constitution

[Mr.Canada]

I think most of us have reached the point where sensible answers to your inanity aren't necessary. You're a figure of derision, almost entirely by your own hand, and now suddenly you want people to act as if posts lauding Fascism are serious?

I'm of the opinion that you're either a bored 14 year old or a developmentally stalled 40 year old.

I'm 35 and I've said it many times here.

[ToadBrother]

I'm 35 and I've said it many times here.

I don't see any reason to believe that any more than you're claims to be half-Jewish, made after you were outed saying anti-Semitic things, or your claims to be some sort of ex-criminal to make up for your hard-on-crime stance, or your claims that you're going to be filming live gay sex acts at a Pride Parade. Maybe you're some sort of genius performance artist, maybe you're a troll, or maybe you're just a dipsh*t. I dunno, but if you think after all the crap you've written that anyone is really going to take you seriously, you should know that that train left the station a long time ago.

[Moonbox]

Well done Topaz. That was my favourite post by you ever. Thanks for saying everything I was thinking. I wish there was a sub-forum for these people so they could get together andfling nonsense and poo at each other.

[Jack Weber]

I don't see any reason to believe that any more than you're claims to be half-Jewish, made after you were outed saying anti-Semitic things, or your claims to be some sort of ex-criminal to make up for your hard-on-crime stance, or your claims that you're going to be filming live gay sex acts at a Pride Parade. Maybe you're some sort of genius performance artist, maybe you're a troll, or maybe you're just a dipsh*t. I dunno, but if you think after all the crap you've written that anyone is really going to take you seriously, you should know that that train left the station a long time ago.

Careful Toadster...

I got a little missive from our moderators for personally attacking members...It was the member your going after right now...

I'm thinking Mr.Falange is a bit of a crybaby,who says things he really believes in(without any historical knowledge),and when he gets called on his complete and total idiocy...

Mr.Falange runs to Da Da to get assistance...D!p$#!+?....35 year old punk is more like it.

I'll bet he was the one who complained about the photo's on my page being "too suggestive"...And they were'nt that bad,going by the list of viewers of the page...I suppose it would be more preferrable for our Cecil B. De Mille of gay street porn if it was a muscular dude in leather chaps....And a smile....

Edited July 18, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Mr.Canada]

If all that can be done is name call then please do so in the post located in my sig. Let's keep the threads troll free please. There's no need for the childish behavior because you don't agree with my opinions.

Edited July 16, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[Shakeyhands]

If all that can be done is name call then please do so in the post located in my sig. Let's keep the threads troll free please. There's no need for the childish behavior because you don't agree with my opinions.

That's the problem here Mr Canada, the thread isn't troll free. I think you meant to say keep the name calling etc to your ( ) thread. If you want the threads to remain troll free, please just try to avoid them.

[Jack Weber]

That's the problem here Mr Canada, the thread isn't troll free. I think you meant to say keep the name calling etc to your ( ) thread. If you want the threads to remain troll free, please just try to avoid them.

And Mr.Falange...Please dispense with the "Right Wing Populist" crap...

Just put Fascist Agitator,or something....

Edited July 16, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Mr.Canada]

That's the problem here Mr Canada, the thread isn't troll free. I think you meant to say keep the name calling etc to your ( ) thread. If you want the threads to remain troll free, please just try to avoid them.

Because my opinion happens to differ from some posters here doesn't make me a troll. Am I supposed to subscribe to the same train of thought as everyone else? People need to open their minds a little.

[Moonbox]

If all that can be done is name call then please do so in the post located in my sig. Let's keep the threads troll free please. There's no need for the childish behavior because you don't agree with my opinions.

It's not that simple. We don't make fun of you because we don't agree with your opinions. I generally don't agree with most of what Topaz, posts, for example, but I don't make fun of him because he can clearly state why he feels differently and because he doesn't go on useless tirades.

Your opinions, on the other hand, are both poorly supported and stupidly presented. Even when I DO agree with you (which is more often than you'd probably think) the way you present your opinions is in such a rude, ignorant and inflammatory manner that it's rarely worthy of any respect.

When you post like an idiot, you get treated like one.

[Remiel]

If all that can be done is name call then please do so in the post located in my sig. Let's keep the threads troll free please. There's no need for the childish behavior because you don't agree with my opinions.

Weak, man. Weak. Crying about people calling you names when you have repeatedly implied that you would have most of the people on this forum killed if you had the chance? I would call it a joke, except for the common refrain that truth is often stranger than fiction.

