This Concerns Me

[nels25]

This morning I read a commentary from an Ottawa Canada newspaper concerning something I had never heard of before.

A so called human rights commission in Canada that has the right to hold trials and punish people in the name of what appears to be political correctness.

The commentary states that this commission can level fines, and issue what in effect equals a life time gag order on a person's speech this seems to be used in a large part against who have a disagreement with a gay/homosexual lifestyle, I am also lead to believe it can be used in other cases although none were sited.

If this is true it is intolerable in the extreme.

Can any one here on DU bring me up date on this situation??:wtf:

[babylonsister]

1. Can you provide a link to the commentary? nt

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Link? Also, slow down. Breathe into a paper bag or something.

You seem to be hyperventilating. Take it easy & try to write coherent sentences.

[havocmom]

3. Your concern is noted. And like above responder, I would ask if you have a link

Am concerned that you did not include a link in OP. There are so many silly and inaccurate emails floating around, one would hope something like such undocumented spam was not the seed of your concern.

[nels25]

4. How does one do a link

I am not that computer literate??

[havocmom]

8. If you got the information from an online site, you copy the site address

(from the address field in your browser) and paste it into the body of your post.

You can hover your cursor at the start of the address in your browser's address field to highlight the address right click, and a menu will drop down. Select COPY from that menu. Got to the body of your DU message and right click again. Select PASTE from that menu

Link accomplished

[meegbear]

5. Did you try the google?

Boy, I sure did.

http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/default-en.asp

[nels25]

6. David Warren Commentator - Ottawa Citizen Newspaper

found in columns listed at Real Politic.

Next time I will do some home, work.

Boy are you guys picky.

[havocmom]

9. So not believing everything posted by people one doesn't know is 'picky'?

No, that shows some degree of critical thought and sane judgment. We don't believe things just because..... that little trait is one of many that separates us from bush*s 21%.

Again, your concern is noted.

If you are posting personal opinions, we aren't so 'picky'. But when you come in here concerned about something you read and expect others to discuss it, you best be providing the rest of the class with the site where we can read what the hell it is you are complaining and concerned about. That isn't 'picky' it is just common sense.

Some of us may have been born yesterday, but we WERE in town all day.

[ck4829]

7. It also goes after groups that urge violence

They helped bring down the Canadian Ethnic Cleansing Team (an organization that was making plans and urging followers to attack Jews, Muslims, and gays).

The group would not have fallen were it not for the Human Rights Commission.

This isn't about free speech, is it still free speech when someone is talking about killing a person because of their race, religion, or some other characteristic?

[Jim__]

10. Here's a link to a June 7 story in the Calgary Herald.

It sounds like it may be about the same issue:

...The Canadian Human Rights Commission suffers from the same problems afflicting provincial commissions, to wit: no rules of evidence, no defence of truth, fair comment or innocent intent and no risk to the complainant, whose case is carried at government expense and who faces no costs in the unlikely event he loses.

All of which leads to this simple question. If the section of the Canadian Human Rights Act that enables all this anti-democratic nonsense is such a dog, why doesn't the liberty loving Conservative government do something about it? Introduce a bill that simply removes Section 13, end of story. ...

The Calgary Herald sounds like a conservative paper. I gues Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act is the issue in question.

[Mr. Blonde]

11. The Canadian Islamic Council

is currently using it on Macleans and Mark Steyn. They didn't like an excerpt they printed from his book.


The facts of the whole deal are really pretty alarming.

I have read where the publishers of Macleans are hoping the Human Rights Council rules against them so they can take it to a real court, and have the CHRC ruled unconstitutional.

[XemaSab]

12. There's a good-sized article about it in the New York Times today

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/us/12hate.html?em&ex=1213416000&en=0a8d34dd757e8d47&ei=5087%0A

Apparently we're the only country with freedom of speech. :shrug:

[Jim__]

14. Yes, we have freedom of speech, but you can be thrown in jail at the president's whim.

That tends to make any constitutional freedoms mere window dressing.

[GoneOffShore]

13. Here's a link to the NYT article

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/us/12hate.html?pagewanted=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

And it has to do with "hate speech" and how it is defined in other countries. We, the US, are the exception in the world in our attitude towards "provocative" speech.