The StopSOP Slate has been endorsed by the following legal professionals:
"I endorse this slate of candidates for Bencher because it is critical that the Law Society stop infringing our Charter-protected rights of freedom of expression and freedom of belief. Those violations are inherent in the mandatory 'Statement of Principles'. I believe in the following principles that appear to be - but should not be - inconsistent with those of the Law Society currently:
- No member and no citizen should be forced to express any beliefs;
- No member and no citizen should be compelled to express obeisance to somebody else's beliefs;
- Members and citizens have the freedom to hold and express their own beliefs, whether popular or not, provided such statements are lawful;
- Members have an obligation to comply with the Human Rights Code and their respective Rules of Professional Conduct;
- The Law Society's requirement for members to create an SOP that "acknowledges your obligation to promote..." violates principles #1, #2 and #3 and seriously misrepresents #4;
- The Society should focus on its core mandates set forth in the Law Society Act, to:
- ensure that lawyers and para-legals 'meet standards of learning, professional competence and professional conduct that are appropriate';
- 'maintain and advance the cause of justice and the rule of law'; and
- 'facilitate access to justice for the people of Ontario'."
“I 100% support StopSOP. I am fervently opposed to the LSO telling me what my personal belief system should be. I am a Christian and abide by Christian values, which include treating all humans equally. The Law Society should stick to regulating lawyers in the practice of law, not in regulating a personal belief system. What is next?”
~Charles M.K. Loopstra Q.C., Toronto
"I am married to a ‘visible minority’ aka ‘person of colour’ aka ‘racialized person’; my children and grandchildren are similarly ‘racialized'. However, they do not ask for, nor do they need, special treatment. Similarly, my firm has 50% ‘racialized’ lawyers/articling students. However, I refuse to be bullied by the LSO and will not acquiesce to their compelled speech dictates. I firmly believe that the LSO has lost sight of its mandate and is significantly overreaching its authority. If we as lawyers don’t stop this now, it will only get worse with time and become progressively harder to undo."
~ Peter Liston, Ottawa
"I will be supporting the StopSOP slate because I do not desire an accretion of powers by the LSO outside of its mandate and effectiveness."
~ Ayoub A. Ali, Mississauga
"In addition to the many well-articulated criticisms of the SOP, I find them both obviously ineffectual in any real sense and, frankly, offensive that other lawyers (benchers) would think that I/we would need this measure in order to behave decently and fairly to our fellow professionals."
~ J. Robert Armstrong, Toronto
"It’s time for the Law Society to stop social engineering and being the enemy of free speech and thought."
~ Michael Thiele, Ottawa
“Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for organizing to unravel this despicable mandate. The social justice warriors have to be stopped from taking over our profession. I will be supporting the slate both with my vote and my money.”
~ Paul Conway, Unionville
"I am opposed compulsory loyalty oaths, compulsory confessions of religious faith, and compulsory statements generally, whether or not I happen to agree with the views I would be compelled to express. Also, given the power-hungry propensities of social justice warriors and the “logic” of their beliefs, we can be sure that the bullying and harassment would not stop at requiring us to adopt a statement of principles. If nothing else, at some point the inquisitors would come around to investigate our compliance with the creed."
~ Albert Frank, Toronto
“Quite apart from the persuasive objections expressed by lawyers and others on your website and elsewhere in the media, which I also share, I am outraged by the patronizing conceit of benchers who dare assume that I, and all other members of the profession, am tainted by intrinsic prejudice requiring their active intervention and my prompt immunizing ingestion of their compelled antidote.”
~Richard H. Baker, Niagara-on-the-Lake
“A shocking invasion of privacy & a direct threat to a form of disbarment.”
~Aaron Milrad, Toronto
“I am pleased to endorse the slate because the LSO has neither the legal nor the moral right to compel speech or make professional licensing contingent on passing an ideological test.”
~Douglas Treilhard, Ottawa
“The SOP is a slippery slope that leads to more division by polarising people, as is now so obvious and is a becoming a world wide issue. Forced adoption of processes like this are the tools of a despot typically and something a Law Society should not encourage through coercion, as lawyers are in the forefront of fighting for freedom from coercion, the rule of law, and basic human rights and dignity.”
~Martin Diegel, Ottawa
The SOP is compelled speech and compelled speech means compelled values. Requiring licensees to think and speak a certain way in order to maintain their livelihoods is not only an incredible overreach and beyond the scope of the LSO, but more importantly a violation of the fundamental principles our pluralistic society was built on.
~ Robert Karrass, Toronto
The StopSOP Slate is also endorsed by:
Howard Levitt, Toronto
Doug Turner QC, Uxbridge
Ned Steinman, Ottawa
Richard Barrett, Mississauga
Carol Bargman, Thornhill
Andrew Rogerson, Toronto
Warren Fullerton, Windsor
Rod Godard, Windsor
Robert G. Kreklewetz, Toronto
Warren Milko, Hamilton
John Abraham, Toronto
Neal Guttman, Windsor
Tony Baker, Toronto
Alan Dryer, North York
Marilyn Lee, Toronto
Oliver Moore, Ottawa
Pierre Plourde, Oshawa
David Purdon, Mississauga
Sean Aylward, Toronto
Robert Labossiere, Sioux Lookout
Norris Ormston, Toronto
Peter Clarke, Toronto