Far left activists and politicians look to bully, intimidate, harass Christian music artist and parishioners from exercising right to practice religion

[User]

28 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No, it's just political is all. Get over it.

Calling it political doesn't make it better and telling people to get over it when you support pushing the stupid laws on them is asinine. 

29 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Sure, and a cop could say your tires were either bald or worn. I mean you could spend the next 9 pages arguing in here what either means but a cop would probably have arrested you for resisting by page 3. Good luck arguing with the judge you were just exercising your right to free speech.

Again, there are objective measurements to a tire being too worn to be safe. 

The point here is that it is not just some arbitrary feeling of subjectivity to say tires are in fact unsafe at a certain tread depth.... and thus, as a society interested in road safety, there should be a measurement of tread depth for safe tires. 

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

This guy is not a Canadian, he has no right to enter Canada. When you go to someone else's country you are their guest, so act like one.

The people putting them up and renting the venue are Canadian. Why wouldn't you respect your own citizens?

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

In other words you were wrong. A cop can't just decide he doesn't like The type of car you're driving

Of course they can. She can decide if it's the kind that's safe or unsafe.

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You spend a lot of energy being wrong you know. Maybe if you thought a little bit before opening your mouth you'd spend less time looking dumb

It takes little effort to side step your ridiculous efforts to appear all intellectual about stuff you actually care next to nothing about.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Of course they can. She can decide if it's the kind that's safe or unsafe.

 

No she can't. You've already admitted that. The dot can decide what safe and what's unsafe. All she can do is check compliance.

It's hilarious that you're wrong about something, then you admit that you're wrong about something, then you immediately go back to being wrong about the same thing. I guess this is a shining example of the leftist mind at work   You literally have the attention span of a goldfish

Quote

It takes little effort to side step your ridiculous efforts to appear all intellectual about stuff you actually care next to nothing about.

And yet you fail so regular   

It must p*ss you off that someone like me so frequently makes you look so stupid   But what you fail to realize is that in fact it's you making you look so stupid. My larger IQ is Just the canvas that you paint your stupidity on

Edited July 31, 2025 by CdnFox

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

No she can't. You've already admitted that.

Yes they can. And yes you've been informed...a couple of times now.

 

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, User said:

Calling it political doesn't make it better and telling people to get over it when you support pushing the stupid laws on them is asinine.

Laws against hate are not stupid. If you think calling them stupid is all it takes to over rule them let us know how that works out in court.

4 hours ago, User said:

Again, there are objective measurements to a tire being too worn to be safe. 

As you can be quite certain traffic cops are trained to do so to the best of their lawful ability.

4 hours ago, User said:

The point here is that it is not just some arbitrary feeling of subjectivity to say tires are in fact unsafe at a certain tread depth.... and thus, as a society interested in road safety, there should be a measurement of tread depth for safe tires. 

There is and when a cop decides your tires are too bald to meet the public's interest in safety it's off to the impound. The cop may not have the final word but they can certainly be the first in line.

The point stands, if cops don't like the car you're driving they can pull it off the road.

By the same token, if municipalities and such determine the hate in your speech is out of compliance with the law they can prevent you from saying it. 

Like cops they have laws that let them do that. Complain all you like but that's the objective reality.

It's also a fact you can change the laws but there's a lawful process you have to follow there as well so...

...get over it seems like the perfectly appropriate thing to say.

 

[User]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Laws against hate are not stupid. If you think calling them stupid is all it takes to over rule them let us know how that works out in court.

The point here was that just telling people to get over it is asinine. 

Yes, laws against hate are stupid. Hate is a subjective emotion. 

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

As you can be quite certain traffic cops are trained to do so to the best of their lawful ability.

You are trying to argue it was as if they could arbitrarily do whatever they wanted... and yet again I corrected you.

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

There is and when a cop decides your tires are too bald to meet the public's interest in safety it's off to the impound. The cop may not have the final word but they can certainly be the first in line.

You are trying to argue it was as if they could arbitrarily do whatever they wanted... and yet again I corrected you.

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The point stands, if cops don't like the car you're driving they can pull it off the road.

No, that point doesn't stand, you have been corrected multiple times by me and CdnFox.

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

By the same token, if municipalities and such determine the hate in your speech is out of compliance with the law they can prevent you from saying it. 

