In Canada some groups are more equal than others

[Berzerker]

Asher -

Obiwan's story is from the perspective of someone very religious and very devout in his pro-life beliefs, don't believe he's telling you the unbiased story of what happened.

Plus intent is also a matter: In the "holocaust" example, they are historical records with historical value. Showing dead fetuses as part of a pro-life booth is simply bad taste, vulgar, and purely political.

Hmm... you were talking about bias?

Tingkai -

Is proof of malicious intent required under US libel law? It's not required in Canada.

I believe it is wrt slander and I'm not really sure how slander is different than libel. Malice has to be shown and that makes it much more difficult, so much so libel/slander cases are rather rare in the US. The last one to make headlines was Oprah's show indicting beef and she was sued by the cattle/beef assoc...she won her case down in Texas.

The Canadian law merely looks at whether it is reasonable to conclude that a statement might lower a person's standing within a community. There is no requirement to prove that specific damage has occurred.

Yikes, that standard is a hazard to free speech IMO. Just saying someone is a homosexual could do that within many communities.

So if someone says John is a paedaphile, he does not have to prove that this has damaged his reputation.

I'd agree with that since the damage is self-evident, most libel cases are brought for economic damage like the Oprah suit. But here malice would have to be a factor so that honest mistakes can be made without lawsuits being filed and won.

But libel laws do not cover a case where groups are named instead of individuals, even though saying "homosexuals are all paedaphiles" can be just as damaging as saying "John is a paedaphile." That's why we need laws against hate speech.

If reason is the standard, is it reasonable to reach such a conclusion about all homosexuals? You see, comments (including jokes) about the Catholic Church and pedophilism could be construed as "hate" speech based on such generalisations. That's the problem with expanding libel laws protecting individuals to "hate crime" laws protecting groups since the use of generalisations is so common.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Agathon


This is flagrant bull****. From this and your other comments I am convinced you don't, and have never, attended a university, or if you did, you have had your head inserted into your backside for the entire time.

Everyone knows that student unions are almost all run by what most people call "left leaning" groups. I have attended and taught at a couple of universities for over a decade now and only once has there been a right wing student union executive (and that was a first in NZ - it didn't last long: they were so spectacularly incompetent they got thrown out).

Those who end up getting voted in (usually with a pathetically low turnout) are almost always malcontents whose sole aim is to get everyone else at the university to submit to their political will. While these people will pay lip service to those with opposing views, in practice they will do all that is within their power to suppress them.

If you attended a university you would know that there are four things which no one may even be mildly critical of for any reason without provoking a storm of hate and reprisals. These are: blacks; homosexuals; women/the feminist movement; and Jews.

These are protected species on campus (although perversely Israel bashing is permitted and even encouraged in some quarters). It doesn't matter what you actually did or what you actually said, if you are labelled an enemy by these people, they will do their best to make your life a misery. I've seen it happen numerous times.

It is wrong and Obi-wan and his friends are from the sound of it probably the objects of wrongful discrimination, but there isn't much one can do about it, short of abolishing the student union and student politics - since whoever's on top will tend to behave badly. I actually favour this last option, since I can't remember anything good coming out of student politics that wasn't adequately encouraged by some other organisation.

Thanks for reminding us of the real world in most University campuses. I couldn't agree more. They opposed the anti-abortion posters because they oppose the accepted bias firmly entrenched on campus.

[Lincoln]

The Canadian law merely looks at whether it is reasonable to conclude that a statement might lower a person's standing within a community. There is no requirement to prove that specific damage has occurred.

No wonder the United States and Canada went their seperate ways. What if the guy deserves to have his standing in the community lowered? Should we still retend that he is an upstanding individual so we don't have to go to jail for teling the truth?

