Jump to content

Why Canadians re-elected a Liberal government?


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

So they’re forced to get the vaccine in the same way people are forced to get a licence, insurance and keep their car maintained if they want to drive on public roads.  

Doesn’t sound so bad…. Sounds cheaper and easier than getting a licence!

I agree it is easier to comply, does not mean that you are not FORCED to make a choice, or take an action you disagree with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Or, if you disagree, you still have a choice not to get the shot, correct?

Sure you still have a choice, both suck just make one, what your telling me here is since it is a choice your not being "forced"

and while it is an extreme example, you have 2 plates one has a pile of shit on it, the other is empty... want to drive/ or continue life as we once did, then you eat the shit and smile at the end of it... I'm not forcing you to eat shit as you make the actual choice...what i am saying i have limited your choices to 2 ,one is worse than the other. I am "forcing" you to make a choice...freedom or continue to be restricted in your movement. 

Edited by Army Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Sure you still have a choice, both suck just make one, what your telling me here is since it is a choice your not being "forced"

and while it is an extreme example, you have 2 plates one has a pile of shit on it, the other is empty... want to drive/ or continue life as we once did, then you eat the shit and smile at the end of it... I'm not forcing you to eat shit as you make the actual choice...what i am saying i have limited your choices to 2 ,one is worse than the other. I am "forcing" you to make a choice...freedom or continue to be restricted in your movement. 

A more realistic analogy is mandatory vaccines to go to a different country.  You’re forced to get these…. Except you don’t have to.  Sooo…. Is it really so bad?

Are you using the word for hyperbole or to try and make your case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

you have 2 plates one has a pile of shit on it, the other is empty..

A better analogy would be that the first plate has steak, veggies and potatoes (able to enjoy all activities), second plate has lettuce and chickpeas on it (some limits on activities)  First choice has better outcomes, the second plate sucks but it's survivable.  You make the choice, nobody is forcing you to eat lettuce and chickpeas for the foreseeable future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Ok, so this is one of those.  Free speech doesn't mean you get to scream "Jew" in a crowded Juden theatre.
2) Or... zero.  Or, it just bothers people.  Maybe, like Sunday shopping, or gay marriage or somesuch ... the "public" will be able to handle racists distributing material trying to brainwash them.  I will reassess my position constantly.
3) No I don't.  Don't believe me.  Why don't we BOTH do nothing and see what changes ?  I predict... nothing.  Nothing will change.
4) Free speech isn't absolute - see 1)
5) I appreciate that your mob says otherwise.  Your mob is smaller, though so you lose.

If the city can restrict me from expressing myself through my lawnmower at 6 AM then they can restrict an ugly retard handing my kids material saying the holocaust doesn't happen.  Want to change that ?  Get to court...

1) you should be allowed to scream to jew any movie theater you dam well please

2) it offending is not relevant to whether it should be legal or not, free speech is a right, in large part to protect offensive speech

it is not there to protect speech that no one finds offensive, because no one is calling you for that speech to be banned

free speech protects controversial speech

5) the size of the mob is irrelevant, free speech isn't only free speech if a majority agrees with it

the courts hate free speech, fck them and the horse they rode in on

the courts agreeing with you doesn't make you right nor does it make your position moral, any more than the SCOTUS agreed with supporters of slavery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dialamah said:

Canada hates hate speech, that's why they restrict hate speech.  Fify

Don't know if you live in Canada, but if you do, perhaps you'd be happier in the States.

hate speech is free speech

America knows

Canada and Canadians wouldn't know what free speech is, if it slapped them in the face

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

I guess thats why the u.s. has so very little problems with riots and such....

 

Oh wait, thats Canada ?

America has riot problems in spite of embracing free speech

not because of it

Canada is more peaceful, in spite of it's hatred of free speech

not because of it

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1) you should be allowed to scream to jew any movie theater you dam well please

2) in large part to protect offensive speech

3) the courts hate free speech, fck them and the horse they rode in on

4) the courts agreeing with you doesn't make you right nor does it make your position moral 

1) Disagree
2) That's not why we have it.  It was Rousseau not Rickles
3) Bleating for "rights" and saying fck the courts is kind of like hating home delivery and yet wanting pizza
4) Right, but I also don't have to prove anything to keep the status quo, and eat my pizza...
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

4) Right, but I also don't have to prove anything to keep the status quo, and eat my pizza...

if you are fine that your status quo is built on stupidity

and it being the status quo is good enough for you

then you are beyond help at this point

 

you're the kind of dude

who would have supported slavery when it was the legal status quo and popular among the masses

you'd feel no need to justify your position either logically or morally

and demand that the burden of proof is on anyone who opposes slavery

if they want to change that

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Charlottesville would have been worse if hate speech had been banned

Than why hasn't Canada had a Charlottesville?  Or anywhere near the hate-motivated crimes the States have had?  If hate speech is limited, how do haters find like-minded people so they can group up?  Or even persuade others to join their "cause"?  

