Jump to content

Why Canadians re-elected a Liberal government?


Recommended Posts

Just now, Faramir said:

Let people criticize those groups just like we allow criticism of Christians and conservatives.

We do…

The case you are citing as destroying this poor pastor’s right to promote that homosexuality is the same thing as pedophilia was overturned.

He won.

So….  What does that mean for your STASI state comment when your best example is the exact opposite of what you are trying to portray?

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jonathan-kay-victory-at-last-rev-stephen-boissoin-prevails-against-albertas-human-rights-censors

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Faramir said:

I hate that its framed as "speech".  Freedom of opinion or expression.  For THAT there should be no limit whatoever and no attempt by biased governments to decide which is or is not hate speech.

So you thinking it should be legal to encourage the killing of Jews?

Edited by TreeBeard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dialamah said:

What if the claim of victimhood is legit?  Consider the law in Quebec,  implemented specifically for Muslims (though hidden in the language) forbidding the wearing of religious wear in government facilities?  Or the verbal and sometimes physical harassment of Muslims just going about their every day lives?  Or the attacks on Muslim places of worship?

LGBTQ face similar problems, as do Jews.  Why do you insist that these aren't to be acknowledged or changed?

You can talk about them but the other side should have every right to express their opinion.  I know you won't like this but I believe holocaust deniers should not be penalized.  The way to deal with bad ideas is to expose them using our own free speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

We do…

The case you are citing as destroying this poor pastor’s right to promote that homosexuality is the same thing as pedophilia was overturned.

He won.

So….  What does that mean for your STASI state comment when your best example is the exact opposite of what you are trying to portray?

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jonathan-kay-victory-at-last-rev-stephen-boissoin-prevails-against-albertas-human-rights-censors

But he didn't win.  He was put through a punitive and expensive process with no right to legal representation.  He had to pay for his own legal defense while the accusers did not have to.  He should have never had to defend himself at all for what was free speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

So you thinking it should be legal to encourage the killing of Jews?

It should be legal to say the holocaust did not happen.  It should be legal to say I hate Jews.  Incitement to violence is a tricky one.  A fine line that could be abused by authorities.  So if someone used facebook and said 'Everyone rise up now and kill some Jews", that should be looked at under incitement to violence.  Or if you like if someone said "Christianity is a loathsome religion, and I hate most Christians I meet" most definitely they should be allowed to and do say that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

Why Liberals were reelected: the Moderate vote goes for the Liberals in urban areas, and people over 65 voted massively for them.

He certainly paid them enough to do so.

8 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

I find this forum to also show the Conservatives as being well represented: they are out of their minds when it comes to Trudeau's reign, and sound foolish criticizing it like they do so.

You're another guy who thinks there's no limit to how much money we can borrow, even as all signs point to a resurgence of inflation. What happens to Trudeau's budget if interest rates double or triple?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a little troubling but not unexpected that most here do not believe in the charter rights right to free speech or even the long British tradition of free speech.  No, speech should not be used in criminal activity.  Obviously you can't go into a bank and yell "hands up".  But this is just splitting of hairs and a dishonest  way to somehow justify limits on free opinion.  Liberals use to value free speech. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Faramir said:

But he didn't win.  He was put through a punitive and expensive process with no right to legal representation.  He had to pay for his own legal defense while the accusers did not have to.  He should have never had to defend himself at all for what was free speech.

People who aren’t guilty have to defend themselves all the time, do they not?  Anytime someone is rendered “not guilty” you can make the case that they should never have been put through the process, couldn’t you?  

In this case, the HRT was put in its place.  Victory in Canada for free speech.  Pastors can say this all day long until they’re blue in the face, right?

Why are you claiming that you can’t criticize LGBTQ people when the Canadian courts have confirmed that you absolutely can?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Argus said:

He certainly paid them enough to do so.

You're another guy who thinks there's no limit to how much money we can borrow, even as all signs point to a resurgence of inflation. What happens to Trudeau's budget if interest rates double or triple?

 

Liberals still believe in the money tree or that there is some untapped segment of the working population to get money from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Faramir said:

It should be legal to say the holocaust did not happen.  It should be legal to say I hate Jews.  Incitement to violence is a tricky one.  A fine line that could be abused by authorities.  So if someone used facebook and said 'Everyone rise up now and kill some Jews", that should be looked at under incitement to violence.  Or if you like if someone said "Christianity is a loathsome religion, and I hate most Christians I meet" most definitely they should be allowed to and do say that.

