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

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

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.

 

Yes it’s all indoctrination unless it’s on the level of science and the science of learning math, language, etc.  Where we go off a cliff is on the sexuality front, unless it’s to ensure safety (STD’s, pregnancy, etc.).   We can and should prevent bullying.  We shouldn’t be advertising certain sexual lifestyle choices and non-biological identities.  Leave it out.  If you don’t, expect rightful pushback and culture wars.  Not everyone agrees with all that the flag represents, nor should they be compelled to accept that symbol at the head of a publicly funded learning institution.  Sure you can disagree, but millions can disagree with you and they won’t and shouldn’t let it go.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

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?  

Community Values, such as respecting Remembrance Day, taking part in secular holidays....

When I was in school many centuries ago they called it 'civics'...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Cultural hegemony refers to domination or rule maintained through ideological or cultural means. It is usually achieved through social institutions, which allow those in power to strongly influence the values, norms, ideas, expectations, worldview, and behavior of the rest of society."

This is how the NDP, liberals and progressives operate in Canada.  They use their political power or positions they hold to impose cultural hegemony or domination of their ideology on public schools students and the rest of society wherever possible.

In the public school system, education departments even claim it is necessary to counter bullying and promote inclusion.  None of them have explained why they cannot just teach respect for everyone regardless of the individual kids personal beliefs.  Why sexual orientation or beliefs have to be made front and centre in education and the SOGI agenda imposed on everyone is hard to understand.  The idea that it is necessary to prevent bullying and promote inclusion I believe is false.

It is a convenient excuse used by activists.  There is nothing stopping them from teaching respect for everyone without including sexual orientation and gender identity in the curriculum.  I think there is a lot of deception going on.  As I explained in other posts, Satan is the professional in deception and lying.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada's justice system is on a well tested and seemingly unavoidable track - from serving the society to upholding some abstract higher ideals. It's quite easy to understand why it is happening so. This is a matter of the primary and secondary realities. What is a reality for you? The street, the daily issues in the city? But imagine if you lived for like, ever, since your birth aka from entering the system, in an environment where your thoughts can create the reality. You write a report entirely out of your mind, on paper et voila, something has dropped into your budget (out of the magical bottomless pocket of power only the dough, just like in the young adult fantasy books), personal account, a new country place, a cute renovation all those nice, physical and very real things (not necessarily any real tangible positive change for other citizens but we're abstracting from this minor blip for now)

Wouldn't you, like your mind, consciousness the sense of real, physical reality be, eventually, blown away and apart? Wouldn't you begin to perceive the reality that is real as a distant and uncertain not always desirable complication while the reality of your office, a real and stable foundation of a healthy prosperous life, for like, ever? One question only: why wouldn't it?

P.S. Monty Python had a good visual illustration of this process, in the Baron Munchausen. "We think so you are", the (public administration) demigod complex.. as simple as mental switching of the realities.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

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.

Alright let's sort this out.

1.  Do you believe homosexuality is a sin?

2.  Do you accept the Bible as God's absolute truth and rule for what a Christian believes?

3.  You mentioned people would know Christians by their actions.   Since we can't really know much about people's actions on a forum, all we have to go by is their words.  So why are you mentioning "knowing Christians by their actions" here?  What is your point?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Canada used to be a cultural hegemony;  European Christians.   The opposite of what you claim is true now.  

To be more accurate, Canada was once more of a Judeo-Christian nation when it was settled by Europeans.

With the mass immigration from the third world, and developing anti-Christian groups such as liberals and progressives, it is becoming less Christian and more pagan now.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the discussion here, the clash and search for the right, correct ideology is highly symptomatic of a society ready to give in and embrace authoritarian model and mindset. An alternative model of course, is non-ideological, competent, effective and efficient, transparent too management of the common public matters. It is repeatedly and persistently challenged in Canada increasingly from municipal to federal levels by opaque, entitled and unaccountable system and tradition of public governance. If you can get away with sloppy, inadequate management why wouldn't you? If you can justify it, absence of real and tangible results by a quest for some lofty ideals, what's there to stop you?

No, no fixing it wouldn't be anywhere as easy as swapping a figurehead in a quasi election. Maybe last few chances to wake up to the reality, allowed by the history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, blackbird said:

Liberalism, Socialism, Communism are all contrary to the Bible and therefore are anti-Christian ideologies.  People who think they are Christian ideologies are fooling themselves.  

