Jump to content

Canada's Woke Supreme Court says some free speech is no longer important compared to protecting identity groups from being offended.


Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Sigh.

Well I used to like talking to you.

So, I pegged you incorrectly, but it seems you actually don't like discussing because you don't like being wrong and think discussion of issues is a zero-sum game.    I guess in the end, you like insulting and berating people more than intelligent discussion, I can't see any other answer.  Maybe you only post to me because you know most who call themselves conservatives on here are empty Trump shills. 

I'm sad and and I am sure you will also be very sad when I put you on ignore.  But I will allow private messages in case you want to renounce your lying ways.

---------

Meanwhile, here's a list of Harper cabinet members who voted FOR trans rights over ten years ago.  Enjoy your culture war, I guess these guys are RINOs to you.  Meanwhile, people who actually have conservative principles and care about rights, freedom and the possibilities of politics will leave you and your silly tribe behind.

Here it is, you might want to sit down:

"[in 2013] Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Labour Minister Lisa Raitt and Heritage Minister James Moore were among the Conservatives who supported the bill."

https://globalnews.ca/news/374979/commons-approves-transgender-rights-bill/

The context was unrecognizably different 10 years ago. The issue isn’t whether to offer acceptance and respect to someone who has transitioned. The issues are the apparent epidemic in surgeries, the apparent pressure to affirm all proclamations of gender self-expression at any age and stage, the apparent regret and lawsuits of transitioned people, some of whom are detransitioning, and the apparent emphasis of trans rights over other human rights such as religious rights and biological women’s rights.  These weren’t on people’s radars 10 years ago.  Stop pretending you don’t know this, because it’s disingenuous and a recipe for anger and divisiveness.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. The context was unrecognizably different 10 years ago.  The issue isn’t whether to offer acceptance and respect to someone who has transitioned.  

2. The issues are the apparent epidemic in surgeries, the apparent pressure to affirm all proclamations of gender self-expression at any age and stage, the apparent regret and lawsuits of transitioned people, some of whom are detransitioning, and the apparent emphasis of trans rights over other human rights such as religious rights and biological women’s rights.  

3. These weren’t on people’s radars 10 years ago.  

4. Stop pretending you don’t know this, because it’s disingenuous and a recipe for anger and divisiveness.  

1.  Weird.  Let's rewind to a post a confused self-described conservative just made a page back:
" Conservatives don't support 'trans rights' because the idea of gender fludity is contrary to evolution, biology, science and basic reality."  So.... what say you ?  

Do conservatives support trans rights or no ?

2.  Those indeed do sound like issues but not issues I have addressed in my question.  You can bring them up but the fact remains that bona fide conservatives believe in Freedom for transgender folks.  I gave the example of the key Harper cabinet members including his 2nd in command.

3.  So ?  Just because you bring up a flood of things that you're anxious about doesn't turn back the clock on whether real actual conservatives support freedom.  They do.

4.  I'm sorry that my principles make you angry, but you may be part of the subset of self-described conservatives that anger easily, I'm not sure.  

@Zeitgeist and saying "you know this" is like waving a white flag in an argument because you're pinning your point on the idea that you can read my mind...

Edited by Michael Hardner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

So we have the latest judge appointed: Michelle O'Bonsawin, as an example. Her primary qualifications are she's a francophone native.

Sure as ... getting there. What's the to stop the bandwagon now? Just stop, think and tell yourself not me: what is left in Canada to stop (preventing just doesn't seem to work sorry) unnecessary, outrageous regular as a clock transgressions and overreaches of government powers?

Nothing was there a century back, at the time of residential schools. We haven't added anything of meaning and value since - can anyone do simple math, 0 + 0. And now we're walking and chanting some slogans to who? those last century bureaucrats are long gone and in their place are the new ones, 100x more cemented in their brains because they never had to think in all this time. It's not even hope, what then some kind of chant, voodoo dance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1.  Weird.  Let's rewind to a post a confused self-described conservative just made a page back:
" Conservatives don't support 'trans rights' because the idea of gender fludity is contrary to evolution, biology, science and basic reality."  So.... what say you ?  

Do conservatives support trans rights or no ?

2.  Those indeed do sound like issues but not issues I have addressed in my question.  You can bring them up but the fact remains that bona fide conservatives believe in Freedom for transgender folks.  I gave the example of the key Harper cabinet members including his 2nd in command.

3.  So ?  Just because you bring up a flood of things that you're anxious about doesn't turn back the clock on whether real actual conservatives support freedom.  They do.

