Search the Community

As Canada continues to bring in so-called anti-hate speech laws that increasingly narrow the range of free speech, this latest bill removes the ability to oppose alternative sexual lifestyles and gender ideology on the basis of religious exemption. It strips away the basic constitutional right to express one’s religious beliefs. This will no doubt require silence before the accelerating sexualization of children and the attack on the traditional family. How much more destruction do we allow our government and courts to do to family life? This is all of course in a context of falling birth rates and more and more government interventions and restrictions on how citizens choose to express themselves. ”Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has passed numerous pieces of legislation prohibiting free speech in Canada, yet nothing has been as restrictive as Bill C-367, an amendment to the Criminal Code that will prohibit Canadians from expressing “an opinion based on a belief in a religious text. If passed, people can be arrested for quoting the Bible on Canadian soil.” Armstrong Economics Please note that if you are reading this in Canada, due to government restrictions, you may not be able to open the following links: https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/great-reset/canada-moves-to-ban-christianity-changes-to-bill-c-367/

Here’s the latest victim of Canada’s policing of unacceptable views. It takes so little now to de-platform people. https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7105360

Michigan just banned conversion therapy. Canada and 22 US states have also done this. What is the science against conversion therapy? It seems that this move is purely an ideological one, because some people don’t like the therapy. There definitely seems to be a heavy push to promote homosexuality in Western culture. We know that the only way for homosexual couples to have kids is through artificial insemination, surrogacy, or adoption. We also know that there are many heterosexual couples desperate to adopt. We have to rely quite heavily on technology to perpetuate a population with a growing number of homosexual couples or increase immigration, given our country’s negative birth rate. Sperm counts are down significantly Our environment is already full of toxins and chemicals that impact fertility and natural hormone production. It raises important questions. If so much unnatural intervention is necessary to maintain families under these conditions, why is conversion therapy considered by liberal governments to be a social evil? If some therapists support such therapy, why is one side of the debate being silenced? What is healthy for individuals and society? I won’t even get into the medical interventions and social agreements to lie that are necessary to maintain trans rights as human rights. A number of social changes have been pushed through legislatures by committees and activists over the past several years, including revisions to our human rights legislation, that have implications for women’s rights, men’s rights, religious rights, free speech, science, and health. The ban on conversion therapy looks and feels like a ban on free speech on ideological grounds. https://www.wsj.com/articles/michigan-bans-conversion-therapy-for-lgbt-children-aa98bbfc https://nationalpost.com/opinion/justin-trudeaus-great-liberal-death-wish/wcm/baaab7c4-ef1a-4461-96ef-84d2416b5a6e/amp/

Many commentators have noticed in recent years that some people are so offended by some ideas and opinions that they think they shouldn’t be exposed to such debate, that posters of such ideas should be banned, or that the debate itself should be shut down. Should we go to to the extent of shutting down debate or criticism to protect people’s “feelings”? This forum attempts to prevent posters from making personal insults, but at what point does criticism become personal or insulting? I’m sometimes shocked at how over sensitive people can be and how little criticism they can handle. I think sometimes free speech is prevented to coddle people. Thoughts?

It's hard to find good coverage of this issue but it seems like it might have major repercussions: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-ruling-in-twitter-harassment-trial-could-have-enormous-fallout-for-free-speech http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/01/09/gregory_alan_elliott_frustrations_boil_over_in_twitter_harassment_trial.html http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-the-twitter-trial-of-gregory-elliott-is-becoming-much-like-twitter-itself-shrill-and-uber-sensitive http://metronews.ca/news/toronto/448441/alleged-harassment-over-twitter-leads-to-criminal-charges-for-toronto-man/ Depending on the source, Elliott is either being targeted and silenced for holding views that are in conflict with those of young feminist activists or he was actually stalking and sexually harassing young women online. Either way, this could be the first case of someone going to court for social media harassment. What I find curious is that the accusation of sexual harassment only seems to appear in the Metro version of the story. Based on what the Post and the Star report, it seems like Elliott's comments were relatively mild and he is in fact being targeted here. Unfortunately, it seems like most of the coverage of this story is coming from sources that I am reluctant to trust, such as MRA groups. Anyone have info or thoughts on this? Edited: added link to Christie Blatchford's piece from last week

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/21/former-legislator-ban-political-ads-from-canadian-tv-radio/ A former MPP wants the government to destroy freedom of speech and expression - in the interests of "fairness". Now that the LPC is trailing in fundraising for its propaganda, it wants to government to hijack the process of political messaging and campaigning. Naturally, he makes no mention of the over one billion dollars flowing from taxpayers to the left-wing CBC that campaigns endlessly against conservatism and in favor of leftism (LPC and NDP, naturally). The left is so typical.... if you don't like something, BAN IT. If you can't get your way, USE THE IRON FIST OF THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE IT.