Jump to content

Another blow for freedom of speech in Canada


blackbird

Recommended Posts

In a democratic society a citizen cannot be threatened with a severe punishment arbitrarily, without a just cause. Associations cannot change that. Associations did not write the Constitution, in a genuine democracy, but they are bound by it.

If you don't understand that you may be living in China North. And if the judge cannot get it, then possibly its China North justice. Already. They may be think it's some kind of a funny wink-wink knock-knock game with dressing that needs to be played for some funny reason, long forgotten. Nothing to do with the duty and democracy.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t know what happened to our society of open debate and free thinking.  It’s really sad. Organizations are leaning on codes of conduct and citing Human Rights to shut down debate and cancel people.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/the-tyranny-of-the-bureaucracy-and-the-weaponization-of-codes-of-conduct/wcm/aa62fa2e-538e-48db-9cc4-b47a0903d322/amp/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a unique situation because 'open' debate on the topic includes the prospect of denying someone's self image with regards to gender.

The psychiatric profession has even more responsibility to be careful around this issue.  I'd be curious to know how many in the college support him.

If Peterson peddled actual snake oil, should he be removed from the college then?

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's a unique situation because 'open' debate on the topic includes the prospect of denying someone's self image with regards to gender.

The psychiatric profession has even more responsibility to be careful around this issue.  I'd be curious to know how many in the college support him.

If Peterson peddled actual snake oil, should he be removed from the college then?

Dysphoria is a psychological condition. You’re offside on the gender debate.  Schools must stop confusing and promoting the mutilation of kids.  Hopefully any dubious hormone treatments and surgery for kids are banned in Canada.  My bigger hope is that gender ideology and curriculum on sexual lifestyle choices are banned from elementary schools across Canada.  The provincial and federal governments have done terrible damage already.  I imagine the lawsuits will start piling up.  Hopefully the public will start to vote out woke trustees and politicians.  What a total disaster.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. You’re offside on the gender debate.  

2. Schools must stop confusing and promoting the mutilation of kids.  
 

1. Me and the college of Psychiatrists then ?
2. Hyperbole.


Peterson was admonished for making irresponsible statements.   That's completely understandable, given the unprofessional conduct he was engaged in.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/jordan-peterson-college-psychologists-tweets-1.6711524

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

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Me and the college of Psychiatrists then ?
2. Hyperbole.


Peterson was admonished for making irresponsible statements.   That's completely understandable, given the unprofessional conduct he was engaged in.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/jordan-peterson-college-psychologists-tweets-1.6711524

You exemplify the anti-free speech cancel culture that Canada has become under the radical left goofs you defend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

You exemplify the anti-free speech cancel culture that Canada has become under the radical left goofs you defend.

Not really.  I think you just want to make an exception for issues that are pet projects of yours  My best guess is that you think that your opinion overrides that of others.  I always defer to institutions, because they tend to work for us.

Your bafflement over being chastised for public statements is itself baffling.  Many organization reserve the right to boot you out for public statements.

Here's another one:

https://engineerscanada.ca/publications/public-guideline-on-the-code-of-ethics#-interpretation-of-the-code-of-ethics

"This competence requirement of the Code extends to include an obligation to the public, the profession and one's peers, that opinions on engineering issues be expressed honestly and only in areas of one's competence. It applies equally to reporting or advising on professional matters and to issuing public statements. This requires honesty with one's self to present issues fairly, accurately, and with appropriate disclaimers, and to avoid personal, political, and other non-technical biases. The latter is particularly important for public statements or when involved in a non-technical forum."

So try being an Engineer and going online to tell everyone the Holocaust was a hoax.  See what happens.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Me and the college of Psychiatrists then ?
2. Hyperbole.

 

1 - no just you.

A diagnosis for gender dysphoria is included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), a manual published by the American Psychiatric Association.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gender-dysphoria/symptoms-causes/syc-20475255

Gender dysphoria (formerly known as gender identity disorder in the fourth version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM) is defined by strong, persistent feelings of identification with another gender and discomfort with one's own assigned gender and sex

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/gender-dysphoria

2.  Weak dodge of the issue,  You can't dismiss something as hyperbole just beacuse you don't have an effecive argument against it.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Not really.  I think you just want to make an exception for issues that are pet projects of yours  My best guess is that you think that your opinion overrides that of others.  I always defer to institutions, because they tend to work for us.

Your bafflement over being chastised for public statements is itself baffling.  Many organization reserve the right to boot you out for public statements.

Here's another one:

https://engineerscanada.ca/publications/public-guideline-on-the-code-of-ethics#-interpretation-of-the-code-of-ethics

"This competence requirement of the Code extends to include an obligation to the public, the profession and one's peers, that opinions on engineering issues be expressed honestly and only in areas of one's competence. It applies equally to reporting or advising on professional matters and to issuing public statements. This requires honesty with one's self to present issues fairly, accurately, and with appropriate disclaimers, and to avoid personal, political, and other non-technical biases. The latter is particularly important for public statements or when involved in a non-technical forum."

