Canada: Stomping on Free Speech

[Jimbo 0]

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/johnleo/jl20040412.shtml

How do you Canadians deal with garbage such as this?

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Gawain 0]

Come on now, cut them some slack, they didn't even have a "Bill of Rights" until like, the mid-80s. and they have nothing equivalent to a US First Amendment.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[PhillyKev 0]

Personally, if given a choice between banning people from talking about sex or banning people from talking negatively about protected classes, I'll take the latter. But, I'd rather neither were banned.

[Keith 0]

Good! It's about time someone tells conservative christians to stay out of my bedroom. I'll take the article for what it is though - Crap! It's propaganda from an ultra conservative web site. No more, no less.

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Good! It's about time someone tells conservative christians to stay out of my bedroom.

Yea, it's always cool to cut out other people's rights when their opinion differs from yours, ain't it?

. . =(_8^(1)

[Keith 0]

I haven't given anyone the right to have an opinion on what goes on in My bedroom, so the answer to your question is Yes.

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[Gawain 0]

Quote

I haven't given anyone the right to have an opinion on what goes on in My bedroom, so the answer to your question is Yes.

Unfortunately, that's not yours to give.

Born of ignorance or not, a person should be allowed to express an opinion about what goes on in a bedroom.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

I haven't given anyone the right to have an opinion on what goes on in My bedroom, so the answer to your question is Yes.

I can't believe you think it's a good thing for a nation to deny it's people any negative expression of opinion about homosexuality.

What if that same govenment decided it's people couldn't express any positive opinions about homosexuality. Do you believe that kind of policy exists anywhere? Do you really endorse governments that control what people think and say?

. . =(_8^(1)

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

From the article:

Quote

Since Canada has no First Amendment, anti-bias laws generally trump free speech and freedom of religion. A recent flurry of cases has mostly gone against free expression. The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ruled that a newspaper ad listing biblical passages that oppose homosexuality was a human-rights offense. The commission ordered the paper and Hugh Owens, the man who placed the ad, to pay $1,500 each to three gay men who objected to it. In another case, a British Columbia court upheld the one-month suspension, without pay, of a high school teacher who wrote letters to a local paper arguing that homosexuality is not a fixed orientation but a condition that can and should be treated. The teacher, Chris Kempling, was not accused of discrimination, merely of expressing thoughts that the state defines as improper.

I wonder; ifone hundred fifty thousand other gay people also read that ad in the paper, and each now complained, would Hugh Owens have to pay them $1500 each, too??

And holy fuck it's now illegal in Canada to write your fuckin' views to the newspaper?!

I wonder if the newspaper that published Kempling's letter -- which makes very specific decisions about what letters to print or not print -- shares culpability for having run a letter that, were it not for them, would never have been seen by the public. Aren't the publishers guilty of complicity in this "crime"?

I used to think that there were other parts of the world where you could live that were more or less just like the U.S.A. in terms of liberty and freedom, and now more and more I think we are on our own in terms of having our precious rights protected. To quote South Park, "This is some fucked-up shit right here."

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[jerry81 10]

Quote

I used to think that there were other parts of the world where you could live that were more or less just like the U.S.A. in terms of liberty and freedom, and now more and more I think we are on our own in terms of having our precious rights protected.

Which is funny, because I used to think the same thing, but lately I can't help but wonder if perhaps Americans are on their own in their perception of freedom, human rights and their protection...

---

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

From the article:


I used to think that there were other parts of the world where you could live that were more or less just like the U.S.A. in terms of liberty and freedom, and now more and more I think we are on our own in terms of having our precious rights protected. To quote South Park, "This is some fucked-up shit right here."

-

Here's another viewpoint, rather better researched than yours.

www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=A41FBB92A536608380256E7C0062B8AF

Summary:
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3749055.stm

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Keith 0]

You are correct. My point is, people may have the legal right to tell me they don’t like who I am, and I have the legal right refuse to listen and/or tell them to Bite Me, Kiss Off, Go to Hell and Kiss My Hairy White Ass.

(edited to add: This isn't directed at you Gawain)

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[Keith 0]

I can't believe people think it's a good thing that a nation has the right to walk into my bedroom and arrest me for having consensual sex.

Our government currently supports homophobia by labeling me a second class citizen, by denying me the right to marry, etc.. Don't you find that offensive?

I'm simply tired of people telling me I don't have the right to fall in love with whom it comes naturally for me.

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[Gawain 0]

Quote

I can't believe people think it's a good thing that a nation has the right to walk into my bedroom and arrest me for having consensual sex.

Our government currently supports homophobia by labeling me a second class citizen, by denying me the right to marry, etc.. Don't you find that offensive?

I'm simply tired of people telling me I don't have the right to fall in love with whom it comes naturally for me.

I won't touch the marriage issue in this thread, but I will say, you are not guaranteed the right to not be offended. That's why 99% of people that don't like Howard Stern, simply don't listen to him.

If we were protected from being offended, the same argument you cite could be reversed just as easily.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

That's why 99% of people that don't like Howard Stern, simply don't listen to him.

Actually I think about 50% of them still listen to him anyway, 49% don't listen, and the other 1% is the FCC

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

That's why 99% of people that don't like Howard Stern, simply don't listen to him.

Actually I think about 50% of them still listen to him anyway, 49% don't listen, and the other 1% is the FCC

You have a point, I forgot that so many that don't like him still listen so they "can hear what he'll say next".

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Keith 0]

Quote

If we were protected from being offended, the same argument you cite could be reversed just as easily.

Do you really believe being offended is the issue??? If so, you have completely missed the boat.

Btw, that whole "you don't have the right to not be offended" bit is old. Find some new material.