Edited July 17, 2010 by Remiel

[bloodyminded]

This country needs a hard right revolution or a civil war imo. There's nothing wrong with some of the parts of fascism. People really need to read about things instead of believing what someone said or what they think. Get the facts then decide. Fascism doesn't mean racism and people need to understand that.

No, it doesn't. Contemporary fascists (who tend, usualy, to avoid the word itself) tend to eschew racism, preferring Mussolini and Franco to Hitler.

They nonetheless cling to ugly and disturbing notions. Fascism is abhorrent even without the final Solution nonsense.

[charter.rights]

No, it doesn't. Contemporary fascists (who tend, usualy, to avoid the word itself) tend to eschew racism, preferring Mussolini and Franco to Hitler.

They nonetheless cling to ugly and disturbing notions. Fascism is abhorrent even without the final Solution nonsense.

If I remember correctly, Mr.Falange had suggested he was considering running for the Conservative party in the next election but was rejected due to his background. Maybe he has taken up a new cause in violent pornography. Just what the world needs a violent porn-loving fascist.

[Jack Weber]

If I remember correctly, Mr.Falange had suggested he was considering running for the Conservative party in the next election but was rejected due to his background. Maybe he has taken up a new cause in violent pornography. Just what the world needs a violent porn-loving fascist.

I love the fact that other people are calling him "Mr.Falange"...

[Moonlight Graham]

The constitution of Canada has many purposes, not the least of which is setting out how government is to function, ie as a parliamentary democracy, its limitations, its requirements, and how power is shared among the different governmental jurisdictions. A part of this document is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which you and these young people you describe seem to believe is the constitution. It's actually just a part of the constitution. Stating it is designed to prevent mistreatment of people by government is simplistic but not entirely inaccurate. But a part of the Charter also sets out requirements that the government treat all people equally, and not discriminate against one group to the benefit of another. At least, not without good reason.

Ya this is pretty much it. Although the Canadian Constitution is not simply a written document like the U.S. Constitution, there are also many unwritten Conventions which are a part of the Constitution (ie: the role/functions of the PM was never written down/mentioned anywhere in the Constitution Act, 1867).

Also, the Charter doesn't just protect rights against government infringement, but protects these rights legally against the infringement of anyone, government or no.

[bloodyminded]

I love the fact that other people are calling him "Mr.Falange"...

Good work, Jack.

Edited July 17, 2010 by bloodyminded

[justme]

Who cares about the Trudeau Charter of Rights and Freedoms? It's a flawed document.

For example, it starts off with this clause:

"The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."

Hate speech is an example of a restriction on the right to free speech. If you disagree with homosexuality or voice opposition to immigration, are you guilty of hate speech? If you refuse to accept a culture that condones killing your own child (ie honor killings) as an equal to Western culture and you're vocal about it, are you guilty of hate speech?

Free speech is just that, free speech, and there should be no restrictions on it - otherwise, it isn't free.

In contrast, the US Bill of Rigbhts:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

That alone makes the Bill of Rights superior to Trudeau's Charter.

[Smallc]

"The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."

Hate speech is an example of a restriction on the right to free speech. If you disagree with homosexuality or voice opposition to immigration, are you guilty of hate speech? If you refuse to accept a culture that condones killing your own child (ie honor killings) as an equal to Western culture and you're vocal about it, are you guilty of hate speech?

Those things aren't hate speech. If on the other hand, you say you're going to go kill all of the fags, of you tell someone else too...that's more of a grey area. The hate speech laws really aren't the problem, it's some of the HRC laws, especially provincially, that are. As for the Section 1 of the Charter, such a statement is necessary. Rights of an individual in a Commonwealth Realm rarely trump the rights of the collective where such individual rights would endanger the collective (or a large portion of it) in some way.

If the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is flawed, it isn't because of Section 1.

[justme]

Those things aren't hate speech. If on the other hand, you say you're going to go kill all of the fags, of you tell someone else too...that's more of a grey area. The hate speech laws really aren't the problem, it's some of the HRC laws, especially provincially, that are. As for the Section 1 of the Charter, such a statement is necessary. Rights of an individual in a Commonwealth Realm rarely trump the rights of the collective where such individual rights would endanger the collective (or a large portion of it) in some way.

If the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is flawed, it isn't because of Section 1.

