A L E R  T

The Canadian Museum for Human Rights inWinnipegplans to promote a left-wing interpretation of human rights as “supposed” progress – especially in regard to promoting and affirming feminist and homosexual “rights.” This conclusion is based on the fact that the Museum’s 16 (sixteen)-member Content Advisory Committee includes 11 (eleven) members who are high profile feminist/homosexual activists.

The Museum has also established a homosexual committee to advise it. This Committee is headed by aVancouverlesbian activist, Jennifer Breakspear, who is also a member of the Museum’s Content Advisory Committee.

Members of this Committee have met with Stuart Murray, appointed by the Conservatives to be the Chief Executive Officer of the Museum, about his position on homosexual rights. Mr. Murray advised them that he now supports homosexual rights, even though he had previously voted against pension and adoption rights for homosexuals when he was the head of the Progressive Conservative Party inManitoba(Capital Xtra, November 11, 2009).

The Chief Operating Officer of the Human Rights Museum, Patrick O’Reilly was the keynote speaker at the opening ofVancouver’s new “Queer Hall of Fame” in September 2009.

The Museum has recently retained the services of CROP Research to carry out a survey to obtain feedback and opinions on the proposed Museum.

This survey is on line and can be filled out anonymously by clicking on the link below:


The survey takes between 30 and 35 min. to complete and, includes what may be considered by some as intrusive questions. However, buried in the middle of this survey are several questions in regard to what one would like to see and not see at the museum.

This survey provides an opportunity, therefore, to express objections to the museum’s promotion of feminist and homosexual rights, as well as its use as a tool to promote a left wing interpretation of human rights.

We are bringing this to your attention in the hope that some of you may have the fortitude to endure the survey, in order to raise serious considerations about the museum’s intent to promote an unacceptable ideology as opposed to genuine human rights.