4.  I'm sorry that my principles make you angry, but you may be part of the subset of self-described conservatives that anger easily, I'm not sure.  

@Zeitgeist and saying "you know this" is like waving a white flag in an argument because you're pinning your point on the idea that you can read my mind...

You refuse to address the serious implications of current trans events and transhumanism in general.  You don’t have an intelligent perspective on how these social experiments might be destabilizing to kids and families, or how the emphasis of a radical and rapidly expanding tech-driven movement might threaten the rights of women and the values of millions.  Your dismissiveness is cloaked in a disingenuous civil rights sheen.  Groot, Oftenwrong, myself, and many others on here who are raising concerns aren’t denying the importance of compassion and acceptance of LGBTQ2S+, we’re being specific and raising valid concerns, including the question of why our publicly funded education system should proclaim support of certain lifestyles and identities but not others, especially when some of these rights are exerted at the exclusion of other rights that aren’t represented on flags in front of schools.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. You’re an irresponsible man.  It has to be said.  You refuse to address the serious implications of current trans events and transhumanism in general.  

2. You don’t have an intelligent perspective on how these social experiments might be destabilizing to kids and families, or how the emphasis of a radical and rapidly expanding tech-driven movement might threaten the rights of women and the values of millions.

3.  Your dismissiveness is cloaked in a disingenuous civil rights sheen.  

4. Groot, Oftenwrong, myself, and many others on here who are raising concerns aren’t denying the importance of compassion and acceptance of LGBTQ2S+

5. our publicly funded education system should proclaim support of certain lifestyles and identities but not others, especially when some of these rights are exerted at the exclusion of other rights that aren’t represented on flags in front of schools.

1.  I don't refuse to address them, but I don't think it makes sense to tie them to fundamental rights.   These are all things that can be addressed and worked through.
2. Tech-driven ?  What ?  There's no slippery slope argument here.  We stopped discrimination against LGBTQ folks without making special provisions for religious rights.   Religions can still discriminate.
3.  I will admit to not being forthright about everything but mostly because they're off-topic IMO.  I am glad to express my opinions when asked.  I don't believe children should be given irreversable treatments if they question their gender, and I do doubt people's gender expression in some cases.   I don't think people should be forced to share changerooms with any gender either.  Did I miss anything ?
4.  Ok it sounds like we're on the same page.
5.  What lifestyles does our education system not support ?  Rights are afforded by our legal institutions, and the culture sometimes leads those changes, sometimes catches up.  Certainly Trudeau Sr. didn't legalize sex acts because there was a huge public push for it.

Interesting points, I hope I cleared things up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many politicians, particularly Liberals and NDP or lefties or progressives, and their followers promote ideologies that promote perversion and things that fit in with their cultural Marxist thinking and ideology.  One of these ideologies which is causing major divisions in some places is the DEI ideology.  Liberals /progressives hide behind this ideology and use it as a wedge issue against more traditional family-oriented voters.  This DEI refers to diversity, equity, and inclusion.  On the surface such words sound reasonable and fair.  But the problem is the ideology becomes a kind of god and is used to reject all other beliefs including our historic Judeo-Christian civilization.  This is problematic in the extreme.  Children are being force fed perversion in public schools and taught that anything is "normal" because it is being inclusive, equal and diverse.  That is where this becomes an ideology of extreme evil and destructive of normal society, marriage between a mother and father, and normal relationships.  DEI also destroys free enterprise hiring by merit when businesses and government are forced to hire based on this DEI ideology.

" 8  Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."  Colossians 2:8 KJV

Edited by blackbird
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Many politicians, particularly Liberals and NDP or lefties or progressives, and their followers promote ideologies that promote perversion and things that fit in with their cultural Marxist thinking and ideology.   

It's paranoid fantasy to say this.  You have to accept that you live in a secular country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's paranoid fantasy to say this.  You have to accept that you live in a secular country.

Why should I accept it as right or proper?  You might be able to get away with saying that in a Communist country or some kind of secularist dictatorship, but we are supposed to be living in a democratic country with freedom of religion, freedom speech and freedom of beliefs.  When you say I "have to accept that", you are basically saying I have no freedom and must accept your ideology.  Sorry,  can't do that.  It is not paranoid fantasy to believe DEI and cultural Marxism is evil and perversion.  Sorry you are on the wrong end of this.  Numbers or polls do not determine what is right or wrong.  History proves it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, blackbird said:

1. Why should I accept it as right or proper? 
2. You might be able to get away with saying that in a Communist country or some kind of secularist dictatorship, but we are supposed to be living in a democratic country with freedom of religion, freedom speech and freedom of beliefs. 
3. When you say I "have to accept that", you are basically saying I have no freedom
4. ...and must accept your ideology. 
5. Sorry,  can't do that.  It is not paranoid fantasy to believe DEI and cultural Marxism is evil and perversion. 
6. Sorry you are on the wrong end of this.  Numbers or polls do not determine what is right or wrong.  History proves it.