So try being an Engineer and going online to tell everyone the Holocaust was a hoax.  See what happens.  

Bad analogue.  Peterson said nothing radical.  His views are worthy as opinions.  Are you suggesting that engineers and psychologists not be allowed to run for political office, raise their children with particular perspectives, or make comments as social commentators?  That’s a very controlling and fascistic view of how much power and control professional bodies and governments should have over people who are members of a profession.  Why not tell teachers they can’t vote or refuse patients from getting second opinions from doctors?

We used to understand and celebrate the fact that many people in or out of a profession have a range of views. Peterson didn’t advise any patients to do anything out of keeping with psychological approaches.  In fact, he wasn’t officially “disciplined”.  Some people who don’t like his views complained and got what they wanted, this absurd, Kafkaesque reeducation.  It’s infantilizing. Let’s be honest, this is about public shaming.  You love it because you don’t like Peterson.  This is shadenfreude.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

1 - no just you.

2.  Weak dodge of the issue,  You can't dismiss something as hyperbole just beacuse you don't have an effecive argument against it.

 

 

1. So you agree with the college ?
2. Except it isn't happening.

20 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. Peterson said nothing radical.  

1. Says you.  And him.

The College gets to decide, otherwise how would standards be governed ?

Here's another example.  

https://www.cpmb.ca/documents/Manitoba Psychologist, December 2011.pdf

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"An instructive example is the case of Kempling v. British Columbia College of Teachers, 2005 BCCA 327, where a member was disciplined for public statements expressing his negative views on homosexuality, which statements were found to be discriminatory and inconsistent with the standards of the teaching profession."

This is all old hat.  People want to rewrite the legal code because they're uncomfortable with transgenderism... it's anti-political.  You need to accept institutional decisions, stop being so entitled people... it's anti-conservative.

Thanks for the chat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

"An instructive example is the case of Kempling v. British Columbia College of Teachers, 2005 BCCA 327, where a member was disciplined for public statements expressing his negative views on homosexuality, which statements were found to be discriminatory and inconsistent with the standards of the teaching profession."

This is all old hat.  People want to rewrite the legal code because they're uncomfortable with transgenderism... it's anti-political.  You need to accept institutional decisions, stop being so entitled people... it's anti-conservative.

Thanks for the chat.

No.  You don’t get to erase religious rights and women’s rights to placate the rainbow end of the political spectrum. How about this: Gender ideology is discriminatory against scientists, women, men, and many religious people?

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

"An instructive example is the case of Kempling v. British Columbia College of Teachers, 2005 BCCA 327, where a member was disciplined for public statements expressing his negative views on homosexuality, which statements were found to be discriminatory and inconsistent with the standards of the teaching profession."

This is all old hat.  People want to rewrite the legal code because they're uncomfortable with transgenderism... it's anti-political.  You need to accept institutional decisions, stop being so entitled people... it's anti-conservative.

Thanks for the chat.

Michael i think your barking up the wrong tree, what remarks has he made that have not been said before publicly by others that have no repercussions. The fact that society has accepted these new gender rules with outthe majority of hard science behind them, is because they are afraid to get canceled...Freedom of speech covers all these remarks, the fact that the LGBTQ community describes them as violence is ridiculous, once again nobody has challenged this for fear of getting canceled...

People are not uncomfortable with transgenderism, their sick of it being pushed down out throats, and are now pushing back and most just throwing up their hands and saying ok what ever you say....it's based on mental health issues...not anti political..

History has shown us over and over again that having blind faith in institutions has lead us down the wrong path to many times, i could list dozens right off my head, NAZI Germany, residential schools for one, RCMP and Military discrimination, and sexism, the list goes on, i think people have stopped believing in our institutions for a good reason...they can not be trusted, or relied upon to make the right choices...

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's a unique situation because 'open' debate on the topic includes the prospect of denying someone's self image with regards to gender.

The psychiatric profession has even more responsibility to be careful around this issue.  I'd be curious to know how many in the college support him.

If Peterson peddled actual snake oil, should he be removed from the college then?

Peterson's statements about transgenderism are exactly the things he was taught and the books taught and that the College of Psychologists accepted as reality up until about five years ago. Suddenly, with little in the way of evidence, they changed it around after some woke people got elected to head the college. 

23 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

People are not uncomfortable with transgenderism, their sick of it being pushed down out throats, and are now pushing back and most just throwing up their hands and saying ok what ever you say....it's based on mental health

You must surely realize by now you're addressing someone for whom transgenderism is almost holy Kant.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. So you agree with the college ?
 

 

The psychiatric college that says it's a serious mental health issue? Yes.

Quote

2. Except it isn't happening.

Except it is and i've posted that info before in detail - for you as i recall. 

How about this then - can we agree it should never be allowed to happen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, suds said:

So who exactly are these people who are going to re-educate Jordan Peterson? What are their qualifications? And if there's no intention of restricting Peterson's freedom of expression.....   then why even bother??

