Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
hot enough

Free speech and attendant responsibilities

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, dialamah said:

In person I'm sure I'd have figured it out - it was cute and I'm usually pretty quick.  Online, an emoticon helps. :)

 

I have real difficulty using them.  Ever since Waldo and Jacee, I think...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bcsapper said:

I have to disagree.  There is such a think as a frivolous case, and such does not need to be heard.  If a case should be heard, the courts should hear it such that all sides are represented equally.  That someone can afford to blow a couple of thousand dollars on lawyers is not a good reason to make them do so.

 

I'm trying to think of a human rights case between two individuals.  Nothing comes to mind, but I'm no expert.  Still, I think it's accurate to say that the majority of cases are of individuals bringing cases against their employers.  It seems to me that requiring employees to have to pay to ensure their rights are being met is likely to be too much of a hardship.  Employers are not necessarily the most diligent at ensuring they're not breaking the law.  Perhaps, if a case is determined to be 'frivolous', the accuser should be required to pay his own fees?  

Anyway, most employers would rather pay that $2000 to a lawyer than to have the employee win and have to pay much more, eh?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2017 at 0:27 AM, JamesHackerMP said:

how far do these hate-speech laws in Canada go?

Not nearly as far as they do in the UK or France or the Netherlands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2017 at 0:04 AM, JamesHackerMP said:

So who has the ultimate authority to interpret or enforce this law? the provincial Human Rights Commissions?

The courts. There have been very few prosecutions. There is one guy in Toronto who keeps getting arrested for going to street corners and screaming insults about Muslims, and there was that guy who was convicted of hate for his web site last year. And this poor idiot went to jail for yelling about Muslims on the subway. He seems to have run into a liberal judge.

 

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd hate for the US government(s) to have that power.  And the liberals who advocate such laws probably haven't factored in the fact that a successive GOP government would use the same laws--not repeal them.  They could issue an executive order "you can't say nasty shit about Jesus" after that (for argument's sake).  Only then the liberals who advocated the laws would realize their error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JamesHackerMP said:

I'd hate for the US government(s) to have that power.  .... Only then the liberals who advocated the laws would realize their error.

 

Agreed...such laws would be unconstitutional in the United States.   The most abhorrent forms of free speech are what need to be protected the most.  

"Liberals" Al Goldstein, Lenny Bruce, and Larry Flynt proved that in courts decades ago.

Edited by bush_cheney2004
  • Like 1

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

×