Victory for free speech in Canada

Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Victory for free speech in Canada

Repeal of hate speech provision seen as victory for free speech

POSTMEDIA NEWS JUNE 28, 2013
A contentious section of Canadian human rights law, long criticized by free-speech advocates as overly restrictive and tantamount to censorship, is gone for good.

A private member's bill repealing Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, the so-called "hate speech provision," passed in the Senate this week.

Its passage means the part of Canadian human rights law that permitted rights complaints to the federal Human Rights Commission for "the communication of hate messages by telephone or on the Internet" will be history. The bill from Alberta Conservative MP Brian Storseth passed in the House of Commons last summer, but needed Senate approval. It has received royal assent and will take effect after a one-year phase-in period. An "ecstatic" Storseth said the bill, which he says had wide support across ideological lines and diverse religious groups, repeals a "flawed piece of legislation."


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
http://www.theprovince.com/li

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15752
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Every time I hear "hate

Every time I hear "hate speech" in law language I get a lip twitch.

We all can hate certain claims without hating the people who might hold those claims. Common law allows you to express your emotions, even when it offends others. When people argue "never offend me" they always forget that power shifts over time.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
So if some one calls a black

So if some one calls a black person "nigger" and they say "let's hang that nigger because they are black and black people are evil people", this is OK?

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Inciting violence is a bit

Inciting violence is a bit different than free speech.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


A_Nony_Mouse
atheist
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

digitalbeachbum wrote:
So if some one calls a black person "nigger" and they say "let's hang that nigger because they are black and black people are evil people", this is OK?

As speech it is neutral. IF it is incitement to violence that is a separate law.

The generic problem with all of these "hate crimes" laws is they intend to make anything that is not a real, existing crime like incitement, into a crime. However the "everything else" category is never defined and as such are always political. In the US that would translate to "hang the nigger" being a crime but "get the honky" not being a crime. And of course the "hang the nigger" would not be a crime if a Black says it. Undefined crimes, crimes of context, are always political crimes.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15752
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:So if

digitalbeachbum wrote:

So if some one calls a black person "nigger" and they say "let's hang that nigger because they are black and black people are evil people", this is OK?

 

The crime is not the emotion, the crime in "lets hang that "nigger" is the call to violence.

 

"Lets hang that faggot"

"Lets hang that Muslim"

"Lets hang that atheist"

 

That is not the same as

 

"I hate niggers"

"I hate Muslims"

"I hate faggots"

"I hate religion"

"I hate atheists"

 

Nor is a call to violence the same as using a word in historical context such as,

"Nazis used the word Juden as a slur to discribe Jews." HISTORICAL FACT. So if we NEVER use that word then how would the holocaust museum be built? How could we keep Huckleberry Finn?

Nor is it the same as say Mel Brooks making fun of Jews or Dave Chapel making fun of whites and blacks.

 

We cannot force each other to never offend each other. What we can do is to agree to let the words fly and draw the line at calls for violence and acts of violence.

 

Otherwise, as atheists, if we choose to go down the stupid PC road, being outnumbered by theists who are threatened by the mere word "atheist", we'd be handing government a loaded gun to use against us.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 That is really good news.

 That is really good news. Those laws were clearly being used to target and harass people for holding unpopular political positions. You can't trust the government with that kind of power. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15752
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: That

Beyond Saving wrote:

 That is really good news. Those laws were clearly being used to target and harass people for holding unpopular political positions. You can't trust the government with that kind of power. 

HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO FUCKING TELL YOU, STOP HUMANIZING YOURSELF TO ME!

In other words, completely agree with you on this, and out of all the things humans should agree on, this certainly is the most important.

Yes, I know, up is down and left is right, and kissing you is like kissing my sister.

FUCK! Don't you have a car to lock keys in or something?

All kidding aside, I do love my well intended PC atheist and theist friends, but the part they always miss is that power shifts over time and never consider what the case might be if they want to say something the government might not like.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


A_Nony_Mouse
atheist
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:
...

Nor is a call to violence the same as using a word in historical context such as,

"Nazis used the word Juden as a slur to discribe Jews." HISTORICAL FACT. So if we NEVER use that word then how would the holocaust museum be built? How could we keep Huckleberry Finn?