Sure, haters can hope to find like-minded people in the pub or Church through in-person conversation, but if their message isn't acceptable in public, than they're not going to be able to find enough supporters to pull off a Charlottesville. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Than why hasn't Canada had a Charlottesville?

culture not the law

if it was all based on the law

Canada would have many far worse Charlottesvilles

just like they would have far more mass shootings

stupid prohibitions always makes things worse

the road to hell is paved with good intentions

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. if you are fine that your status quo is built on stupidity

2. then you are beyond help at this point

3. who would have supported slavery when it was the legal status quo and popular among the masses

 

1. I'm not the kind of person who says that people who disagree with them are stupid.  I also don't say 'fck the courts'
2. I guess I'm not asking for help from someone who thinks they're above the court system anyway.
3. No, I'm not saying morality is always right - far from it.  Sometimes it is enough, though, for something to be supported morally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

America has riot problems in spite of embracing free speech

not because of it

Canada is more peaceful, in spite of it's hatred of free speech

not because of it

Wow, that's such a weird conclusion.  Take a look at Western countries that limit hate speech and you'll notice hate motivated violence than the States.  Can it really be coincidence that the country that allows hate speech has more hate-motivated crime than countries that limit hate speech?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I'm not the kind of person who says that people who disagree with them are stupid.  I also don't say 'fck the courts'
2. I guess I'm not asking for help from someone who thinks they're above the court system anyway.
3. No, I'm not saying morality is always right - far from it.  Sometimes it is enough, though, for something to be supported morally.

3. and you haven't supported your position morally

you have only appealed to popularity and legality

implying that if something is legal and popular

that automatically makes it moral

when clearly there are many examples throughout history where that is not the case

and it isn't the case with hate speech restrictions either

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Wow, that's such a weird conclusion.  Take a look at Western countries that limit hate speech and you'll notice hate motivated violence than the States.  Can it really be coincidence that the country that allows hate speech has more hate-motivated crime than countries that limit hate speech?

yes

because the trend is that the countries who support hate speech restrictions the most

have the most hate

and the countries who support hate speech restrictions the least

have the least hate

pointing to one cherry picked outlier

and comparing them to countries with less hate speech restrictions than most

who are far less hateful than the countries that restrict it a lot more

does not negate the obvious trend

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

yes

because the trend is that the countries who support hate speech restrictions the most

have the most hate

and the countries who support hate speech restrictions the least

have the least hate

pointing to one cherry picked outlier, does not negate the obvious trend

 

Ok, done with someone so clearly confused and illogical. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Ok, done with someone so clearly confused and illogical. 

projection is a helluva drug

Western Europe supports hate speech laws less than most countries on the planet

and they are some of the least hateful countries on the planet

the fact that you can't follow that basic logic

shows you are arguing in bad faith

just because America is more pro free speech and is less peaceful than some nations that have less free speech

is not proof that more free speech begets more hate

it is in fact precisely the opposite

 

as usual

you are allowing America Derangement Syndrome to cloud your judgement on the benefits of liberty

and side against individual rights for no good reason

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. and you haven't supported your position morally

2. that automatically makes it moral, when clearly there are many examples throughout history where that is not the case

3. and it isn't the case with hate speech restrictions either

1. Ok, well let's just say it's public morality to tolerate other groups as established in our culture and legal precepts then.
2.  Ok that's interesting.  What are you thinking about here ?  What examples ?
3. Yes, Canada abhors hate speech don't you know ?  I don't know how I would prove it other than to show you polls that show Canadians are concerned about system racism curtailing hate speech and so on.

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
      10,723
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    DACHSHUND
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • babetteteets went up a rank
      Rookie
    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • paradox34 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      First Post
    • paradox34 earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Recently Browsing

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