1. You don't have to, but I'm trying to help you be happier in your world.
2. I can get away with saying that in a free democracy too.  Are you going to have Father O'Malley come over and arrest me ?
3.  Right.  You are correct you don't have to accept it, but you should.  You know - Christ said that people would know Christians by their actions and the positive things they did.
4.  You keep forgetting I am Christian.
5.  It is just that.  "Cultural Marxism" isn't even a thing, it's a made-up bogeyman.
6.  Here's some history of the last 60 years:

Religiosity-Graph1.png

 

https://religionnews.com/2014/01/27/great-decline-religion-united-states-one-graph/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I guess you’re celebrating the decline of religion and have the stats to indicate that this is happening.  It’s highly arguable that the LGBTQ2S+ is a form of indoctrination that substitutes certain identity and sexuality imagery for religious symbols like the crucifix.  If you’re for removing prayer from schools because it doesn’t represent the beliefs of all families, why are you pushing LGBTQ2S+ symbols that don’t represent the beliefs of all families?   At least be consistent.  

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

23 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

So I guess you’re celebrating the decline of religion and have the stats to indicate that this is happening.

I would celebrate it.  If there was a party, or a dance, or a commemorative coin, to mark the occasion then I am in.  But I gather that @Michael Hardner does not celebrate the decline of religion.   
 

25 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

It’s highly arguable that the LGBTQ2S+ is a form of indoctrination that substitutes certain identity and sexuality imagery for religious symbols like the crucifix.  If you’re for removing prayer from schools because it doesn’t represent the beliefs of all families, why are you pushing LGBTQ2S+ symbols that don’t represent the beliefs of all families?   At least be consistent.

If you’re going to argue that acceptance of people who are a different sexual orientation than “the norm” is equal to religion, then so is teaching that racism is wrong.  
 

All of a sudden teaching anything is akin to a religion. 
 

Sorry…. Religion has a very clear definition, and it doesn’t include things like the acceptance of other skin colours or sexual orientations.  Those aren’t religion.  

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

6 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

I would celebrate it.  If there was a party, or a dance, or a commemorative coin, to mark the occasion then I am in.  But I gather that @Michael Hardner does not celebrate the decline of religion.   
 

If you’re going to argue that acceptance of people who are a different sexual orientation than “the norm” is equal to religion, then so is teaching that racism is wrong.  
 

All of a sudden teaching anything is akin to a religion. 
 

Sorry…. Religion has a very clear definition, and it doesn’t include things like the acceptance of other skin colours or sexual orientations.  Those aren’t religion.  

Nice try.  This has nothing to do with racism or acceptance of people who are gay, bi, identify as the opposite gender, nonbinary, etc.  It has to do with the raising of symbols on flags that represent certain sexual lifestyles and genders but not all people.  It’s an ideological push, so it will and should receive a significant pushback.  It is. An activist group with particular agendas are seeking to make war and they’re getting a war.  

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

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

 This has nothing to do with racism or acceptance of people who are gay, bi, identify as the opposite gender, nonbinary, etc.  

So... flying a flag that symbolizes acceptance of people who are gay, bi, opposite gender, nonbinary etc. has nothing to do with acceptance of them ?

Sorry if I am confused by that.  Do you want to clarify ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Nice try.  This has nothing to do with racism or acceptance of people who are gay, bi, identify as the opposite gender, nonbinary, etc.  It has to do with the raising of symbols on flags that represent certain sexual lifestyles and genders but not all people.  It’s an ideological push, so it will and should receive a significant pushback.  It is. An activist group with particular agendas are seeking to make war and they’re getting a war.  

Then having the flag of our country/province is also a religion.   The picture of the monarch in public places suddenly becomes a religion.  The school’s soccer team banner is a religion. 
 

You calling it a religion doesn’t make it one.  Under no possible definition is a symbol automatically mean it is a religion. That’s asinine. Religious symbols are religious because they symbolize and actual religion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

So... flying a flag that symbolizes acceptance of people who are gay, bi, opposite gender, nonbinary etc. has nothing to do with acceptance of them ?

