Bryan

What specifically are social conservatives currently legally able to do that would deny anyone their basic human rights that is not already covered by the charter and the criminal code?

What basic human right are they being denied that is not already covered by the charter and the criminal code?

Yes. Old Testament. Before Christ.

There are no animal sacrifices in Christianity. The guy was just a loon.

Yup. Make up a fake problem that has a self-fullfilling rationale. The loonier their reason for wanting it, the deeper they dig in against the enemy that they invented out of thin air.

What is it that makes them need additional protections that are not already covered by the charter of rights and freedoms, and/or the current criminal code?

What is it that makes them need additional protections that are not already covered by the charter of rights and freedoms, and/or the current criminal code?

What is it that makes them need additional protections that are not already covered by the charter of rights and freedoms, and/or the current criminal code?

Depends on your definition of discrimination. What is it that makes them need additional protections that are not already covered by the charter of rights and freedoms, and/or the current criminal code?

What makes it "the right thing"?

Billions of dollars in fraud are committed electronically on a routine basis. We allow it because there is insurance to cover the losses.

Yeah. Chong is a guy you want to have around for his input, but you don't want him actually making decisions.

This could have something to do with it: Is Ghomeshi complaint being dropped over credibility issues? Interview may hold clues http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-is-ghomeshi-complaint-being-dropped-over-credibility-issues-interview-may-hold-clues

Yup: "Look, if we drop the charges, will you at least agree not to contact her?" "I guess so" "Case dismissed!"

I've done it. It's amazing how low the prices can drop in the last day before departure.

Yikes! Jian Ghomeshi won’t face second assault trial, case to be resolved by peace bond: sourceshttp://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/jian-ghomeshi-wont-face-second-assault-trial-case-to-be-resolved-by-peace-bond-sources

That isn't exactly accurate either. The driver of a vehicle might have to prove that he's legally entitled to be driving the car by providing license and insurance, but even that is only under the context of a legitimate investigation of a highway traffic act offence, The passengers in that car would not have to identify themselves if they chose not to. The police do not have the right to just grab anyone they want and demand ID.

No it isn't. I have no duty to supply any personal information with anyone if I don't want to.

Being forced to participate in something with no option to opt out nor any way to avoid it. Again: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/duress

No, but they do threaten to call in people who do carry them.

And nothing. I was addressing Cyber's lack of understanding of a basic dictionary definition, and explaining why his analogies don't apply the way he thinks they do.

Avoiding tickets and parking meters is easy -- just don't participate in the action that could incur them. There is no option to not participate in the census. With your other examples, the solution is stasis. Do nothing and you'll have no issues. The census is legal compulsion to participate. If you don't do it, they send people to your house to threaten you, and to attempt to force you to do it.

See, you're doing it again, misrepresenting what was said. 1) I already answered the question. I provided the actual definition of duress. Your argument is with reality. Contrary to contemporary progressive opinion, things do not become what you wish they were if you just dream hard enough. 2) I asked you a serious question, and I did not level a single insult. I truly do want to know if there is a reason why you have so much trouble following what others are saying to you. It's the exact opposite of an insult -- rather than mocking you, I'm trying to understand what your difficulty is.

Not everywhere. Just the information they are forcing people to divulge anyway, only visible to the people authorized to access it. It was a serious question. Cyber is a past master of misrepresenting the things other people are saying, and demanding that they repeat things that have already been clearly laid out. I'm just trying to understand why his reading comprehension skills are so low.

So they should fix that and stop wasting time and money on this useless extra layer of redundancy. I already posted the dictionary definition. Is english your second language?