I’ll remember that when a Canadian or an Englishman talks about the gun laws or health care in the United States.
Marc
Are you suggesting that someone in the US has been arrested for calling a political figure a dumbass?
(actually, I imagine someone HAS, but not legally…)
Seruously, what’s his problem with Jews? You would think he’d have a solidarity with our oppressed brothers thing goin’ on.
I think any legal restriction on professing an opinion creates the potential for unreasonable limitations.
(“Jews are a disease” is an opinion. “Kill them” is not an opinion.)
Hey im canadian.
i dont think that this free speech stuff is unlimited. doesnt work that way in canada. you got beef? buy some eggs at the store and let the other guy’s house have it. you dont go around saying jews are a disease and so forth.
we’re proud of our ww2 heritage. i dont give a flying fuck what an american constitutes as free speech. it doesnt fly up here in the north. most people dont want guys walking around talking about genocide being a good thing. if they did then it wouldnt be an issue…just a way of life.
While I disagree with the law, too, I would point out that not all forms of expression are protected free speech in the USA, either. This should not become some superiority-of-nations issue.
Jews are a disease?
No, but diabetes is a disease.
The disease that Racist used as a crutch for his hate.
Any diabetics here suffering from the same racist/hatred symptoms? :rolleyes:
it isnt! americans have ground it in their heads that free speech means you get to say whatever you want. sorry to break it to people, but no it doesnt.
and forget about this “we’ll talk things over with OUR right to free speech”. fuck that. that only breeds more complaining. the key lies in what the PEOPLE want. period.
the majority of canadians dont want nazis walking around talking shit…so we dont allow it
if americans wanna let nazis run around then thats understandable…its also understandable whenever the KKK or NAMBLA wants to hold a march right through the streets of new york.
all hail hypocrisy.
Jews are a disease?
No, but diabetes is a disease.
The disease that Racist used as a crutch for his hate.
Any diabetics here suffering from the same racist/hatred symptoms? :rolleyes:
They should be allowed to march.
Just like others should be allowed to organize counter protests.
IANACanadian (or a lawyer), but this looks like the law in question.
(bolding mine) I think this looks like a pretty good law. It protects private speech and actually has a lot of leeway, what with all that “knowingly” and “in good faith.” The only thing outlawed is public advocacy of hatred towards a group based on “color, race, religion” or ethnicity. So you can still hate on rich people, ignorant people, liberals, computer geeks and transsexuals all you want. Actually, I’m disappointed there’s nothing in there about sexual orientation. As Larry Mudd pointed out, even Fred Phelps is probably a-okay here, since his hate speech is religiously based.
yeh and im saying…would you go out to protest in their group saying “HEY HEY! RACISMS OKAY”
yeh you probably wouldnt. instead of directly going down and starting your own protest that could help their efforts with a sign saying say…
“RACISM BAD…FREE SPEECH OKAY…DEAL WITH IT”
you instead would prefer to hide behind your “everyone should say what they want” rhetoric…see…no direct ties with the group and you look like a saint.
WHat im saying is…if you want them to have free speech for that shit YOU go down and march with them. you wouldnt because you disapprove (i assume). canadians dont like that shit so instead of everybody being uncomfortable just so a select asshole can have their bigoted say we go with what most people want.
many americans ive met dont understand that everything has limitations no matter how noble.
You seem to be saying, “If you disagree with them, it’s ok to make what they’re saying illegal.”
I only say “seem” because a) your posts are incoherent, and b) everything I’ve read about Canada claims it is a tolerant place. You clearly do not belong.
here we go…someone doesnt understand that things arent black and white so then im the bad guy for wanting nazis to have their say.
if i seem to be saying what you inferred then you obviously cant read people. are you american? well then you and your hypocrisy has no place to chastise me.
I’m saying that a vast majority of canadians disapprove of what this guy was doing. as a majority we had no problem telling him to fuck off in prison. as a majority we stand with what we want.
