Jump to content

The woke police going after nurse for believing in biology


Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, blackbird said:

There you are making general vague statements without any basis.  I said no contract can take away basic rights without a clear meaningful reason such as when you are on the job, you can't say certain things.  But it doesn't need a written contract to tell people how to think and speak on the job.  That's just common sense.

You’re absolutely correct and @Michael Hardner is wrong.  
 

You can say anything you want about your employer, even if you sign a contract that you won’t.  The government will not take away your freedoms because you signed a contract.  
 

Your employer can also fire you for doing so because you signed a contract not to.  
 

You’re both conflating your freedoms with the consequences of saying things.  You’re free to say them, and the government can’t punish you for doing so, but your employer has a right to fire you as a consequence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, myata said:

1. But you wouldn't be able to make them, if you have a contract and your employer has an absolute privilege to interpret and decide what may or could harm their reputation is some stretched remote way. You lost you rights and the paper they were written on is worthless.

2. No, this is not how freedoms and democracy work, and you struggle to get it because you never really understood the democracy.

3. Police cannot discuss tomorrow's raid on the criminals, etc. Obvious.

 

1. Well, not worthless.  If it didn't say anything about your public statements in the contract then it would be hard for them to bring a case.
2. Ok, well you seem to be saying that my employer doesn't have the right to restrict my public speech.  Can I find a case that answers the question before us and we can be done with it ?
3. These are some examples, yes, of your rights being restricted.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TreeBeard said:

1.  You’re both conflating your freedoms with the consequences of saying things.  You’re free to say them, and the government can’t punish you for doing so, but your employer has a right to fire you as a consequence. 

1. Ok - that sounds like what I meant, even if I stated it wrong legally.  Thanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. ?
2.  What do I care what other people (that you have a cute name for) say ?
3.  Those things are analogous at all.  You don't have a logical mind.
4.  Rights discussions are pretty tricky things to undertake.  From your post you seem to be pretty invested in one side or the other, and you want me to be on the other I guess.  That's just not how it is.  I find the situation interesting, and have stated multiple times what I would like to get out of this discussion.  

I think that freedom of speech is for people outside of their workplace. Pretty basic. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

To answer your question, I think government employees are restricted from political participation.   One friend told me that he couldn't put a sign on his lawn.  Not sure how much of this is so, but for sure there are restrictions.  I also can't express myself freely about things online, with regards to financial legislation, due to my job.

Government employees regularly express their political views on their own time. Sometimes they even run for political office. And I've seen lawn signs on the lawns of people I know are public servants.

In any event, I wasn't asking so much about employees as members of a professional association.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another article reporting the decline of freedom.  It seems the bigger government gets, the less freedom.  Could there be a correlation?  After all, civil servants have to have a purpose.  What other purpose than control of the society they are supposed to be serving?  Control for our own good or control for the good of the collective and those in charge?

GOLDSTEIN: Freedom in Canada and globally on decline, says report (msn.com)

Could this be yet another sign we are in the last days or end times as prophesied in the Bible and moving toward a one world government?

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Another article reporting the decline of freedom.  It seems the bigger government gets, the less freedom.  Could there be a correlation?

GOLDSTEIN: Freedom in Canada and globally on decline, says report (msn.com)

Could this be yet another sign we are in the last days or end times as prophesied in the Bible and moving toward a one world government?

We're lagging behind Estonia now? 

What's Canada going to do to keep our immigration up when we can't even compete with Estonia? 

We're already paying people to come here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

We're lagging behind Estonia now? 

What's Canada going to do to keep our immigration up when we can't even compete with Estonia? 

We're already paying people to come here. 

Next they’ll try to keep us from leaving the country.  Oh wait, some memories seem to be returning…

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

but your employer has a right to fire you as a consequence. 

That is not the case that's been discussed in this topic. You say something you think without any association to your employer, never mentioning them from you home, during your free time. Next morning the employer runs a "tribunal" on the grounds that it may have affected their "reputation" and fires you. That would be clearly, a) arbitrary dismissal, and you should be able to sue the employer, including damages for violating your constitutional rights; b) a gross violation of the constitutional rights.

