woman are both with one and the same dignity "in the image of God". In their "being-man" and "being-woman", they reflect the Creator's wisdom and goodness.
Pope St. John Paul II's Theology of the Body further elaborates that the human body, in its masculinity and femininity, expresses the person and reveals the "nuptial meaning" of existence—a mutual gift rooted in creation. The body is not merely biological but witnesses to the person's capacity for love and communion, oriented "for" the other sex.
The body which expresses femininity 'for' the masculinity and viceversa the masculinity 'for' the femininity, manifests the reciprocity and communion of persons. It expresses it by means of the gift as the fundamental characteristic of personal existence.
Biological sex thus precedes personal choice and cannot be altered without denying the Creator's design.
The Catechism explicitly calls each person—man or woman—to "acknowledge and accept his sexual identity," underscoring that sexuality concerns the "innermost being" and must be integrated into the total commitment of love.
By creating the human being man and woman, God gives personal dignity equally to the one and the other. Each of them, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity.
This acceptance is not optional; it flows from the truth of creation, where man discovers his identity through sincere self-gift, free from shame in original innocence. Scholarly analyses reinforce that separating "gender" (socio-cultural roles) from biological sex distorts this truth, treating identity as malleable rather than received as a gift.
Magisterial documents consistently warn against gender ideology, which posits human identity as detached from biological sex, reducible to individual choice or social construct. Pope Francis describes it as denying "the difference and reciprocity in nature of a man and woman," leading to educational and legislative efforts that sever personal identity from "the biological difference between male and female."
This ideology leads to educational programmes and legislative enactments that promote a personal identity and emotional intimacy radically separated from the biological difference between male and female. Consequently, human identity becomes the choice of the individual, one which can also change over time.
Such views eliminate the family’s anthropological basis and echo earlier critiques, like those from the Pontifical Council for the Family, which reject "constructionist" theories independent of sexual dimorphism. Pope Benedict XVI, cited in scholarly works, saw this as questioning "what being human really means," reducing the child to an object and stripping human dignity. While biological sex and socio-cultural gender roles "can be distinguished but not separated," radical ideologies overstep by making identity fluid.
Pope St. John Paul II anticipated pastoral responses to such confusions, urging study of masculinity and femininity's "values and specific gifts" without discrimination in grace, yet affirming no equivalence in created differences.
Amid these critiques, the Church insists on respecting every person's dignity, regardless of struggles with identity. Families with members experiencing same-sex attraction or gender confusion deserve "respectful pastoral guidance" to discern God's will, avoiding unjust discrimination while rejecting aggression.
Every person, regardless of sexual orientation, ought to be respected in his or her dignity and treated with consideration, while ‘every sign of unjust discrimination’ is to be carefully avoided.
Youth, aware of sexuality's role in identity, seek Church dialogue on male-female differences and related issues, though cultural exaltation complicates serenity. Accompaniment requires "intelligent love," recognizing brokenness without endorsing ideologies that produce it.
Catholic teaching unequivocally prioritizes biological sex as the immutable foundation of gender identity, rooted in God's creative act and expressed through the body's nuptial meaning. Gender ideologies contradicting this are anthropologically flawed, threatening human dignity and the family. Yet pastoral charity calls for compassionate guidance toward truth. This balanced doctrine upholds equality, complementarity, and the call to self-gift.