[Ben Kenobi]

VOTING RECORDS ON BILL C-250 (from Hansard)


YEAS

Members

Adams
Alcock
Asselin
Augustine
Bachand (Saint-Jean)
Bachand (Richmond--Arthabaska)
Bagnell
Barnes (London West)
Barrette
Bélanger
Bennett
Bergeron
Bigras
Binet
Blaikie
Blondin-Andrew
Bonwick
Borotsik
Boudria
Bourgeois
Bradshaw
Brison
Brown
Bulte
Byrne
Caccia
Caplan
Cardin
Carignan
Carroll
Catterall
Cauchon
Charbonneau
Clark
Coderre
Collenette
Comartin
Crête
Cullen
Cuzner
Dalphond-Guiral
Davies
Desjarlais
DeVillers
Dion
Dromisky
Drouin
Duceppe
Easter
Eggleton
Eyking
Finlay
Folco
Fontana
Frulla
Fry
Gagnon (Champlain)
Gagnon (Lac-Saint-Jean—Saguenay)
Gagnon (Québec)
Gauthier
Girard-Bujold
Godfrey
Godin
Graham
Grose
Guarnieri
Guay
Guimond
Harvard
Harvey
Herron
Ianno
Jennings
Jobin
Jordan
Keddy (South Shore)
Keyes
Kilgour (Edmonton Southeast)
Knutson
Kraft Sloan
Laframboise
Lanctôt
LeBlanc
Lee
Lill
Lincoln
Loubier
MacKay (Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough)
Macklin
Mahoney
Maloney
Marceau
Martin (Winnipeg Centre)
Martin (LaSalle--Émard)
Masse
McCallum
McDonough
McLellan
Ménard
Minna
Mitchell
Murphy
Nault
Neville
Normand
Nystrom
Paquette
Paradis
Parrish
Patry
Peterson
Phinney
Picard (Drummond)
Plamondon
Price
Proctor
Proulx
Redman
Regan
Robillard
Robinson
Rocheleau
Rock
Roy
Saada
Sauvageau
Scott
Sgro
Shepherd
Simard
St-Jacques
St. Denis
Stewart
Stoffer
Telegdi
Thibault (West Nova)
Thibeault (Saint-Lambert)
Tremblay
Vanclief
Wasylycia-Leis
Whelan

Total: -- 141



NAYS

Members

Abbott
Ablonczy
Anders
Anderson (Cypress Hills—Grasslands)
Assadourian
Bailey
Barnes (Gander—Grand Falls)
Bélair
Bellemare
Benoit
Bertrand
Bonin
Breitkreuz
Bryden
Burton
Cadman
Calder
Cannis
Casey
Casson
Chamberlain
Chatters
Cummins
Day
Doyle
Duncan
Efford
Elley
Epp
Fitzpatrick
Forseth
Gallant
Goldring
Gouk
Grewal
Grey
Hanger
Harper
Harris
Hill (Macleod)
Hill (Prince George--Peace River)
Hilstrom
Hinton
Hubbard
Jackson
Jaffer
Johnston
Karetak-Lindell
Karygiannis
Kenney (Calgary Southeast)
Lastewka
Longfield
Lunn (Saanich—Gulf Islands)
Lunney (Nanaimo—Alberni)
Malhi
Mark
Marleau
Martin (Esquimalt--Juan de Fuca)
Mayfield
McCormick
McGuire
McKay (Scarborough East)
McNally
McTeague
Meredith
Merrifield
Mills (Red Deer)
O'Brien (London--Fanshawe)
O'Reilly
Obhrai
Pacetti
Pallister
Penson
Peric
Peschisolido
Pickard (Chatham--Kent Essex)
Pillitteri
Rajotte
Reed (Halton)
Reid (Lanark—Carleton)
Reynolds
Ritz
Savoy
Schellenberger
Schmidt
Serré
Skelton
Solberg
Sorenson
Speller
Spencer
St-Julien
Steckle
Stinson
Strahl
Szabo
Thompson (New Brunswick Southwest)
Thompson (Wild Rose)
Toews
Tonks
Ur
Valeri
Vellacott
Volpe
Wappel
Wayne
White (Langley--Abbotsford)
White (North Vancouver)
Williams
Yelich

[Ben Kenobi]

Asher:

First off, I was there, I'm considered a primary source.

It's one thing to provide the pictures for people who are willing to see them, it's another thing to force them down other people's throats.

Gee. Whenever we are on campus we have 'warning signs' in front of our display that warn people about graphic pictures in front. If they choose to walk that way, they will see the pictures.