Do you think it’s society’s responsibility to feed people who can’t afford food?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2023 at 10:59 AM, 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. 

Jesus God what a drama queen you are.

I make a common statement and throw in "you know this" and you get your panties in a twist and demand an apology. Repeatedly! Put me on ignore, you windbag. I could care less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Do you think it’s society’s responsibility to feed people who can’t afford food?

"

What Does the Bible Say About Socialism?

Written by admin  in Atheism,Bible,Bible Verses,Questions

 

Socialism directly opposes everything about God, the Bible and Christianity. And it’s not difficult to see it if you’ve got an open mind.

Socialism is allied with the failed philosophy of materialism and the bankrupt religion of atheism. It destroys everything it touches.

Socialism destroys families, economies and nations. And more.

The Bible -both in the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament- builds up both the family and the nation. Every nation that has embraced the Bible has seen great and lasting benefits.

Followers of Jesus Christ have transformed the world through scientific, medical and technical achievements based on the Bible. They have transformed cities and nations with Biblical precepts.

Socialism does the opposite. Every time.

So what does the Bible have to say about Socialism?

The Bible tells us that Socialism is slavery and thievery. And anybody who has lived under Socialism can confirm it. Socialism destroys the Biblical work ethic and confiscates assets earned by producers and gives them to non-producers. This de-motivates producers and creates a cycle of sloth, poverty and dependence."

What Does the Bible Say About Socialism? – Faith Founded on Fact

Jesus teaches individual charity, not state-ordained Socialism.  We have food banks which are at least partially funded by individual donations.  That is a good thing.  But the state ideology of wealth redistribution is stealing and is Socialism.  In fact, Trudeau squanders taxpayer money all over the world and to every group he can think of that might earn a few votes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Do you think it’s society’s responsibility to feed people who can’t afford food?

I think he who pays the piper calls the tune.

If you abdicate the responsibility to take care of yourself then you abdicate the freedom to make decisions and should become a ward of the state, going where you're told, living where you're told, doing what you're told. If you made such crummy decisions in life you have to have us pay for your food then you don't get to make future decisions on anything. That includes having children, btw.

And yes, I do make exceptions for those with disabilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ontario middle school teacher reports student violence on the increase.

We have been told the diversity, equity, inclusion agenda would help prevent bullying and violence.  What we are seeing is the opposite.  The sexual orientation - gender identity ideology is leading us down the path of increased violence in schools.  The reason is because they took God, the Bible and prayer out of schools and brought in the woke, materialistic, humanistic ideology of the self and feeding the flesh where anything goes.  Is it any surprise students are becoming more self-centred and aggressive?  Of course it is no surprise.  

So much for the woke agenda.  It is destroying society.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, myata said:

I think the discussion here, the clash and search for the right, correct ideology is highly symptomatic of a society ready to give in and embrace authoritarian model and mindset.

People's determination to defend the democratic system is being repeatedly challenged as the realization sets in about just how little government is responsive to what the electorate want, and to their well-being.

I really hate it when people cite videos but I'm going to do it here because it's so clear an illustration of the problem in the US - and I doubt it's much different here.

In clear, precise language and with charts, Harvard professor Lessig demonstrates how unresponsible the US government has been to what the people have wanted over the last several decades. Basically, what the people wanted made zero difference to what government did. Only what the rich wanted mattered.

 

6 hours ago, myata said:

An alternative model of course, is non-ideological, competent, effective and efficient, transparent too management of the common public matters.

The only proper governance would be a completely merit-based approach with almost all information other than on individuals available to the public by default. I toyed with such a system in my head before. In such a system government would be a particular university course, and only the best and brightest could get in. Graduates would be appointed, not hired, to low-level positions on small municipal or county councils and closely monitored. The best would go to larger councils. Then the best from those would get to be mayors. The best mayors would be appointed to provincial legislatures, and so on. Until at the top you get the best of the best of the best. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Jesus teaches individual charity, not state-ordained Socialism. 

You think Jesus would say the state shouldn’t collect taxes to feed the poor?  Or would Jesus say “whatever it takes to feed the poor, let’s just do it!  Let’s add 2% to the GST and use that money to feed the poor”?  
 

Are you opposed to school lunch programs?


How much of your income do you devote to feeding the poor?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, blackbird said:

To be more accurate, Canada was once more of a Judeo-Christian nation when it was settled by Europeans.