...

 

An excellant example. In German Jude means Jew and Juden is the plural. One simply needs to declare using Jews to describe Jews a slur and you have a hate crime. Of course one would  make an exceptions for Die Juden using Juden therefore it would be a crime of political context.

It is not uncommon today. For a thing to be a crime it is not just a matter of the action itself but also who commits the act.

 

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15752
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Brian37

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
...

Nor is a call to violence the same as using a word in historical context such as,

"Nazis used the word Juden as a slur to discribe Jews." HISTORICAL FACT. So if we NEVER use that word then how would the holocaust museum be built? How could we keep Huckleberry Finn?

...

 

An excellant example. In German Jude means Jew and Juden is the plural. One simply needs to declare using Jews to describe Jews a slur and you have a hate crime. Of course one would  make an exceptions for Die Juden using Juden therefore it would be a crime of political context.

It is not uncommon today. For a thing to be a crime it is not just a matter of the action itself but also who commits the act.

 

 

Calling something a "hate crime" makes it political, you cannot legislate emotions and force people to like you. You can however have common law that says people cannot act out in violence or call to violence. Something that bat shit insane region on both sides hasn't learned yet. When both sides do, then they'll have peace.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Repeal of hate

Vastet wrote:
Repeal of hate speech provision seen as victory for free speech POSTMEDIA NEWS JUNE 28, 2013 A contentious section of Canadian human rights law, long criticized by free-speech advocates as overly restrictive and tantamount to censorship, is gone for good. A private member's bill repealing Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, the so-called "hate speech provision," passed in the Senate this week. Its passage means the part of Canadian human rights law that permitted rights complaints to the federal Human Rights Commission for "the communication of hate messages by telephone or on the Internet" will be history. The bill from Alberta Conservative MP Brian Storseth passed in the House of Commons last summer, but needed Senate approval. It has received royal assent and will take effect after a one-year phase-in period. An "ecstatic" Storseth said the bill, which he says had wide support across ideological lines and diverse religious groups, repeals a "flawed piece of legislation."

 

  Good for Canadian politicians for growing some balls and stepping up for the cause of free speech.  Those who advocate for overly restrictive speech codes may have good intentions but a shitty law is still a shitty law.  Good riddance.

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


A_Nony_Mouse
atheist
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Brian37 wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
...

Nor is a call to violence the same as using a word in historical context such as,

"Nazis used the word Juden as a slur to discribe Jews." HISTORICAL FACT. So if we NEVER use that word then how would the holocaust museum be built? How could we keep Huckleberry Finn?

...

An excellant example. In German Jude means Jew and Juden is the plural. One simply needs to declare using Jews to describe Jews a slur and you have a hate crime. Of course one would  make an exceptions for Die Juden using Juden therefore it would be a crime of political context.

It is not uncommon today. For a thing to be a crime it is not just a matter of the action itself but also who commits the act.

Calling something a "hate crime" makes it political, you cannot legislate emotions and force people to like you. You can however have common law that says people cannot act out in violence or call to violence. Something that bat shit insane region on both sides hasn't learned yet. When both sides do, then they'll have peace.

It is already criminal separate from motivation, to call for violence or to commit violent acts. Violent of course meaning harm to persons or property.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


A_Nony_Mouse
atheist
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

ProzacDeathWish wrote:
Good for Canadian politicians for growing some balls and stepping up for the cause of free speech.  Those who advocate for overly restrictive speech codes may have good intentions but a shitty law is still a shitty law.  Good riddance.

But they are still working hard to criminalze any short of reverence and devotion to the holy holocaust.

Only lies need laws to protect them.

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
No we aren't. Get off those

No we aren't. Get off those drugs. This decision makes such a move impossible.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


A_Nony_Mouse
atheist
A_Nony_Mouse's picture
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
User is offlineOffline
.

Vastet wrote:
No we aren't. Get off those drugs. This decision makes such a move impossible.
Ernst Zundel

 

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
He has been jailed several

He has been jailed several times: in Canada for publishing literature ""likely to incite hatred against an identifiable group'"

That is no longer illegal, so they can't charge him for it. Proving my point.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.