But wait, there's more. Who would be the employer here, in most cases no other than the government itself. Governments in violation of constitutional rights? So should they be allowed to use those pads, "professional associations" to do the same job on their behalf?

The solution is easy, define jurisdictions clearly and specifically: only clear professional misconduct, in direct execution of professional duties is in the jurisdiction of "associations" and "tribunals". And for everything else, for overstepping jurisdiction even by a half a step or inch, their a..es can (and should be) sued off, that time sure, for damaging reputations, exemplary damages for overstepping authority all of that. Only this way the society can make "because we can" folk learn because they will always come to believe that yes, they can and try it again. Persistently, tirelessly and regularly. That's a fact, nothing to discuss here, proven, certified and stamped by history.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, myata said:

That is not the case that's been discussed in this topic. You say something you think without any association to your employer, never mentioning them from you home, during your free time. Next morning the employer runs a "tribunal" on the grounds that it may have affected their "reputation" and fires you. That would be clearly, a) arbitrary dismissal, and you should be able to sue the employer, including damages for violating your constitutional rights; b) a gross violation of the constitutional rights.

But wait, there's more. Who would be the employer here, in most cases no other than the government itself. Governments in violation of constitutional rights? So should they be allowed to use those pads, "professional associations" to do the same job on their behalf?

The solution is easy, define jurisdictions clearly and specifically: only clear professional misconduct, in direct execution of professional duties is in the jurisdiction of "associations" and "tribunals". And for everything else, for overstepping jurisdiction even by a half a step or inch, their a..es can (and should be) sued off, that time sure, for damaging reputations, exemplary damages for overstepping authority all of that. Only this way the society can make "because we can" folk learn because they will always come to believe that yes, they can and try it again. Persistently, tirelessly and regularly. That's a fact, nothing to discuss here, proven, certified and stamped by history.

You’re describing the scary overreach that has become ubiquitous in government and organizations in Canada today.  It’s put a chill on free speech because everyone is afraid of being canceled, losing their jobs and reputations, etc.   Canada has dropped down in freedom rankings for these reasons.  We are increasingly told what we should think and how we should live in top-down totalitarian fashion.  Anyone who has studied history should know where this attack on free thinking leads. We can refer to the Spanish Inquisition, McCarthyism, the various purges in communist and fascist countries.  Disagreement on matters of opinion has become grounds for mistreatment by employers, media, etc.

I don’t know exactly when this got out of control in recent years, but the pandemic response certainly heightened the situation.  It always starts for “good” reasons: ending racism, communism, sexism, public health emergencies, environmental catastrophe, etc.   Having free exchange and debate of ideas suddenly became misinformation, conspiracy, and so on.

The shift against freedom today is supported by cutting edge surveillance, data collection, and enforcement systems.  That’s why we should be highly critical of new centralized controls, such as digital state currencies.

Government and big businesses are working closely together like in the days of the fascist regimes to make sure citizens follow the path of “good” behaviour. 

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada's political culture does not have any of this ("weak" isn't true enough). Just absent:

- critical analysis of the decisions of governments and authorities

- effective independent mechanisms of checks and oversight

This is a problem, long standing and critical one that, as the history shows, does not have easy sweet talking solutions. An authority without controls will always try to overstep its boundaries and reduce controls. With each passing decade sailing in this mode, we will have more encroaching and less effective (and efficient, obviously) governments. This is no forecast, only history.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, myata said:

Canada's political culture does not have any of this ("weak" isn't true enough). Just absent:

- critical analysis of the decisions of governments and authorities

- independent mechanisms of checks and oversight

This is a problem, long standing and critical one that, as the history shows, does not have easy sweet talking solutions. An authority without controls will always try to overstep its boundaries and reduce controls. With each passing decade sailing in this mode, we will have more encroaching and less effective (and efficient, obviously) governments. This is no forecast, only history.