Why would you classify the early immigrants as “Judeo-Christian”, rather than just Christian?  You think there were a lot of Jews among them?

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2023 at 7:19 AM, myata said:

A wrong question does not have good answers. You can have free speech in its pure and clear meaning: no one can interfere with the right to express an opinion, as long as its not directly related to a criminal act (and there are way to formulate this, sure).

I agree wholeheartedly. Believe me, I'm as much a free speech advocate as you are and perhaps even more so. But in the case under discussion (here) there was no interference with anyone's rights to express an opinion. One of the party's involved launched a defamation lawsuit against another party who in turn filed an application with the courts to dismiss the lawsuit. It ends up in the lap of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court dismisses the lawsuit. That's it. Now if you don't agree with the Court's decision to dismiss the lawsuit then that's something else entirely. But there was no interference with anyone's right to express an opinion.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Why would you classify the early immigrants as “Judeo-Christian”, rather than just Christian?  You think there were a lot of Jews among them?

 

 

People use this term commonly but you're right it doesn't make sense.

18 minutes ago, suds said:

 But there was no interference with anyone's right to express an opinion.

Pretty clear explanation, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Why would you classify the early immigrants as “Judeo-Christian”, rather than just Christian?  You think there were a lot of Jews among them?

 

 

"

The term Judeo-Christian is used to group Christianity and Judaism together, either in reference to Christianity's derivation from Judaism, Christianity's borrowing of Jewish scripture to constitute the "Old Testament" of the Christian Bible, or due to the parallels or commonalities in Judaeo-Christian ethics shared by the two religions. The term "Judæo Christian" first appeared in the 19th century as a word for Jewish converts to Christianity.

In the United States, the term was widely used during the Cold War in an attempt to suggest that the United States had a unified American identity which was opposed to communism."

Judeo-Christian - Wikipedia

The term Judeo-Christian can be applied to early immigrants because most of the came from Europe and had some, at least nominally Judeo-Christian beliefs.  Our laws and system was built on those beliefs as opposed to Marxism or Communism ideology.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

You think Jesus would say the state shouldn’t collect taxes to feed the poor?  Or would Jesus say “whatever it takes to feed the poor, let’s just do it!  Let’s add 2% to the GST and use that money to feed the poor”?  
 

Are you opposed to school lunch programs?


How much of your income do you devote to feeding the poor?

Taxes are Socialism and forced wealth redistribution.  If we didn't have carbon taxes, gas taxes, and many other taxes for this and that, there would be more money in people's bank accounts and more money to donate to charitable organizations to help the poor.  Simple as that.  

Forced confiscation of money by government (Socialism) also wastes a large amount of it on bureaucracy which must be paid with all kinds of benefits and pension plans that many other people outside government do not receive.

I know in Saskatchewan the government gives men a half of a year off work with full salary when the man's wife has a baby.  Who is private industry gets anything like that?   Six months maternity leave for the men?????  Give us a break.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Taxes are Socialism and forced wealth redistribution.  If we didn't have carbon taxes, gas taxes, and many other taxes for this and that, there would be more money in people's bank accounts and more money to donate to charitable organizations to help the poor.  Simple as that.  

Forced confiscation of money by government (Socialism) also wastes a large amount of it on bureaucracy which must be paid with all kinds of benefits and pension plans that many other people outside government do not receive.

I know in Saskatchewan the government gives men a half of a year off work with full salary when the man's wife has a baby.  Who is private industry gets anything like that?   Six months maternity leave for the men?????  Give us a break.

You didn’t answer any of my questions, but went off on a strange tangent. 
 

Doesn’t paternity leave help strengthen the family unit and allow parents to take care of their children?  Why are you against that;  is it just because you don’t get it too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, suds said:

But there was no interference with anyone's right to express an opinion.

I think you're mistaken here. Like the dissenting judge noted, libel, deliberate misrepresentation, abuse, insults and vitriol, destruction of reputation and possibly, career without any or sufficient evidence is not only an opinion, but also an impact, possibly a very serious one, on specific individual(s). The ruling basically allows an open season for such acts based on an arbitrary declaration of "topics of public interest".

This direction is very wrong. Not only it will not achieve the desired goal, but it will suppress a genuine discussion of complex matters and erode democratic rights of the citizens and the democracy itself. Incredible that folks called top justices in the country couldn't have thought about possible effects of their decision.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 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
      10,712
    • 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...