Death threats are already covered under the Criminal Code.

The HRC uses Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which is an anti-hate speech law that was created originally to deal with phone messages and later expanded to cover the internet in 2001. The section deals with hate messages not threats of violence.

Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) empowers the Commission to deal with complaints regarding the communication of hate messages by telephone or on the Internet:

13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

Interpretation

2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) applies in respect of a matter that is communicated by means of a computer or a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication, but does not apply in respect of a matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking.

http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/proactive_initiatives/hoi_hsi/qa_qr/page1-en.asp

"Diversity is one of Canada's greatest strengths, and the Government of Canada is taking steps to protect it." (from the above link)

Read: The Liberals want to protect the agenda they put in place to transform Canada from criticism and opposition.

The whole diversity thing started with Trudeau in the late 60s, and personally, I think it's an oxymoron. How is it a strength to import Jamaican gang violence, Muslim honour killings, or Indian pre-arranged marriages? But if you point out the FACT that these behaviours are part of cultures that often fall within racial boundaries, you enter what you call "grey area". Did we need the level of security that we now have at airports before diversity? No, yet it's one of our greatest strengths apparently. In order to avoid offending anyone, and to preserve the illusion, we must not do profiling at airports, for minority rights trump ours.

"As well, there are Criminal Code amendments that would create a new offence of mischief motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on religion, race, colour, national or ethnic origin, committed against a place of religious worship or associated religious property." (from the above link)

But it's ok for Muslims to preach hate of the West in the Mosques that they build in our country.

[Smallc]

You left out important parts of the law. Speech that is truthful or put forward in the context of continuing discussion are protected under the free speech protections in the charter. There are very few things that actually fall under federal hate speech laws.

[bloodyminded]

Who cares about the Trudeau Charter of Rights and Freedoms? It's a flawed document.

For example, it starts off with this clause:

"The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."

Hate speech is an example of a restriction on the right to free speech. If you disagree with homosexuality or voice opposition to immigration, are you guilty of hate speech? If you refuse to accept a culture that condones killing your own child (ie honor killings) as an equal to Western culture and you're vocal about it, are you guilty of hate speech?

Free speech is just that, free speech, and there should be no restrictions on it - otherwise, it isn't free.

In contrast, the US Bill of Rigbhts:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

That alone makes the Bill of Rights superior to Trudeau's Charter.

The United States does have superior speech laws.

[August1991]

I want help with this new way we tend to view the constitution. I am over 50 now and since those very Liberal days of Trudeau and the institution of government funded lobby one of the many things I have become totally disillusioned about is the way young people interperate the Canadian constitution. I was raised to believe that our fathers meant for the constitution to be the kind of document that would prevent the mistreatment of a people by their government, in a nut shell a document that would restrict the actions of government. When I ask my own kids and others, even some polititions they have developed a very twisted concept of the constitution as to believe now that the constitution is a document that demands that all people are treated equal under the law. and it is the government's duty to enforce the constitution. I Truely want any and all to comment on this but please, please, please do not comment until you have asked at least 3 young people which definition they believe is true.

This is your second post here, and your only post expressing an opinion.

Badactor, I'll give your opinion some thought if you're willing to defend it. Until then, I'll ignore you.

[Smallc]

I don't think I'd talk about other people's undefended opinions, if I were you.

[August1991]

I don't think I'd talk about other people's undefended opinions, if I were you.

Badactor has two posts here, and only one where he/she expresses a poorly written, ungrammatical opintion. Despite numerous replies to her/his single post (an OP), badactor did not reply.

Smallc, if you start a new post about the Constitution, I'll read it and consider it (your posts in particular; after reading some of your several thousand posts, I have learned that you have something intelligent to say.) OTOH, I have little time for posters like badactor, and that's my point above.

Edited July 17, 2010 by August1991

[Smallc]

I was just saying that, even though you often have well thought out opinions, you sometimes go with these ideas that seem to have little basis in fact (I'm sure we all do it sometimes...you just seem to make a sport out of it ). But you're right, new posters should always try to be extra diligent when backing up their posts and making a good impression.

[Jack Weber]

I was just saying that, even though you often have well thought out opinions, you sometimes go with these ideas that seem to have little basis in fact (I'm sure we all do it sometimes...you just seem to make a sport out of it ). But you're right, new posters should always try to be extra diligent when backing up their posts and making a good impression.

So do I....

Over to you,Mr.Falange!