Well, that depends on what your charter of rights or whatever says, and as it appears here, there are some narrow scopes here on what that can be, and even then I think you guys go too far. 

And once again, the difference here is that tires wearing out is an objective safety concern that can be measured with objective facts on tread wear. 

Hate speech is subjectively defined based on feelings and arbitrary rules on who or what special interests deserve protection over others. 

 

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, User said:

The point here was that just telling people to get over it is asinine. 

Sometimes but not in this case.

7 minutes ago, User said:

Yes, laws against hate are stupid. Hate is a subjective emotion.

Which has proven to be strong and dangerous enough to necessitate laws that prevent it from being evoked. That's why hate laws are not stupid.

12 minutes ago, User said:

You are trying to argue it was as if they could arbitrarily do whatever they wanted... and yet again I corrected you.

Excuse me? I'm repeatedly pointing out to you bozos no one is doing whatever they want, they're following due process. Why are you ignoring that?

16 minutes ago, User said:

No, that point doesn't stand, you have been corrected multiple times by me and CdnFox.

You truly believe you can tell a cop to go get stuffed if he issues an impoundment order and calls a tow trunk to haul your vehicle to the impound? Seriously?

LMAO!

1 hour ago, User said:

And once again, the difference here is that tires wearing out is an objective safety concern that can be measured with objective facts on tread wear. 

So is the concern over hate speech when the decision to prevent or stop it is being guided by objective laws. It's not some arbitrary exercise.

1 hour ago, User said:

Hate speech is subjectively defined based on feelings and arbitrary rules on who or what special interests deserve protection over others.

Except where laws define things objectively - mostly so rules about who deserves what are not arbitrary I might add. 

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

Yes they can. And yes you've been informed...a couple of times now.

 

No she can't and you've already admitted that. All she can do is compliance.

And she certainly can't do it because she doesn't like the type of car

But I appreciate your demonstrating to the entire board how screwed up the left are these days  You admit you're wrong then it's just your right then admit you're wrong then insist you're right And then you're mad cuz you want it to be everyone else's fault

A cop cannot decide they don't like the type of car you're driving and stop you from driving it. Is enforced motor vehicle regulations and laws

[User]

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

Which has proven to be strong and dangerous enough to necessitate laws that prevent it from being evoked. That's why hate laws are not stupid.

This entire comment of yours is stupid. 

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

Excuse me? I'm repeatedly pointing out to you bozos no one is doing whatever they want, they're following due process. Why are you ignoring that?

No excuse. You are repeatedly making vague comments as if authorities can in fact subjectively do as they please and it is myself and cdnfox telling you otherwise. 

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

You truly believe you can tell a cop to go get stuffed if he issues an impoundment order and calls a tow trunk to haul your vehicle to the impound? Seriously?

LMAO!

No, law enforcement operates with the authority to enforce laws with force. The place to contest their actions is in court, but that doesn't make what they are doing right just because they are doing it. They can also break the law, make mistakes, and be wrong. 

But... this is you like usual just playing dumb and obfuscating. 

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

So is the concern over hate speech when the decision to prevent or stop it is being guided by objective laws. It's not some arbitrary exercise.

No, been pretty clear and provided examples. You can objectively say that using the word "green" is illegal and that objective measurement is that you said the word "green" but such a law is clearly stupid and subjective. 

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

Except where laws define things objectively - mostly so rules about who deserves what are not arbitrary I might add. 

As I have already noted many times and explained above, an objective measure doesn't change the stupid, wrong, subjective reasoning behind it. 

[Barquentine]

On 7/31/2025 at 10:18 AM, User said:

you COVID lockdown worshippers

Who are you talking about? I didn't spend a day in lockdown. And even though I hate masks, I wore one because it was the right thing to do.

[User]

2 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

Who are you talking about? I didn't spend a day in lockdown. And even though I hate masks, I wore one because it was the right thing to do.

You seemed pretty upset that some Christians got together in a public space, as if the police should have swooped down on them all and run them off. 

 

[Barquentine]

4 minutes ago, User said:

You seemed pretty upset that some Christians got together in a public space

Can you quote where I said that? I've only been talking about following rules and mandates.

[User]

9 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

Can you quote where I said that? I've only been talking about following rules and mandates.

 

"And yet he's so special he gets to do it any way?"

"Break the law - pay the consequence!"

 

[eyeball]

9 hours ago, CdnFox said:

No she can't and you've already admitted that.