So you do think there should be limits to free speech.  

Me too.  

What if we don’t agree on where that line should be?  How should we resolve that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TreeBeard said:

People who aren’t guilty have to defend themselves all the time, do they not?  Anytime someone is rendered “not guilty” you can make the case that they should never have been put through the process, couldn’t you?  

In this case, the HRT was put in its place.  Victory in Canada for free speech.  Pastors can say this all day long until they’re blue in the face, right?

Why are you claiming that you can’t criticize LGBTQ people when the Canadian courts have confirmed that you absolutely can?

The penalty is in the process.  Have you heard that expression.  That is the intent of the tribunals.  The Tribunals should not exist as they are quasi kangaroo courts.  Real courts don't pay for the legal bills of the plaintiffs like the so called human rights commissions do.  Pastors don't dare speak about homosexuality in case they get pulled before a Tribunal.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

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?  

They are definitely not the people you want judging free speech. And if you look at some of the European countries, free speech has been trampled on the alter of not 'causing offense' towards various groups. Say anything unflattering about Muslims and you'll have the police at your door. Question whether a transexual is really a woman and you'll find yourself up on charges. This is the kind of thing people fear when looking at Trudeau's internet rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TreeBeard said:

So you do think there should be limits to free speech.  

Me too.  

What if we don’t agree on where that line should be?  How should we resolve that?

I don't believe there should be limits on freedom of opinion.  Do you?  We are obviously on two different planets here.  You revile free speech and I don't.  You like safe and polite speech only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Faramir said:

I don't believe there should be limits on freedom of opinion.  Do you?  We are obviously on two different planets here.  You revile free speech and I don't.  You like safe and polite speech only.

You just posted that you can’t yell ‘hands up’ in a bank.  And you also can’t incite violence.

Didn’t you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Argus said:

Say anything unflattering about Muslims and you'll have the police at your door. Question whether a transexual is really a woman and you'll find yourself up on charges.

Where is this happening?  Examples?

Because the last time I asked for an example of a Canadian who isn’t allowed to express anti LGBTQ sentiments, I got a case that was overturned and confirmed that indeed the person was allowed to say those things about LGBTQ people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ironstone said:

It's pretty low when people working for any political party start interfering with the campaign of their rivals. They should be punished accordingly as well. I may end up being surprised if George Chahal faces actually faces serious consequences for his actions but I think that because of his political affiliation it's more likely he won't.

The law enforcement is independent of government or political parties and they do the job without interference. Even the Prime Minister himself can be charged if he breaks the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Faramir said:

Stephen Boisson.  It wasn't a hate crime THEN just a violation of a kangaroo court.  But shiny pony's intention is to pass that bill to make it so.  Canada the increasingly STASI state.

Maybe, but we don't have the letter to judge for ourselves.. if you can find it I'll be glad to pass opinion and who knows maybe I'll even agree with you. I'm actually a staunch defender of religious rights. But I find it hard to believe that he published letter saying something is a sin, it sounds like it was more than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

You just posted that you can’t yell ‘hands up’ in a bank.  And you also can’t incite violence.

Didn’t you?

Right and that's obviously NOT an opinion.  That's a statement.  So no I do not believe there should be any penalty for expression one's opinion.  If we want to talk about speech, then there should be VERY limited narrow restrictions.  I find that left and liberals argue these points because they really do agree there should certain topics off limits.  Is that you?  Do you think anyone should have the right to even say nasty things about Jews, Christians, Muslims, UFO freaks, hippies, liberals, conservatives, ect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Where is this happening?  Examples?

Because the last time I asked for an example of a Canadian who isn’t allowed to express anti LGBTQ sentiments, I got a case that was overturned and confirmed that indeed the person was allowed to say those things about LGBTQ people. 

The UK, for one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Faramir said:

I rather go back to don't ask don't tell.  I don't need perverts subjugating my children to their BS.  Sexual activity is not an identity, its just a past time.

It's pretty hard to "subjugate" someone's sexuality.  If it were possible, Christians/Muslims and other religions would have had homosexuality stamped out centuries ago.  Just as you can't stop yourself from finding the opposite gender sexually attractive whether you act on it or not, so gay people can't stop themselves from finding the same sex sexually attractive, whether they act on it or not.

