Anti-Transgender Speech Will Get You Two Years In prison in Canada

a reply to: Kali74

Glenn not failing to disappoint. Lol nice!

a reply to: seagull

You have twisted the meaning of this thread by downplaying it.

So where do you draw the line?

Child molestation?

Beastality?

violent TRUMP rallies?

Where?

By attempting to soften the blow with your care free attitude and political correctness people with your way of thinking might be the problem. You are part of the problem, not a part of the solution. I think we need less political correctness and concentrate on REAL problems. Instead of worrying about how someone feels lets see if we can take care of those REAL problems first, i.e. feeding and housing the needy, medical aid, taking care of the elderly, jobs, etc...... BUT people like you stop this progress by making political correctness statements as you have above......

Once the planet is OK then we can concentrate on childish things .... such as worrying about not hurting someone's feelings.

RIGHTS? WHERE ARE THEY? You live in a delusional world.

You think you have RIGHTS?

You think this is positive change by stirring the pot?

LOL

originally posted by: DeathSlayer

So where do you draw the line?

Child molestation?

Beastality?

violent TRUMP rallies?

Judgmental Christians?

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: SaturnFX

You've fallen for the Canadian equivalent of Glenn Beck and his insistence that Christians are being persecuted.

I didn't check the sources too close, just didn't like the wording in a bit of legal dialog that discusses any sort of social obligation regardless of who it is trying to protect.
I know if you speak out in the middle east against islam, you get thrown in jail. if you speak out against the government in china, its jail, I worry when there is any discussion of speech being curbed (outside of the lets all grab a pitchfork at 4pm and storm the castle type speech)

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Yes, I was reading an article about all the conditions that must be met before it's considered hate speech, including this exclusion:

Excluded from hate speech are good faith interpretations of religious doctrine, discussion of issues of public interest, and literary devices like sarcasm and irony;

www.theglobeandmail.com...

So, one is free to say that the Bible condemns homosexuality as an "abomination" (interpretation of religious doctrine), and one is free to speak their opinion that allowing transgender females into the women's room could let more predators in (issue of public interest). What one could NOT get away with saying is something like "gays and transgender people are freaks who should all be exterminated".

I noticed that no one here is complaining about the fact that someone in Canada is also not allowed similar hate speech against religious people, like Christians. Hmmmmm....

Could the Westboro Baptist Church operate under their guidelines while doing what they do?

That I think is the question, and I dont think they could given the wording. That, to me, is a slippery slope. The idea in someones mind may be its shutting up the trash, but the reality might be, they are shutting up unpopular views and opinions and this is step 1

originally posted by: Grimpachi
There are many things I do not understand about Canadian law and free speech. Obviously, the US has more liberty in that department.

The entire TG issue isn't something I can rally behind. I am all for equality, but I believe people should use the correct restrooms according to their own plumbing. That would be equal IMO.

Other than that I am trying to stay away from the issue.

The body may be "equal" but the mind isn't. And especially when they get surgery and hormone therapy, the body starts to reflects what's inside. Can't you agree once they resemble their gender identity then it's equal enough? You might hold dearly to the natural order, but come on. I definitely don't want to be forced to see a naked woman in a shower room who thinks she's a man, but at the same time if she actually looks like a man then I don't care at all. This is my probelm with the transgender issue. I have no qualms about them being themselves (be free), but I don't want to be exposed to a naked woman or a woman undressing when I'm in a locker room. That's abusive IMHO. It doesn't respect ME. It's all about them if it comes to that and it can't just be about them.

For the OP: I agree about how censoring what people say can be too much. In Germany they can't make books about the holocaust being a conspiracy, for example. It's a criminal offense. They also censor video games which have nazi's or nazi references. Is that too far? I'm not sure, but it does feel off to me. it's THEIR government, however. And still security almost always wins over freedom, so what's to stop it from spreading everywhere? Will we control every aspect of our lives? People clearly believe false things and it can clearly be a problem. Some of it's mental illness. Some of it's pure stupidity. It's thorny.

Also we have to be careful when stoppping hate speech (or dumb speech) becomes stopping the truth form being spoken. Where's hte line at? In theory, cooler heads will prevail. In theory, we'll know because of common sense. But then again, the road to evil usually starts with good intentions. Will we really know when we crossover into tyranny? What if it sneaks through? History suggests--at least to some extent--that's exactly what will happen. Like it or not, a lot of people supported Hitler. Many empires were fueled by their own populations supporting them. They weren't whipped into obedience. They didn't have to be. There's research on this topic. Below.

en.wikipedia.org - Milgram experiment...
en.wikipedia.org - Learned helplessness...
en.wikipedia.org - Stanford prison experiment...
www.psychologicalscience.o rg - Why Do People Defend Unjust, Inept, and Corrupt Systems?...

Obviously if I was a person in power or a sociopath wanting to control others then I don't think I'd want to fund this sort of research. Yet I'd be almost precisely the most likely person who could fund it.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

I've twisted it? OK, whatever makes you feel most oppressed.

I think maybe you need to reread it, any twisting being done is on your part.

Just an additional thought here, or question rather...

How does this, in anyway, threaten you? It's obvious you feel it does.

I'm sure anti-white speech is actually promoted though.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Thought crimes coming soon to a country near you.

Disgusting use of the 'law'.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: seagull

Fighting words. Not protected by the Constitution.

Offensive words are the most protect words by the Constitution.

Yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater which is not on fire is not a fighting word, it's a safety hazard.

The constitution does not protect against dangerous speech, such as threatening to kill someone or harm them.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Teikiatsu

I'm sorry that you're ignorant about Fighting Words.

I'm sorry you have such thin skin.

a reply to: Orangutangman

have a molson eh, and quit yer whining ya hozer!