Sorry if I am confused by that.  Do you want to clarify ?

Why that flag not not every other flag for every other identity group?  You don’t even know what its colours represent.  You just accept the assumptions made for what all parents “must” think.   It’s compelled speech that’s ideologically driven and has zero to do with accepting people.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not opposed to any orientation. I don't even want to give a h@ck about someone's orientation, it doesn't concern or affect me in any way. But I'm totally opposed to self-serving politicians making it into a cause celebre the only one or a few that's worth their precious attention or so it looks increasingly by the reality in the country. To cover their ineptitude and inability to solve actual priority problems for decades, of course. Making great speeches in place of delivering real and working solutions. And raking obscene (in real terms, compared to median income in the reality) buck for that great service. I propose an experiment. Let's make politics a volunteer affair, no public buck, no outrageous expenses but real necessary ones returned after reviewed by a committee of the citizens, plus a modest stipend equal to the median income, dollar for dollar. For one term only. Curious how many we could count in the end?

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Then having the flag of our country/province is also a religion.   The picture of the monarch in public places suddenly becomes a religion.  The school’s soccer team banner is a religion. 
 

You calling it a religion doesn’t make it one.  Under no possible definition is a symbol automatically mean it is a religion. That’s asinine. Religious symbols are religious because they symbolize and actual religion

It doesn’t rise to the level of religion.  It’s more like a cult or a political ideology, like the hammer and sickle, your fav.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zeitgeist said:

1. Why that flag not not every other flag for every other identity group?  
2. You don’t even know what its colours represent.  
3. You just accept the assumptions made for what all parents “must” think.  
4. It’s compelled speech that’s ideologically driven and has zero to do with accepting people.  

1. We fly other flags, yes.  I'm ok with that.
2. No.   No idea.
3. I'm pretty sure it's flown as a symbol of acceptance.  Let's see what Wiki says: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_flag_(LGBT)
"LGBT people and allies currently use rainbow flags and many rainbow-themed items and color schemes as an outward symbol of their identity or support. 
Yep.
4. Nope.  You aren't compelled to say anything.  Not compelled speech.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. We fly other flags, yes.  I'm ok with that.
2. No.   No idea.
3. I'm pretty sure it's flown as a symbol of acceptance.  Let's see what Wiki says: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_flag_(LGBT)
"LGBT people and allies currently use rainbow flags and many rainbow-themed items and color schemes as an outward symbol of their identity or support. 
Yep.
4. Nope.  You aren't compelled to say anything.  Not compelled speech.    

Yes it’s compelled when publicly funded schools are required to fly the flag.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

It doesn’t rise to the level of religion.  It’s more like a cult or a political ideology, like the hammer and sickle, your fav.

Thanks for agreeing that it isn’t a religion.  Of course, cults are just small religions, so it’s not that either.  
 

Can you call acceptance of different people as equal a political ideology?  Are human rights political ideologies?  I agree they are.  But, rather than comparing them to communism, I would compare them to democracy.  Very few people think communism is an ideal political ideology worthy of attaining.  Democracy?  I’d say most people would agree that it’s the ideal.  Human rights  for gay people?   Like democracy, it’s a political ideology that most people agree with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Yes it’s compelled when publicly funded schools are required to fly the flag.  

Then anything a school does is compelled.  Flying a flag... having books... having teachers in the classroom...

You're bending over backwards so far that you're coming back up the front again.

But... well...   So... ok... congratulations you have changed the definition to something you alone would understand and are now free to communicate it .... to yourself only though, as no one else would get it.

Kind of like @Perspektiv using "groomer" to describe anyone who disagrees with him on education...

FYI I was always against compelled speech as Dr. Peterson defined it, and lo and behold it didn't come to pass.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Thanks for agreeing that it isn’t a religion.  Of course, cults are just small religions, so it’s not that either.  
 

Can you call acceptance of different people as equal a political ideology?  Are human rights political ideologies?  I agree they are.  But, rather than comparing them to communism, I would compare them to democracy.  Very few people think communism is an ideal political ideology worthy of attaining.  Democracy?  I’d say most people would agree that it’s the ideal.  Human rights  for gay people?   Like democracy, it’s a political ideology that most people agree with. 

You still can’t explain why a flag for this but not for so much else, nor can you explain why all of the valid concerns around certain identity issues must be swallowed by all.  Would you support a Khalistan flag?  

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...