Plus intent is also a matter: In the "holocaust" example, they are historical records with historical value. Showing dead fetuses as part of a pro-life booth is simply bad taste, vulgar, and purely political.

Intent? What if I said my intent was to provide a voice for those who cannot speak for themselves?

Similarly, I'd hope a "stool appreciation club" with graphic pictures involving human stool would be forced to remove their pictures upon several complaints as well.

Done, though they were allowed to keep their pictures? You ever hear of the 'Piss Christ' display that did precisely that? They claimed to be 'artistic'.

"Free speech" has a limit within decency laws.

If 'decency' is the standard, why then are equally gross holocaust pictures permitted?

Oh, and BTW, you better get ready for these pictures to come on your campus. The prolife club in Calgary is just getting warmed up.

I bet they'll get a better response out there than on the 'Left' coast.

It's a different situation entirely:
one is during the holocust memorial week, one is during CLUB WEEK.

Awesome! You'd let us have a Prolife week on campus.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Lincoln


No wonder the United States and Canada went their seperate ways. What if the guy deserves to have his standing in the community lowered? Should we still retend that he is an upstanding individual so we don't have to go to jail for teling the truth?

Truth is a defence against libel in Canada and the United States.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Asher:

First off, I was there, I'm considered a primary source.

Yes, a primary source with an agenda.

If 'decency' is the standard, why then are equally gross holocaust pictures permitted?

Did you register a complaint with the SU as several people did for your display?

Oh, and BTW, you better get ready for these pictures to come on your campus. The prolife club in Calgary is just getting warmed up.

I bet they'll get a better response out there than on the 'Left' coast.

I'd doubt it, Calgary may be right-wing but not religiously so. You need to go out to rural Alberta to find the religious right-wingers.

Not to mention that my university simply doesn't permit that kind of display on campus. In fact there was a recent issue about even allowing topless "artwork" in the halls, and they were forced to take them down.

Awesome! You'd let us have a Prolife week on campus.

Hey, why not. We've got a gay week, why not a pro-life week?

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
If 'decency' is the standard, why then are equally gross holocaust pictures permitted?

How about posting your abortion pic so we can judge.

[chequita guevara]

Uh, no.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It is wrong and Obi-wan and his friends are from the sound of it probably the objects of wrongful discrimination, but there isn't much one can do about it, short of abolishing the student union and student politics - since whoever's on top will tend to behave badly. I actually favour this last option, since I can't remember anything good coming out of student politics that wasn't adequately encouraged by some other organisation.

I agree. Student politics is basically a farce and popularity contest. Nothing good really comes out of it.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by notyoueither


When fat people, or WASP men, become the targets of violence based on hatred to any significant degree, then they too could come under the protection of our anti-hate legislation.

Don't laugh! The US Bureau of Justice does include a category for hate crimes against white men not related to sexual orientation. IIRC it is one of the larger categories of violent hate crimes. In the United States evidently everyone is covered against hate crimes, even WASPS. The moral of that is that in the US don't shout a racial, religious, or sexual slur before you assault or murder someone.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Tingkai


Truth is a defence against libel in Canada and the United States.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Lincoln

Thanks for clearing that up.

It would be insane if it weren't.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Of course ignore the other cites listed in the ad .

to you as well. Why don't you actually read the cites in their contexts? Romans also says that homosexuals are worthy of death, Leviticus 18 says that they shall be "vomited out," of the land, and 1 Corinthians says they'll go to hell.

Keep in mind one of the primary targets of this law is people like Fred Phelps--people who really do openly call for killing homosexuals.

If I saw the Klan or a Nazi group posting a picture of a Star of David with a slash through it, the first thing I think of is that they want to kill Jews. Considering the past history, it's a reasonable assumption.

The same holds true for fanatical religious fundamentalists posting images of gays with slashes through them.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Romans also says that homosexuals are worthy of death, Leviticus 18 says that they shall be "vomited out," of the land, and 1 Corinthians says they'll go to hell.

So going to Hell and being 'vomited out' of the land means commit genocide against them?

Yeah..