TreeBeard

What so-called experts are you referring to?

How do you think that pointing out what’s happening in Alberta is a scare tactic? Don’t you think it’s a bit scary for Albertans who might need surgery or get in a car accident wondering if there will be a hospital bed available for them?

Are you being hyperbolic, or do you actually believe that the Canadian government is communist? I ask, because I’m just wondering what reason I should use for not taking you seriously…. Does he exaggerate a lot, or is he just really, really stupid? That’s the question I’m trying to answer…

So all we’re doing is arguing about where the line should be? And who administers the line? Seems to me a compromise can be made. Do the HRTs look at a lot of free speech cases?

Sounds like the free market decided…

I read that TV viewership is down across the board. Internet, streaming, etc. Is the CBC dropping more than other networks?

Do you believe there should be any legal limits at all on free speech?

OK. But, to prevent deaths from deaths with COVID (maybe dying from drowning from fluid on your lungs is the actual cause), isn’t the best way not to get COVID?

Still…. No one watched it. If it was in demand, wouldn’t it be put on basic cable? Or do you think this is a case of “everyone is against us”?

What did you like about the 18th century? The monarchy? White voters only? Men only? “Way preferable than the chaos a proportional system would give us. Look at Israel and Denmark that use these unstable systems.” I took a look at Denmark. It seems they have elections every 4 years. Can you explain how it is unstable? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Denmark

Doe anyone want to get back on topic? I had questions…

If you weren’t bound by these draconian laws, what would you be doing about the LGBTQs, etc, etc and Muslims?

Didn’t they try a “conservative” channel in Canada and viewership was so low that it just faded off the air?

Sure, you and I are ignorant of it… But I thought the poster might have some secret knowledge that you and I do not. Maybe there are secret tribunals in Canada that are locking up Christians who say this about gay folks? Something like that….

You really think most of the 600,000 would have died anyway if there was no COVID?

Whew. I like thinking that these people didn’t die of a virus. Fatties died of being fat, not of COVID. Thanks, for some reason it’s reassuring knowing the virus isn’t so bad after all.

Can you point to any case of being charged with a hate crime for saying that homosexuality is a sin?

Was R. v Morgentaler about doctor’s rights? Or did if confirm that the law in question violated a woman’s right under Section 7 of the Charter of Rights?

How does a law violate a right, if there is no right? Doesn’t a right have to exist for the law to say that a right was violated?

Your opinion is that the court was wrong. I get that. But, let’s speak in legalese here for a second…. The ones who decide on actual rights of Canadians is ultimately the Supreme Court of Canada, and not your opinion, correct?

Hmmm…. You’re thinking that I am the outlier on this one…. Do you think your view on this is in the mainstream? So, people 50 and over will have died anyway…. Eventually? So they’re not COVID deaths? Hmmm…. I like your way of accounting…. I really do. It would make me feel a lot better if there were only a handful of COVID deaths and these other 500,000 people we could just say died of something else (natural causes…. The Wuhan flu, maybe?). That would offer a lot of relief. But I just can’t get past the fact that so few people, and none of the experts, are doing the accounting this way. I have to, once again, defer to the experts. Maybe I’m naive, but I don’t ask my plumber for advice if I need brain surgery.

So what did the CANADIAN Supreme Court mean when they explicitly stated that the law violated a woman’s right under Section 7 of the Charter of Rights? Did the CANADIAN Supreme Court rule that abortion was a right? Or is everyone just wrong about that?

Maybe I’ll try and get back to the original topic with a question… How does the right to life, liberty and personal security of a heart attack victim trying to recover in a hospital compare to the right to protest? They can protest anywhere, while the heart attack patient is a captive of their physical limitations and is stuck in that hospital. Do you think that should be considered?

You’re mixing up Canada and the USA as if they are the same thing. Where did I say the SCOTUS has anything to do with Canada? I purposely put IN CANADA as the first two words so we could get away from this confusion. So, IN CANADA, our CANADIAN Supreme Court ruled that denying a woman an abortion violated Section 7 of the Charter of Rights. I think we can agree that that is what they did? So, the CANADIAN Supreme Court made abortion a right in Canada. They had the legal power to do so, whether we agree with the ruling or not. I think we can agree that the Supreme Court has the legal power to do that, right? So when you say it’s not a right IN CANADA, this is your opinion of what should be, not what actually is?