Dont come around with your self-righteous high horse with this “i dont like nazis but they should be able to say what they want” stuff. it’s lame. We do things our way you do things your way. What’s your point? we share a border…not legislature. you cant come with your flawed american national policy and expect us to be into hook line and sinker.
Why do you come here and tell me that im incoherent. youre just like a little kid i saw telling their mommy she was mean but you dont want to say why. you just post with your “another bigot…ill take care of this with my one-line debate” attitude.
What’s your stance? would you go to the march with the sign i suggested? YES or NO. if you dont reply then i understand. ive had to run many a hippy.
And if you want to tell a canadian how canada is then you better go and get some first-hand experience not what some funny book told you. run along now. arent you supposed to be “spreading freedom” somewhere?
P.S. to everyone- i dont hate america or americans. i have many friends from your great country. i just didnt like this inuendo that just because alot of americans support TOTAL UNLIMITED free speech doesnt make it gospel for me or my country.
My point is that you’re an intolerant asshole. The difference between you and I (beyond typing, spelling and grammar skills) is that I think you ought to be able to spew your bigoted hate. I have faith that people will be able to see how stupid it is on their own without calling the law to intervene.
Masterchief, meet irony. Irony, masterchief. You two get to know each other, I’m sure you’ll be good friends.
WHAT sign? “Racism bad, free speech good”? Probably not that specific sign with its ape-like slogan, but something similar, sure…
Sure, that makes sense :rolleyes:
Well, strictly speaking, if a third group wanted to gather and instead of launching a counter protest, they simply wanted to demonstrate for free speech… I’d support that.
Yes, um… sure. Hide. Yep.
Two questions:
What, exactly, are you smoking?
Can I have some?
I don’t need to march in support of people whose ideas I disagree with. That’s, like, what freeeeeeedom is all about. I support people’s right to march to shut down neuclear power plants. I, however, support those power plants. ~shrugs~ I see no problem.
Ah. The rule of the mob. Excellent. Better make sure your views are always popular enough, wouldn’t want to make people uncomfortable now would you?
One of the things we Americans guard against is the tyranny of the majority. Very often the morally right position on an issue isn’t supported by the majority. There was a time not so long ago where people were denied basic civil rights by the law because of the color of their skin and in many cases the majority was just fine with that. For this and many other reasons we yankees think that freedom of speech is an inalienable right that the government should not be allowed to breach. So far no one posting in favor of free speech has said they want to see nazi asshats parading down mainstreet but we realize that is a consequence of free speech. If we only allow free speech for the popular majority then we are already living in Orwell’s Oceana.
masterchief, I was not trying to make an America good, Canada bad point, and I don’t think anyone else was. I know what I meant was that this law blows, whether it is in Canada, the US, China, or anywhere. Being able to imprison people for saying things that the majority thinks of as bad is not a good thing, IMHO.
You early say…
I am sorry, but that is exactly what free speech is. You get to say what you want. And I am not even an American. Now, that does not mean that any country has unrestricted free speech. But the starting point must be free speech - and then any restrictions on it require justification. You clearly think that the law in question is a valid restriction. I think you are wrong, but accept there is an argument. But there is simply no argument whatsoever that it is not a restriction on free speech.
I don’t trust the government or the majority to get this kind of thing ‘right’, if indeed there is a right at all. If it makes you any happier, there are plent of times the US has got it wrong on free speech law. But that doesn’t make a modern, democratic, civil rights based society any more justified in having laws allowing it to imprison its own population for peacefully expressing views, however abhorrent.
I like being able to say what I want as much as the next person, but I don’t got no beef with Canada’s law.
I can appreciate that, but this is not a law banning all sorts of free speach but a very specific type that promotes hatred of a group.
Genuine question: Can you postulate some sort of future situation where the law as posted by The Weird One (other than a general slippery slope argument) would be detrimental to society? For example, the civil rights movement you spoke of would not have contravened this law as it is the opposite of promoting hatred.
I can think of an extreme example where this law may have been beneficial to a population : Rawanda.