It’s about intimidation and shaming until Peterson kowtows to the left wing activists pressuring the College to beat up Peterson, who is standing up against cowardice.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, suds said:

What are their qualifications? 

Possibly members of the college who, unlike him, are in good standing.

 

I just read some of the complaints again... apparently he was fat shaming?

13 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

It’s about intimidation and shaming until Peterson kowtows to the left wing activists pressuring the College to beat up Peterson, who is standing up against cowardice.

So, I don't think I realized that this sophomore wannabe frat boy was fat shaming for clicks?

What a disgusting man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Possibly members of the college who, unlike him, are in good standing.

 

I just read some of the complaints again... apparently he was fat shaming?

So, I don't think I realized that this sophomore wannabe frat boy was fat shaming for clicks?

What a disgusting man.

No.  He was making a point about the absurd movement afoot to affirm everything that everyone does, including overeating.  He’s saying that overweight continues to be overweight, no matter how much we pretend that it’s healthy and “beautiful.”   He’s bringing the reality principle to bear on the safe space people.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

No.  He was making a point about the absurd movement afoot to affirm everything that everyone does, including overeating.  He’s saying that overweight continues to be overweight, no matter how much we pretend that it’s healthy and “beautiful.”   He’s bringing the reality principle to bear on the safe space people.  

Did he make inappropriate comments on fatness for medical person who treats them?  Fair question.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Did he make inappropriate comments on fatness for medical person who treats them?  Fair question.

It was a retort to the, “Let’s pretend the sky isn’t blue” crowd.  It may seem insensitive, but it makes an important point about the ways in which we deny reality so we don’t have to face it and make real progress.

This commentary explains the arbitrariness and overreach well:

 

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/29/2023 at 3:13 PM, Michael Hardner said:

"An instructive example is the case of Kempling v. British Columbia College of Teachers, 2005 BCCA 327, where a member was disciplined for public statements expressing his negative views on homosexuality, which statements were found to be discriminatory and inconsistent with the standards of the teaching profession."

This is all old hat.  People want to rewrite the legal code because they're uncomfortable with transgenderism... it's anti-political.  You need to accept institutional decisions, stop being so entitled people... it's anti-conservative.

 

There's a difference between being suspended for a month (as with Kempling) and being told to undergo social media training. Peterson claims he pays for this 'training' out of pocket for as long as it takes, until those administering the training  are convinced he has been re-educated. This to me sounds a bit orwellian. Peterson also claims he is going to tape the proceedings and make them public. If not allowed to tape, he will make notes or do it by memory. If the goal is to make an example of Peterson, I figure they picked the wrong guy and instead may be creating a martyr. And according to Orwell...  martyrs have always had the capability of destroying the things that led them to martyrdom. So stay tuned.... it ain't over yet.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2023 at 2:42 PM, suds said:

 If the goal is to make an example of Peterson, I figure they picked the wrong guy and instead may be creating a martyr. And according to Orwell...  martyrs have always had the capability of destroying the things that led them to martyrdom. So stay tuned.... it ain't over yet.

I don't think that the college could be so stupid as to be surprised with dr. Peterson's response.

Their motivations seem pretty clear.  Peterson will have to abide by the code and stop being such a special lil YouTuber or face the accountability he's always talking about...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't think that the college could be so stupid as to be surprised with dr. Peterson's response.

Their motivations seem pretty clear.  Peterson will have to abide by the code and stop being such a special lil YouTuber or face the accountability he's always talking about...

You sound like a radical liberal with Orwellian ideology (Marxist).  Many liberals are Marxists pretending to be mainline lovers of democracy and freedom.  Fakers!  You claim to be a conservative.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We know both Trudeau (father and son) had a love for Castro and Cuba's dictatorship as well as China's Communist system.  Don't be surprised at the direction Canada is heading.  NDP leader Singh even reportedly said the Communist revolution in Cuba was good for the people.  Canada is slowly becoming more authoritarian.  We are cooking like frogs in a pot of water.  It is a slow but sure process of growing authoritarianism run by bureaucracy.  Examples are the imposition of carbon taxes, which steadily increase.  The so-called "just transition" away from fossil fuels and the net zero targets.  The continuing saga of new laws to control the internet. The federal public service has increased in size by at least 25% since Trudeau was elected in 2015.  Liberals (and NDP) really do believe in big government as the provider, driver, and solution to everything in life.  Sadly many Canadians believe this too and more are falling for it every day.  That is pure Marxism.  People fled from Cuba to escape the Communist dictatorship, yet we had leaders who actually cozied up to the dictator, and many Canadians continued to vote for them.  What does that tell you about these voters?  In the future, it is not inconceivable that many will be fleeing from Canada.

I escaped Castro's Cuba for freedom in America. Sixty-one years later my family still celebrates our arrival (msn.com)

Edited by blackbird
  • 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
      10,692
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Gator
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Gator went up a rank
      Contributor
    • Gator went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Fracnsis Moore earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Gator went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • admined earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

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