Should Don Cherry Have Been Fired?

[jacee]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

What people like you and jacee claim is "inciting hatred" should not be illegal,

Well, it is illegal. Arguing with me won't change that. But you can go around publicly being hateful, try to incite hatred against (eg) Black people, and when you are charged and go to trial, you can make your arguments there, take it all the way to the Supreme Court if you wish, and try to change the law.

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

The whole point of free speech, is to protect offensive speech, because it's the kind of speech people want to ban.

The main point of freedom of expression is to protect democracy from devolving into fascism by ensuring our right to speak out against our governments without fear of being silenced by punishment from the state - arrested, charged, and incarcerated, etc. Some politicians find protests offensive, would like to ban protests and have tried to. But then we would no longer have democracy, so the courts uphold freedom of expression.  

But speech and other forms of expression are subject to reasonable limits, and are sometimes criminal: You can't yell "Fire!" when there is none. You can't conspire to commit a crime. You can't threaten someone with harm. You can't persistently harass someone, sexually or otherwise.  You can't incite or promote hatred against members of a group simply because of their gender, race, religion, culture, gender identity/expression, or other similar attributes. 

Thus, you would be wise to seek legal counsel to clarify whether yelling "n*****" at Black people in public would result in arrest and punishment. Or, you can go ahead and do it, get charged and fight your battle in court.

Arguing with me or anyone here about it won't change the law. "Should not be illegal" is not something we can help you with. 

The reason for freedom of expression is not so you can harass, attack publicly incite or promote hatred against people because of their race, etc. 

[Yzermandius19]

You do know the Nazi's banned the speech of their political opposition right? Just like you want to do with those you think are Nazi's. Don't be like the Nazi's thinking that's the only way to fight "Nazi's", that's bad juju. That is becoming the very thing you decry the most, meaning you are just projecting your own faults on everyone else, hence calling everyone and their mother a "White Supremacist".

Edited November 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[jacee]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

it's not the fault of the offensive speech that someone got violent as a result

Interesting that you say that. When white supremacists try to speak in public and are drowned out by communities of people who oppose them, they often become violent. And of course, they are offended by and blame the people who spoke back at them.

But, as you say, 

it's not the fault of the offensive speech that someone got violent as a result

[jacee]

24 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

You do know the Nazi's banned the speech of their political opposition right? Just like you want to do with those you think are Nazi's. Don't be like the Nazi's thinking that's the only way to fight "Nazi's", that's bad juju. That is becoming the very thing you decry the most, meaning you are just projecting your own faults on everyone else, hence calling everyone and their mother a "White Supremacist".

What you think I think is irrelevant, and in fact, what I do think is still irrelevant. 

Clarifying the legal realities is relevant. You might want to look into that so you don't find yourself in legal trouble ... or perhaps you prefer to get yourself in legal trouble so you can challenge the law in court. Your choice. 

And of course, racist speech has consequences other than legal, as Don Cherry just found out.

Edited November 28, 2019 by jacee

[Iceni warrior]

21 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

You do know the Nazi's banned the speech of their political opposition right? Just like you want to do with those you think are Nazi's. Don't be like the Nazi's thinking that's the only way to fight "Nazi's", that's bad juju. That is becoming the very thing you decry the most, meaning you are just projecting your own faults on everyone else, hence calling everyone and their mother a "White Supremacist".

The Nazis applied the law selectively. They never banned speech inciting hatred towards Jews for example. In fact they encouraged it.

"Nazis banned free speech too" is just a lazy argument.

 

[Goddess]

2 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Sometimes, but it's not the fault of the offensive speech that someone got violent as a result, only if they were inciting violence should they be held legally accountable. The former is not a good reason to restrict free speech.

"Offensive" is in the eye of the beholder.  People like Jacee assume that if they are offended by something someone else says, then the other person did something wrong.

No.  Just because YOU are offended, does not mean the other person did anything wrong.

Millions of Muslims are offended by any criticism of Islam and are working desperately in every country to make criticism of Islam illegal and punishable.  It doesn't make criticism of Islam wrong, nor does it make the ones who criticize religion wrong.  You're offended by criticism of your religion?  Too bad.  Criticism should fall under free speech and should be protected.

[jacee]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

"Offensive" is in the eye of the beholder.  People like Jacee assume that if they are offended by something someone else says, then the other person did something wrong.

And you would know that because of your all-seeing cyclops eye? Lol 

Edited November 28, 2019 by jacee

[Goddess]

8 minutes ago, jacee said:

And you would know that because of your all-seeing cyclops eye? Lol 

I know it because you automatically assume that if YOU are offended, the other person is automatically "wrong".  You dont' consider that maybe, perhaps you are offended over nothing and that the problem is you.

[dialamah]

 

30 minutes ago, Goddess said:

You dont' consider that maybe, perhaps you are offended over nothing and that the problem is you.

 Like the way you, Argus and others are offended by hijabs and burkas, so those women, or their husbands/fathers/brothers must be doing something wrong.  

30 minutes ago, Goddess said:

You dont' consider that maybe, perhaps you are offended over nothing and that the problem is you.

Have you ever considered that for yourself?

Funny how criticism of white society/white men is condemned by right-wingers as "reverse racism" and all because of "liberal guilt", but critisicm of anyone else is "free speech".

Oh yeah, listened to someone in a grocery store say some really nasty stuff about minority groups the other day, and finish up by saying "Don Cherry said so, and he knows."  Racism spreads, Cherry was part of that. I don't blame him he's old and that's how he grew up, but glad he's off the air.

