• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Anti-Olympic signs could mean jail: rights group

Fiddytree said:
Oh there you are! I was wondering who said it before. It must have been you. But Seriously? :roll:

It also serves as a fantastic dick measuring contest, so for those of you who really have to feel superior to another country can measure how many medals your country has won.
Click to expand...

Do you care if some American video game nerd can beat some Japanese nerd in some sort of video game contest and get a trophy or medal for it, do you care if some American can blow a bugger out of his nose further than some German and get a trophy or medal for it? I could care less if some American in a globalist event can throw a shot put further than someone else or throw a javelin very far.
 
SE102 said:
Well you can really say it all you want, but the minute the neo-nazi rally happens i hope it gets gassed...:)
Click to expand...

What if the government declared themselves and the military edfa protected a class just like the gays and considered speech against them to violate hate speech laws?
 
jamesrage said:
What if the government declared themselves and the military edfa protected a class just like the gays and considered speech against them to violate hate speech laws?
Click to expand...

What if the zerg overran our homebase.
 
apdst said:
You bet it should. Just like anti-black, white, hispanic, north, south, east, west, etc. If we start cherry picking which hate speech is ok and which isn't, where do we draw the line, before free speech is dead, or how do we keep from creating double standards. There's aleady a double standard in this country. Why make it worse?
Click to expand...

But what if that person was a teacher, and he/she was teaching stuff like the Holocaust didn't exist. How would you deal with this.
 
jackalope said:
Fire them.
Click to expand...

I brought it up because there was a case like that here in Canada years ago. I can't remember the details as it happened years ago, but he was a University professor teaching his students that the Holocaust was a lie.
 
Middleground said:
I brought it up because there was a case like that here in Canada years ago. I can't remember the details as it happened years ago, but he was a University professor teaching his students that the Holocaust was a lie.
Click to expand...


What happened to him? Did he lose his tenure, or was it protected?
 
jackalope said:
What happened to him? Did he lose his tenure, or was it protected?
Click to expand...

I just looked it up:

James Keegstra
For more details on this topic, see R. v. Keegstra.
In 1984, James Keegstra, a Canadian high-school teacher, was charged with denying the Holocaust and making antisemitic claims in his classroom as part of the course material. Keegstra and his lawyer, Doug Christie, argued that the section of the Criminal Code of Canada (now section 319{2}), is an infringement of the Charter of Rights (section 9{b}). The case was appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, where it was decided that the law he was convicted under did infringe on his freedom of expression, but it was a justified infringement. Keegstra was convicted, and fired from his job.[61]

More details here:

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Keegstra]James Keegstra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
Catz Part Deux said:
CBC News: Sunday

Tell that to the Human Rights Commission.
Click to expand...


Of course they have free speech, however it's not absolute, just as it is not here. Why is our definition the one that everyone should use? Every country decides that for themselves. Cananda and the UK have hate speech laws, we don't.


Interesting case though, and I wonder what the Charter Challenge result will be.


But, to the OP. The guy did NOT say homosexuality is a sin and end up in jail. :roll: He did a whoooooollllleee lot more than that.

btw, did he end up in jail? I thought the article said they didn't use the criminal law.
 
Middleground said:
I just looked it up:

James Keegstra
For more details on this topic, see R. v. Keegstra.
In 1984, James Keegstra, a Canadian high-school teacher, was charged with denying the Holocaust and making antisemitic claims in his classroom as part of the course material. Keegstra and his lawyer, Doug Christie, argued that the section of the Criminal Code of Canada (now section 319{2}), is an infringement of the Charter of Rights (section 9{b}). The case was appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, where it was decided that the law he was convicted under did infringe on his freedom of expression, but it was a justified infringement. Keegstra was convicted, and fired from his job.[61]

More details here:

James Keegstra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Good! I'm glad his ass was fired. :2wave:
 
Middleground said:
But what if that person was a teacher, and he/she was teaching stuff like the Holocaust didn't exist. How would you deal with this.
Click to expand...

Well, there's a huge difference between saying what you want on the street and then telling lies in a classroom. Common sense has to come into play at some point.
 
apdst said:
Well, there's a huge difference between saying what you want on the street and then telling lies in a classroom. Common sense has to come into play at some point.
Click to expand...