Where did you see that happen?

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, User said:

No, law enforcement operates with the authority to enforce laws with force. The place to contest their actions is in court, but that doesn't make what they are doing right just because they are doing it. They can also break the law, make mistakes, and be wrong. 

That's right force in the form of a document called a Notice and Order issued at an officers discretion if they deem your vehicle is in a unsound unsafe mechanical condition.

Sure they can be wrong but try telling her to go fùck herself and get back to us with the results.

2 hours ago, User said:

But... this is you like usual just playing dumb and obfuscating. 

No, this is more like you digging in your stubborn pig-headed heels over a simple well established fact some random lefty put before you in the internet. LMAO!

[Shady]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

That's right force in the form of a document called a Notice and Order issued at an officers discretion if they deem your vehicle is in a unsound unsafe mechanical condition.

Sure they can be wrong but try telling her to go fùck herself and get back to us with the results.

No, this is more like you digging in your stubborn pig-headed heels over a simple well established fact some random lefty put before you in the internet. LMAO!

Stop defending literal fascism.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Barquentine said:

Who are you talking about? I didn't spend a day in lockdown. And even though I hate masks, I wore one because it was the right thing to do.

Did you support the lockdowns or did you feel that they were an overreach?

He didn't say anything about you being in lockdown, just the people like you worshiped the lockdowns as a solution to everything and didn't give a Flying Fig about the impact to people's rights

[West]

17 hours ago, User said:

The point here was that just telling people to get over it is asinine. 

Yes, laws against hate are stupid. Hate is a subjective emotion. 

You are trying to argue it was as if they could arbitrarily do whatever they wanted... and yet again I corrected you.

You are trying to argue it was as if they could arbitrarily do whatever they wanted... and yet again I corrected you.

No, that point doesn't stand, you have been corrected multiple times by me and CdnFox.

Well, that depends on what your charter of rights or whatever says, and as it appears here, there are some narrow scopes here on what that can be, and even then I think you guys go too far. 

And once again, the difference here is that tires wearing out is an objective safety concern that can be measured with objective facts on tread wear. 

Hate speech is subjectively defined based on feelings and arbitrary rules on who or what special interests deserve protection over others. 

 

Laws against "hate" only go one way in this country. You can call church goers pedophiles and that's fine. 

Leftists are trying go use the hecklers veto. In any sane country they recognize the hecklers veto as ridiculous and dont use it as an excuse to shut down freedom of speech

[herbie]

Abbotsford just banned the ass from performing in a city park. Their useless twit Tory MP sent a letter of how he was offended by that.
How predictable.....

[CdnFox]

29 minutes ago, herbie said:

Abbotsford just banned the ass from performing in a city park. Their useless twit Tory MP sent a letter of how he was offended by that.
How predictable.....

It is predictable but tories would stand up for people's rights while left-wing communist losers would applaud silencing their opponents. So you're right in that respect  

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, Shady said:

Stop defending literal fascism.

LMAO!

Do you rage against the system when you're stopped behind all the sheep at a red traffic light or do you just pass everyone and push your way through the intersection?

It's hilarious that when you're reminded by a lefty why we have laws and legal processes it's all just fascism.

I thought you people prided yourselves on being for law and order.

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

LMAO!

Do you rage against the system when you're stopped behind all the sheep at a red traffic light or do you just pass everyone and push your way through the intersection?

It's hilarious that when you're reminded by a lefty why we have laws and legal processes it's all just fascism.

I thought you people prided yourselves on being for law and order.

So what you're saying is you know he's right and therefore you're going to try and distract the argument into something that's absolutely ridiculous in the hopes that he'll argue that instead  

You have all the subtlety of a yappy Chihuahua  

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

So what you're saying is you know he's right and therefore you're going to try and distract the argument into something that's absolutely ridiculous in the hopes that he'll argue that instead

No I'm hoping he'll demonstrate some consistency. If police are being fascists for ordering a dangerously unsafe vehicle off the road then there are very very few laws that aren't fascist in our system.

Why do you stop at red lights? Or maybe you don't and just give everyone the finger and do whatever you want.

[West]

9 hours ago, herbie said:

Abbotsford just banned the ass from performing in a city park. Their useless twit Tory MP sent a letter of how he was offended by that.
How predictable.....

Hecklers veto. How undemocratic and vile.