You can't say it doesn't have "any" but I agree that we don't have a good culture of criticism.

The current populism plays into the hands of the royalist status quo by dumping ridiculous claims out there instead of well-founded ones.  The healthiest media criticism seems to be in the podcast/twitter world, occasionally from the MSM (once in a long while) and maybe in Quebec.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

? Communism??

Isn't this post about FREE SPEECH??

Hilarious... True colours here...

The point is that free speech can be attacked from the left or the right.  It’s you who wants to pin all attacks on free speech exclusively on the right when it’s crystal clear today that the biggest threats to free speech are coming more commonly from the left.  It’s funny watching you who call yourself conservative constantly defending the left.  You don’t see how far left government and media have shifted in Canada and how other political voices are silenced or dismissed.  It’s a distinct lack of pluralism.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

1.  It’s you who wants to pin all attacks on free speech exclusively on the right when it’s crystal clear today that the biggest threats to free speech are coming more commonly from the left.  
2. It’s funny watching you who call yourself conservative constantly defending the left.  
3. You don’t see how far left government
4. ...and media have shifted in Canada and how
5. ...other political voices are silenced or dismissed.   

1. No, I think it's both sides.
2. No, it's funny seeing people who say they are 'conservatives' attacking institutions, business, and international commerce because they saw a YouTube video paid for by Russia.  THAT is funny.  
  It's also quite funny that you think free speech needs to be harnessed to stop people from talking about communism, if I read that right.
3. It's also funny that you think "far left" means governments that pay lip service to diversity while lowering taxes for the wealthy, and removing consumer protections etc...
4.  It's also funny that you think corporate concentrations of media are 'left', including in America where an Australian billionaire directs his television network to actively promote his favourite candidates...
5.  What is silenced and dismissed is common sense: talking about government providing value for services, talking about providing a level playing field for government an so on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. No, I think it's both sides.
2. No, it's funny seeing people who say they are 'conservatives' attacking institutions, business, and international commerce because they saw a YouTube video paid for by Russia.  THAT is funny.  
  It's also quite funny that you think free speech needs to be harnessed to stop people from talking about communism, if I read that right.
3. It's also funny that you think "far left" means governments that pay lip service to diversity while lowering taxes for the wealthy, and removing consumer protections etc...
4.  It's also funny that you think corporate concentrations of media are 'left', including in America where an Australian billionaire directs his television network to actively promote his favourite candidates...
5.  What is silenced and dismissed is common sense: talking about government providing value for services, talking about providing a level playing field for government an so on...

It’s funny that you think we’re still living under the old timey 1990’s Liberal vs. Conservative political opposition.  I voted for that Liberal party and still would today.  We’ve come along way from Chrétien-Martin fiscal prudence and laissez-faire with people speaking their conscience.

You can resume your CBC government love-in.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

It’s funny that you think we’re still living under the old timey 1990’s Liberal vs. Conservative political opposition.  I voted for that Liberal party and still would today.  We’ve come along way from Chrétien-Martin fiscal prudence and laissez-faire with people speaking their conscience.

You can resume your CBC government love-in.  

You might note that I said nothing about the Liberal party, nor the CBC.  As happens so often, this little exchange with you making a personal comment about me rather than addressing these points:

- media is more concentrated
- corporations are more concentrated, more powerful, and wealthier
- governments paying lip service and batting their eyes while whispering 'diversity' doesn't mean anything
- conservatives today regularly make comments against institutions like universities, the courts, the police, and trade

And your response is that I love the Liberals and the CBC.  My bad for wading through the ignore list for being bored.... double secret probation for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You might note that I said nothing about the Liberal party, nor the CBC.  As happens so often, this little exchange with you making a personal comment about me rather than addressing these points:

- media is more concentrated
- corporations are more concentrated, more powerful, and wealthier
- governments paying lip service and batting their eyes while whispering 'diversity' doesn't mean anything
- conservatives today regularly make comments against institutions like universities, the courts, the police, and trade

And your response is that I love the Liberals and the CBC.  My bad for wading through the ignore list for being bored.... double secret probation for you.

??‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

You might note that I said nothing about the Liberal party, nor the CBC.  As happens so often, this little exchange with you making a personal comment about me rather than addressing these points:

- media is more concentrated
- corporations are more concentrated, more powerful, and wealthier
- governments paying lip service and batting their eyes while whispering 'diversity' doesn't mean anything
- conservatives today regularly make comments against institutions like universities, the courts, the police, and trade

You have university-level writing skills and the ignorance of a champion.

1) Our gov't isn't whispering 'diversity', they're peddling division, racism, and bigotry. Then you pretend to see the swastikas and confederate flags that somehow nobody managed to capture in photos or on video. That means something.

2)  "Conservatives today regularly make comments against institutions like universities, the courts, the police, and trade" doesn't even mean anything. Everybody comments on those things. What are you trying to say? 

Conservatives definitely call out the media for being hypocrites, liars and disinformers, do you think they're wrong?

If they feel that way, what would you rather they do, just ignore it?

Quote

And your response is that I love the Liberals and the CBC. 

Weird how you don't love Trudeau, but you will lie for him and carry his water.

Weird how you don't have blind faith in our MSM, but you can't even contemplate for a second that our media has ever told a lie.

Quote

My bad for wading through the ignore list for being bored.... double secret probation for you.

Let me guess what brilliant conversationalists and free thinkers haven't made your ignore list: Beave, eyeball, ExFlyer, Rebound, Hodad, CrakHoBarbie, robo... 

I can't even imagine what your little echo chamber sounds like when there are no conservatives around to inject reality into the discourse dialogue debate discussion conversation prattle session.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

 

1. 1) Our gov't isn't whispering 'diversity', they're peddling division, racism, and bigotry.  

2.  "Conservatives today regularly make comments against institutions like universities, the courts, the police, and trade" doesn't even mean anything. Everybody comments on those things. What are you trying to say? 

3. Weird how you don't love Trudeau, but you will lie for him and carry his water.

4. Weird how you don't have blind faith in our MSM,

5. but you can't even contemplate for a second that our media has ever told a lie.

6. I can't even imagine what your little echo chamber sounds like when there are no conservatives around to inject reality into the discourse dialogue debate discussion conversation prattle session.

 

1. Peddling vs Whispering.  Ok, Peddling.  It still amounts to jack squat for most of us.  It's marketing and image building.

2. I had originally written 'attack' but rewrote it to try to say that, but softer... so much for my university level writing skills.  They (verbally) attack those things today.

3. I don't even LIKE Trudeau.  Of course I don't lie.

4. This is exactly the problem with pretend conservatives today.  Just because I don't buy into the world view of The Rebel, I am said to have 'blind faith' in the MSM.   Wrong again.

5. I have noted media lies on this very board.

6. I AM a conservative.  I read the Globe and Mail.
 

.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

- media is more concentrated

And less capable. I mean, Canada's media is so bad that in an environment that encouraged entrepreneurship someone would be starting up new papers/tv/internet news organizations which could completely trash them. There's o little local or even Canadian news in them vs garbage and American stuff.

21 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

- governments paying lip service and batting their eyes while whispering 'diversity' doesn't mean anything

I would not say the Trudeau government is paying lip service to it when all its hiring and promotions are governed by it, and when everything it does, from letting contracts to handing out university grants is decided by it. Not to mention the collection of halfwits who are in Trudeau's cabinet purely due to their race, ethnicity or gender.

21 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

- conservatives today regularly make comments against institutions like universities, the courts, the police, and trade

They regularly make comments against institutions they see as having become heavily politicized by the Left and their social justice theories, yes. I don't believe conservatives in Canada are the ones attacking police, however. That comes from the Left.

 

  • Like 1
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
      10,742
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CrazyCanuck89
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • DACHSHUND went up a rank
      Rookie
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      First Post
    • aru earned a badge
      First Post
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

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