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[CanuckInUSA 0]

It's kind of funny reading about a bunch of Americans arguing about free speech in Canada when most Canadians are thinking about the Calgary Flames being up 1-0 in the Stanley Cup finals. LOL ... Canada is not a perfect country, but they are a free country very much like the good ole' US of A.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[Keith 0]

Actually, I think the good ol' US of A could learn a thing or two from Canada.

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

If we were protected from being offended, the same argument you cite could be reversed just as easily.

Do you really believe being offended is the issue??? If so, you have completely missed the boat.

Btw, that whole "you don't have the right to not be offended" bit is old. Find some new material.

I know the argument is old, but it's still applicable, and the boat is about "offensive" expression (in Canada) based on the bill that's under consideration for law.

Perhaps I'm being to literal, but that's what I understand the issue to be about. This legislation is in direct conflict with Canada's own Bill of Rights, which while it doesn't guarantee free speach, it does guarantee a free press. Now, the press is restricted from editorializing on issues of import. Right or wrong, good or bad, expression of opinions on sexual preference is a hot button.

Now, Canadians might be willing to let their freedom of expression, which influences thought, be legislated into extreme-socialist-political-correctness?

F*ck that. It's that kind of apathy that crushes the human spirit. I don't have agree with a lifestyle to accept it. But not being able to express my disagreement because it might hurt someone's feelings is bullsh*t. I don't care what goes on in an individual's bedroom, but I do have an opinion about what happens in a bedroom. My opinion does not prevent you from doing what you want.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Keith 0]

Quote

. . . and the boat is about "offensive" expression (in Canada) based on the bill that's under consideration for law.

No, it's not about offensive expression. It's about homophobia. It's about a society deciding homophobia is no longer an accepted norm, and a subset of said society being pissed because they're losing followers. And no, I don't advocate legalized suppression of expression. I advocate people finding someone else to hate, if they must hate.

I said this already, but I'll say it again, I'll take the article for what it is - Crap! It's propaganda from an ultra conservative web site. No more, no less.

Keith

Don't Fuck with me Keith - J. Mandeville

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

I can't believe people think it's a good thing that a nation has the right to walk into my bedroom and arrest me for having consensual sex.

Our government currently supports homophobia by labeling me a second class citizen, by denying me the right to marry, etc.. Don't you find that offensive?

I'm simply tired of people telling me I don't have the right to fall in love with whom it comes naturally for me.

I do find that offensive. I think gay people are gay not by choice but by biology. So I don't think it should be held against them any more than being born blind should be held against a blind person -- surely no one chose their orientation. Short people did not choose to be short, etc.

But please tell me what this has to do with going FAR OVER THE LINE to where you BAN people from SPEAKING THEIR MINDS about homosexuality! Surely it is not a good thing to do something like this even in the name of protecting the rights of homosexuals. Freedom of speech (which, as the article says, is apparently neither protected nor valued in Canada) is far more important than what they are protecting, here.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

If we were protected from being offended, the same argument you cite could be reversed just as easily.

Do you really believe being offended is the issue??? If so, you have completely missed the boat.

Btw, that whole "you don't have the right to not be offended" bit is old. Find some new material.

Why is it old? Because there is no effective counter for it and you want people to stop stymying you with it?

Fact is, you don't have a counter for it. The Canadian law in the article is supposed to stop Canadian gays from being insulted and offended by the speech or writing of others. There is no defense for silencing people who want to speak against homosexuality -- that should be their right.

If the only way that gays can win in the debate over their rights is to keep people from speaking their points against them[, then they've already lost.

This is not about giving or taking away gay people's rights: it is simply a matter of eroding the right to speak freely (which again, apparently is not a right in Canada).

Learn to separate the two.

You can support gay rights without supporting a law that punishes people for publishing their views that homosexuality is "wrong."

That has nothing to do with whether they can "come into your bedroom" and arrest you for consensual sex.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

. . . and the boat is about "offensive" expression (in Canada) based on the bill that's under consideration for law.

No, it's not about offensive expression. It's about homophobia. It's about a society deciding homophobia is no longer an accepted norm, and a subset of said society being pissed because they're losing followers. And no, I don't advocate legalized suppression of expression. I advocate people finding someone else to hate, if they must hate.

I said this already, but I'll say it again, I'll take the article for what it is - Crap! It's propaganda from an ultra conservative web site. No more, no less.

Propaganda or not -- IS the law actually proposed, and what are its chances for being passed. Doesn't matter what website had the article as long as this is real proposed legislation.

What is this about finding someone else to hate? It seems you're saying that you don't want people hating homosexuals, but it's okay with you if they go and hate blacks, or asians, as long as it's "someone else"?! That's hardly a defensible position.

But if you think that this legislation, which bans the speaking of views that "offend" homosexuals, will stop people from being homophobic, or hating homosexuals, you're fooling yourself. You can't legislate morality or personal views. All you'll do, I guess, is drive them underground, and probably spark some sort of hate-war against gays for the very reason that you silenced people's right to speak about the issue.

It IS about offensive expression. If it weren't, the law would be proposed to punish ACTS of discrimination against gays, not WORDS against them.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Personally, if given a choice between banning people from talking about sex or banning people from talking negatively about protected classes, I'll take the latter. But, I'd rather neither were banned.

Well, here in the U.S. we're supposed to enjoy EQUAL protection under the law. There is no constitutional basis for extending "protected class" status to gays, blacks, asians, handicapped, etc. If they are a "protected class," that means I have LESS protection than they do if I don't belong to that class. If I have LESS, I don't have EQUAL. Therefore, the notion of "protected classes" is unconstitutional. And still they're getting away with this kind of bullsh*t.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"