Board of Education due to its perceived inaction in connection with Mr. Neufeld’s initiative. Mr. Hansman was quoted as saying the following: Sometimes our beliefs, values, and responsibilities as professional educators are challenged by those who promote hatred. This is often the case when it comes to sexual health curriculum in schools and our efforts to ensure safe, inclusive schools for all students — including LGBTQ students . . . . [Emphasis added; emphasis in original deleted.] (A.R., vol. I, at p. 87) [152] Read plainly and in the context of the press release, this statement implies that Mr. Neufeld promoted hatred against an identifiable group, i.e. LGBTQ students. [153] Then, in April 2018, a news article was published on CityNews 1130’s website. The article pertained to the human rights complaint filed against Mr. Neufeld by the BCTF. In the article, Mr. Hansman was quoted as saying that Mr. Neufeld had “tip toed quite far into hate speech” (A.R., vol. I, at p. 89 (emphasis deleted)). This statement is at the core of Mr. Neufeld’s action in defamation (chambers judge’s reasons, at para. 25). [154] Both of these statements carry the defamatory sting that Mr. Neufeld engaged in hate speech. Our law requires an onerous and objective standard to be met for speech to constitute hate speech (Keegstra, at pp. 777-78, per Dickson C.J.; Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott, 2013 SCC 11, [2013] 1 S.C.R. 467, at para. 56). Understandably, allowing subjective sensibilities to play a role in the 2023 SCC 14 (CanLII) statements concerning the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity 123 (“SOGI 123”)