[Goddess]

1 minute ago, dialamah said:

 

 Like the way you, Argus and others are offended by hijabs and burkas, so those women, or their husbands/fathers/brothers must be doing something wrong.  

Have you ever considered that for yourself?

Yes.  I'm offended by women and little girls being treated as inanimate objects instead of human beings, I'm offended that they require covering or they can't leave the house.  I'm offended by the numbers of women and girls being beaten, killed and maimed for having a hair stick out of said coverings.  I'm offended at the numbers of women being imprisoned because of this garment.  I'm offended that the belief is that an uncovered woman deserves to be raped or abused.  I'm offended by the beliefs and teachings that have given rise to burkas and hijabs.

I dont' think the question is "Why is Goddess offended by burkas and hijabs?"

The question is "Why are YOU not offended by them?"

(Not so much "offended" by them, as just knowing that they are a symbol of a sick and disgusting view of women.)

[jacee]

22 minutes ago, Goddess said:

I know it because you automatically assume that if YOU are offended, the other person is automatically "wrong".  You dont' consider that maybe, perhaps you are offended over nothing and that the problem is you.

It appears I may have hurt your feels somehow. I don't recall.

[Goddess]

Just now, jacee said:

It appears I may have hurt your feels somehow. I don't recall.

Nope.  No worries there. 

[jacee]

Back to hockey ... 

Don Cherry's firing for bigoted comments is perhaps a good time for a fuller discussion.

Is hockey 'for everyone'? Or is hockey only for well-off white boys? 

This article addresses racism, but there's also the issue of the cost and demands on families. 

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/calgary-flames-bill-peters-hall-analysis-1.5374929

 

[Yzermandius19]

6 hours ago, jacee said:

Interesting that you say that. When white supremacists try to speak in public and are drowned out by communities of people who oppose them, they often become violent. And of course, they are offended by and blame the people who spoke back at them.

But, as you say, 

it's not the fault of the offensive speech that someone got violent as a result

Indeed, whether on the right or the left, it's not the fault of the offensive speech that someone got violent as a result, and neither side should be banned. No double standard here.

[Yzermandius19]

6 hours ago, Iceni warrior said:

The Nazis applied the law selectively. They never banned speech inciting hatred towards Jews for example. In fact they encouraged it.

"Nazis banned free speech too" is just a lazy argument.

 

Only people who don't agree jacee get shouted down, everyone who agrees with jacee is free to speak to freely, selective application of silencing the voices of dissent there as well. That's why I brought it up, do try to keep up.

Edited November 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Yzermandius19]

27 minutes ago, jacee said:

Back to hockey ... 

Don Cherry's firing for bigoted comments is perhaps a good time for a fuller discussion.

Is hockey 'for everyone'? Or is hockey only for well-off white boys? 

This article addresses racism, but there's also the issue of the cost and demands on families. 

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/calgary-flames-bill-peters-hall-analysis-1.5374929

 

It's not either or, it's for "everyone", and for well-off white boys too. That's no crime where I come from.

[jacee]

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Only people who don't agree jacee get shouted down, everyone who agrees with jacee is free to speak to freely. That's why I brought it up.

I haven't noticed that you've been "shouted down". In fact, that's pretty impossible on a discussion board.

I can see that you've run out of arguments, though. Lol 

[jacee]

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

It's not either or, it's for "everyone", and for well-off white boys too. That's no crime where I come from.

Few families can afford to have kids play hockey these days. The time and money demands on parents are outrageous.

[Yzermandius19]

3 minutes ago, jacee said:

I haven't noticed that you've been "shouted down". In fact, that's pretty impossible on a discussion board.

I can see that you've run out of arguments, though. Lol 

I am talking about you being Cantifa. You clearly support shouting down right wing public speeches, and have admitted to engaging in this activity, with lame excuses that it's just you exercising your free speech rights, they aren't very popular so their audience has no right to hear them speak, you're right to be a jerk comes first and you've written the entire audience who wants to hear them off as racist anyway, so it's all good.

Edited November 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Yzermandius19]

Just now, jacee said:

Few families can afford to have kids play hockey these days. The time and money demands on parents are outrageous.

It's not being cheap doesn't make it only for white people.

[jacee]

3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

It's not being cheap doesn't make it only for white people.

No, the racism kids (and adults) have to deal with does. 

Maybe read the article: "If hockey is for everyone, those in power need to listen — even if the message is difficult to hear"

Edited November 28, 2019 by jacee

[Yzermandius19]

3 minutes ago, jacee said:

No, the racism kids (and adults) have to deal with does. 

What racism? Hockey is no more racist than any other sport. Why are you singling out hockey?

It's okay to hate on a sport that is mostly played by white people and pretend it's more racist than a sport played mostly by black people? Is that what you're getting at?

Edited November 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[jacee]

5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

I am talking about you being Cantifa. You clearly support shouting down right wing public speeches, and have admitted to engaging in this activity, with lame excuses that it's just you exercising your free speech rights, they aren't very popular so their audience has no right to hear them speak, you're right to be a jerk comes first and you've written the entire audience who wants to hear them off as racist anyway, so it's all good.

I've never seen an audience at a white supremacist rally. 

[Yzermandius19]

1 minute ago, jacee said:

I've never seen an audience at a white supremacist rally. 

You're lying or you never looked for an audience and just assumed everyone in the crowd agreed with you. That does not excuse your conduct, even if you were right, which you're not.

Edited November 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[jacee]

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

What racism? Hockey is no more racist than any other sport. Why are you singling out hockey? It's okay to hate on a sport that is mostly played by white people and pretend it's more racist than a sport played mostly by black people?

Read the article so you have something useful to say.

Or take a break.