Transsexuals usually know there's something 'different' about them from the time they're 4 or 5.   Most kids that age aren't being "subjugated" by anyone but their parents.  Kids pick up at a pretty young age what is 'appropriate' for their assumed gender and will try to conform, even if it feels completely wrong for them.

Imagine if your child did not fall into these sexual norms; they'd know how strongly you disapprove of people not conforming, so you'd likely lose your kid - and you might not ever know why.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dialamah said:

It's pretty hard to "subjugate" someone's sexuality.  If it were possible, Christians/Muslims and other religions would have had homosexuality stamped out centuries ago.  Just as you can't stop yourself from finding the opposite gender sexually attractive whether you act on it or not, so gay people can't stop themselves from finding the same sex sexually attractive, whether they act on it or not.

Transsexuals usually know there's something 'different' about them from the time they're 4 or 5.   Most kids that age aren't being "subjugated" by anyone but their parents.  Kids pick up at a pretty young age what is 'appropriate' for their assumed gender and will try to conform, even if it feels completely wrong for them.

Imagine if your child did not fall into these sexual norms; they'd know how strongly you disapprove of people not conforming, so you'd likely lose your kid - and you might not ever know why.  

Sure they can.  It's like resisting smoking.  It is simply an extra curricular activity they chose to engage in, still not an identity.  Sort of the same thing as liking balloon sex.  Kids know there are 2 genders as does science.  It's these perverts that are trying to put these questions in their minds to doubt themselves.  Parents are looking out for the emotional health of their children, not to become walking targets for homosexuals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Faramir said:

 So no I do not believe there should be any penalty for expression one's opinion.   

OK…. Don’t you contradict this in the next sentence?  Expressing an opinion and speech are the same thing.  Unless you are redefining terms to mean different things?  

I hope not, because that always makes things awkward and unproductive when people are not even talking about the same thing.  
 

Quote

 

If we want to talk about speech, then there should be VERY limited narrow restrictions.


 

Right.  Very limited restrictions.  Like inciting violence… like yelling ‘this is a stick up” in a bank.

What do you think about libel?  Should lying about someone and impugning their reputation be allowable speech?

 

Quote

I find that left and liberals argue these points because they really do agree there should certain topics off limits.  Is that you?  Do you think anyone should have the right to even say nasty things about Jews, Christians, Muslims, UFO freaks, hippies, liberals, conservatives, ect?

1 - Yes, nasty is great.  Let’s get nasty!  

Incitement of hatred?  No.  I don’t think people should be allowed to promote hatred of Jews (for example) if it could be foreseeable that it would lead to violence against them.

 

 

2 - But your example so far has been someone’s nasty speech who was confirmed to be OK.  I love nasty speech too!!  Darn gays!

So can you provide another example of people NOT being allowed to say nasty things about LGBTQ (or whatever group…. Your choice) in Canada?  Because you did say this was forbidden to do in Canada. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Faramir said:

You can talk about them but the other side should have every right to express their opinion.  I know you won't like this but I believe holocaust deniers should not be penalized.  The way to deal with bad ideas is to expose them using our own free speech.

Well, there was a time when I'd have agreed that even bad ideas should be expressed, so that good ideas can flourish.  Problem is, I don't see that happening.  People simply get more entrenched in their ideas, good or bad, and as we see become more polarized.  Do you think polarization is good for society?  The States has very recently had an attempted insurrection due to that kind of polarization.  

My opinion is that there has to be limits on people being able to say or promote anything they want.  Just as people can't deliberately sell poison while claiming it's a cure-all, so speech can't spew poison while claiming it's a boon to society.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Faramir said:

Sure they can.  It's like resisting smoking.  It is simply an extra curricular activity they chose to engage in, still not an identity.  Sort of the same thing as liking balloon sex.  Kids know there are 2 genders as does science.  It's these perverts that are trying to put these questions in their minds to doubt themselves.  Parents are looking out for the emotional health of their children, not to become walking targets for homosexuals.

Pfft.  I'm assuming you are heterosexual.  Please, go out and be homosexual - give up your heterosexuality, like a smoking habit.  Do it just for a month; you don't even have to make it a lifetime commitment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...