Jump to content
Political Forums
August1991

Should we abolish Canada's Human Rights Commissions?

Canada's Human Rights Commissions  

91 members have voted

  1. 1. What should we do with our human rights commissions?

    • Abolish human rights commissions
      46
    • Restrict these commissions (rescind section 13)
      17
    • Keep human rights commissions - they are integral to a civilized society
      32


Recommended Posts

The first reason: the legacy of 9/11, and the associated realization that speech codes have been actively hampering our ability to respond to the threat from militant Islam.

This is rich... "our ability to respond" such as we see here on MLW on this with simple-minded opinions that are the equivalent of pillow-punching...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fletch 27    0

The CHR is simply a pedestal to allow hatred in Canada under the cloud of "free speech".. The Khadrs and many more just love this... We are basically inserting our fingers in our own ass and covering our ears allowing HRC to continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
guyser    0

The CHR is simply a pedestal to allow hatred in Canada under the cloud of "free speech".. The Khadrs and many more just love this... We are basically inserting our fingers in our own ass and covering our ears allowing HRC to continue.

Oh my....had to quote this one for the ages.

By the way, go wash your fingers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Argus    651

Amazing. But I'll really believe this when I see the CBC report the news.

Jonathan Kay

It's a good start. But I want to see them gone completely.

A next step would be to not allow them to bother people because they publish something politically incorrect in paper format, as in Macleans magazine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

White Supremacists Cheer The CHRC Decision

“This is a huge victory for freedom in Canada,” a poster calling him or herself “CanadaFirst” posted on the website of StormFront, a notorious white supremacist group. “However, we still have other unjust Zionist ‘hate’ laws that need to go.”

Also

The new law doesn’t make hate speech legal on the web or by phone -- hate speech remains illegal under the Criminal Code. But by removing it from the Canadian Human Rights Act, it takes away the authority of the country’s human rights commissions to investigate online hate speech and request that violating websites be taken down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Argus    651

The Conservative Party of Canada - Supporting White Supremacy Since 2012.

Hitler had a German Shepherd, so anyone else who has a German Shepherd is just like Hitler! :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cybercoma    17

Hitler had a German Shepherd, so anyone else who has a German Shepherd is just like Hitler! :ph34r:

What nonsense is this?

The white supremacists are dancing in the streets, thanks to legislation drafted and passed by the Conservatives. Either it's blatant incompetence due to short-sightedness or they're supporting white supremacy. Take your pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gunrutz    0

What nonsense is this?

The white supremacists are dancing in the streets, thanks to legislation drafted and passed by the Conservatives. Either it's blatant incompetence due to short-sightedness or they're supporting white supremacy. Take your pick.

I prefer to think they are supporting freedom, people should have the freedom to dislike each other for whatever reason, it's up to the rest of us to do what is right, but we don't need thought or belief police in this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Argus    651

What nonsense is this?

The white supremacists are dancing in the streets, thanks to legislation drafted and passed by the Conservatives. Either it's blatant incompetence due to short-sightedness or they're supporting white supremacy. Take your pick.

You are engaging in a common intellectual fallacy of suggesting that if some unpleasant person/group is in favor of something, then everyone must be against it unless they sympathize with that person/group.

Hitler liked dogs. Therefore, if you don't hate dogs you must be just like Hitler! :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
August1991    22
The Conservative Party of Canada - Supporting White Supremacy Since 2012.
The New Democratic Party of Canada - supporting strawman arguments, and political correctness since 1961.

---

But I do admire Stephen Harper for doing something that David Lewis was never capable of doing: Stephen Harper has forced ordinary Canadians to choose.

On which side are we?

Edited by August1991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cybercoma    17

The New Democratic Party of Canada - supporting strawman arguments, and political correctness since 1961.

---

But I do admire Stephen Harper for doing something that David Lewis was never capable of doing: Stephen Harper has forced ordinary Canadians to choose.

On which side are we?

Typical rightwing fascist argument: if you're not with us, you're against us. Children think this way as well.

Are we adults or are we children?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
August1991    22
Typical rightwing fascist argument: if you're not with us, you're against us. Children think this way as well.

Are we adults or are we children?

Cybercoma, you entirely miss my point.

You make a straw-man argument.

----

A false dichotomy is a Hobbesian choice: you can choose between fascist Hitler and radical Stalin.

A straw man argument is different: you can choose between democratic civilized Sweden/Canada, or Nazi Germany.

Edited by August1991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
August1991    22
Human rights legislation pertains to public displays of discrimination, so your examples are irrelevant.
Shwa, in case you ever return to this forum and read this, what do you mean?

What is "public display of discrimination"?

----

If a single woman posts on the Internet that she seeks a man over 50, Christian, white, financially stable - does her advert contravene the public display of discrimination.

What if her Internet ad instead notes that she likes "tall black men"? In this 21st century, how do we define public display?

---

State discrimination is fundamentally different from private/individual/corporate discrimination. IMHO, the State should be blind. But individuals should be free to discriminate as their wont.

Edited by August1991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×