That's right.
 
SE102 said:
What if the zerg overran our homebase.
Click to expand...

Mock my post if you will but if the government can make opposition speech to certain groups illegal under the guise in the form of hate speech laws, then who is to say that they will not do the same to other forms of opposition speech? You anti-free speech libs fail to grasp that. Hate speech is still free speech and if you allow your government to ban speech against one thing then you allow them to ban speech against other things.
 
jamesrage said:
Mock my post if you will but if the government can make opposition speech to certain groups illegal under the guise in the form of hate speech laws, then who is to say that they will not do the same to other forms of opposition speech? You anti-free speech libs fail to grasp that. Hate speech is still free speech and if you allow your government to ban speech against one thing then you allow them to ban speech against other things.
Click to expand...

So banning hate speech... is in fact banning non-hate speech?
 
Middleground said:
But what if that person was a teacher, and he/she was teaching stuff like the Holocaust didn't exist. How would you deal with this.
Click to expand...

Revisionist history shouldn't be allowed in school no matter who is teaching it, it is not a free speech issue but a issue of an employee failing to do their job right. It would be the equivalent of firing a science teacher for teaching bible classes in public school or a Sunday school teacher in a church for teaching evolution. This is not the same as some wacko going on the street and holding a sign that denied the Holocaust.
 
SE102 said:
So banning hate speech... is in fact banning non-hate speech?
Click to expand...

You basically gave them permission to do if you accept hate speech laws. If the government labels it hate-speech then it is no longer non-hate speech, it doesn't matter if you do not see it as hate speech.
 
Last edited:
jamesrage said:
Do you care if some American video game nerd can beat some Japanese nerd in some sort of video game contest and get a trophy or medal for it, do you care if some American can blow a bugger out of his nose further than some German and get a trophy or medal for it? I could care less if some American in a globalist event can throw a shot put further than someone else or throw a javelin very far.
Click to expand...

I generally do not watch many of the events. However, I am not against the Olympics simply because I get bored of them.
 
Middleground said:
Oh yeah? Regular Americans are not being tapped? That's news to me.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about banning a form of expression. That would NEVER fly in America. It just wouldn't...

Other countries like to think that America isn't liberal enough but we have the closest thing to free speech and expression in the world. There's nothing wrong with being proud of that; just like there's nothing wrong with Canadians being proud of UHC.

And this isn't some anti-Canadian rant, either. I love Canada! They’re our most intimate ally and if there was a war to end all wars, America and Canada would become one nation until the end; that's a fact. We share geography, history, and culture. Hell, I'd die in the defense of the Canadian homeland! True story...:cool:

But banning a sign? Americans would never tolerate it.

:2usflag:
 
Orius said:
Why is this thread becoming an America vs. Canada thing? I posted the article to show how bad the Olympics in general are. Wherever they go, the upper crust gets so anxious to see the dollars flow that they start curtailing rights. It happens everywhere, and it would happen in Chicago too.

People need to stop seeing the Olympics as a good thing. It's not.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to attack Canada. You guys are my favs! I'm just saying this would never fly in an American city, especially an uber-liberal one like Chicago. People LOVE demonstrating and marching and protesting in liberal cities and our Constitution's First Amendment vigorously protects free speech. Banning a sign in Chicago!? The civil disobedience would be epic...
 
SE102 said:
So banning hate speech... is in fact banning non-hate speech?
Click to expand...

Hate is relative, and it's a matter of perspective. I don't, for the record, believe that speech should result in imprisonment.
 
stevenb said:
Who knows, the retardicans started it.. and the libtards are continuing it.

I guess... those that are being warrantless wiretapped are "security threats"... to something or someone.
Click to expand...
This is what I dislike about extremist libertarians. They think by trash talking both sides, and never having had to actually govern anything that they are above it all. Steven if your political beliefs were so superior and popular, maybe you'd have someone in DC.
 
SE102 said:
Well you can really say it all you want, but the minute the neo-nazi rally happens i hope it gets gassed...:)
Click to expand...

Sadly, these views are representative of wide swathes of college campuses all over the land.

Education is indeed in a bad, bad place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom