Canada's Star Chambers

[Ben Kenobi]

Again, you are completely confused.

Ontario ruled it had no jurisdiction.
It is true that British Columbia's tribunal has not issued a ruling.

The federal complaint (this would be "Canada's" as referenced in your title) has been completely dismissed, as of June 26, 2008.

Please stop confusing other people because you've no idea what you're talking about.

Thank you. The case proceeds, the only distinction you are making is one of jurisdiction, not exoneration.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris


No, they've claimed that there wouldn't be any additional tax on gasoline because it's already taxed within their target range of $40-80 per ton of CO2.

Yes, but they are adding an additional tax of gasoline by adding additional taxes to the components of gasoline. Figure out how transitivity works, thanks.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I'll start off with Capilano College having a christian student group disbanded by the college. They filed and I believe their complaint has been dismissed.

Link? And many cases have been dismissed, this means nothing.

Are you referring to this? If so, looks like what we call a "backfire":

http://bluewavecanada.blogspot.com/2008/05/human-rights-complaint-forces-college.html

Thursday, May 15, 2008
Human Rights Complaint Forces College to Permit Pro-Life Group Official Club Status

I have never been so happy to have been so wrong. When I learned that the Capilano College Heartbeat Club filed a human rights complaint because it was denied club status at Capilano College (and thus discriminated against its religious beliefs) I thought to myself: what a dumb move. I expected the Club to be beaten back, because the HRC's are bastions of political correctness.

But it looks like that that move proved fruitful, as the Capilano College Student Union has agreed to allow the club to have official status.

Good for you.

I wonder if this will open the floodgates for other human rights complaints from other college pro-life groups. That remains to be seen.

BTW, you also lied again. It wasn't a "Christian group", it was a heavyhanded political action pro-life group, which is not the same thing.

And I thought you made the complaint that the Tribunal has a 100% conviction rate? And here you are citing one that the tribunal rejected?

You can't even keep all of your lies straight.

The Tribunal did dismiss this complaint, this is true, but this is the grounds:

The Tribunal ruled that since the pro-life position is not specifically a religious one, a complaint claiming discrimination based on religious beliefs would fail.

Which is undeniably true. You don't have to be Christian to be Pro-Life. If this was a "Christian Student Fellowship" club that was prevented, I've no doubt they would've won the tribunal.

There's further issues like it wasn't the College that prevented the club, it was the Student's Union.

[Elok]

Ngh, I wish people would stop making the pro-life movement into a religious crusade. We'll never win if we keep looking like we're trying to impose our religious beliefs on the general population...

[Ben Kenobi]

Are you referring to this? If so, looks like what we call a "backfire":

http://bluewavecanada.blogspot.com/...es-college.html

Funny how fast you are to find a link that you think will embarass me.

I have never been so happy to have been so wrong. When I learned that the Capilano College Heartbeat Club filed a human rights complaint because it was denied club status at Capilano College (and thus discriminated against its religious beliefs) I thought to myself: what a dumb move. I expected the Club to be beaten back, because the HRC's are bastions of political correctness.

But it looks like that that move proved fruitful, as the Capilano College Student Union has agreed to allow the club to have official status.

Good for you.

I wonder if this will open the floodgates for other human rights complaints from other college pro-life groups. That remains to be seen.

Thanks Asher.

BTW, you also lied again. It wasn't a "Christian group", it was a heavyhanded political action pro-life group, which is not the same thing.

How so? The club filed for recognition based on their religious rights.

Seem to me you are the one who has blinders on.

The Tribunal did dismiss this complaint, this is true, but this is the grounds:

Isn't that what I said? I said the tribunal dismissed the complaint. The issue here was that they never prosecute complaints by Christians, which you've confirmed here.

Which is undeniably true. You don't have to be Christian to be Pro-Life. If this was a "Christian Student Fellowship" club that was prevented, I've no doubt they would've won the tribunal.

Ahh, ok.

Now, my question for you, is why should Cap College be able to ban a group, that as you said is prolife. Surely you can see that Cap College was wrong to ban them?

There's further issues like it wasn't the College that prevented the club, it was the Student's Union.

And? What difference does it make? They were de-listed as a club simply because the student union wishes to censor them. You've agreed here that they have a case here.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
How so? The club filed for recognition based on their religious rights.

Seem to me you are the one who has blinders on.

Er, Ben, it was dismissed because their claim that it was a religious group was invalid. You can keep saying it was a Christian group if you want, but it's clearly a Pro-Life group which is not necessarily a Christian group.

Ahh, ok.

Now, my question for you, is why should Cap College be able to ban a group, that as you said is prolife. Surely you can see that Cap College was wrong to ban them?

The college didn't ban, the students union did. They're completely different entities and you'd do well to establish the basic facts before speaking for once.

And I've no problem with banning political activism groups on campuses as part of a university-sanctioned group. Particularly the Pro-Life groups whose only strategy is to plaster supersized posters of aborted fetuses around the cafeteria. They can burn in hell, for all I care.

[Ben Kenobi]

The college didn't ban, the students union did. They're completely different entities and you'd do well to establish the basic facts before speaking for once.

So you feel I was entirely unaware of the case and the circumstances surrounding the case?

And I've no problem with banning political activism groups on campuses as part of a university-sanctioned group.

Glad to know you are in favour of censorship. I'll remember that whenever the pride parade comes to town.

Thanks asher for showing me how tolerant you are again of differing viewpoints.

Nevermind the fact that the Cap college students all have to pay into their student union. I daresay if they are paying for the bills of the union, they should be able to make use of the facilities provided to all the students, rather then being discriminated against.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Glad to know you are in favour of censorship. I'll remember that whenever the pride parade comes to town.

There are limits to freedom of speech. Note that the pride parade can't march daily through the food court of your university, either.

I don't think photographs of gay sex should be posted all around campus, and the same is true with abortion photos.

The entire premise behind the "pro-life" photos these douchebags post around campus is to shock and deeply offend people, in settings where they do not expect this (eg, while eating lunch in a public setting on a public university campus).

[Asher]

BEN. YOU HAVE BEEN OWNED.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=873681

Maclean's wins 'hate speech' human rights challenge in B.C.

Joseph Brean, National Post Published: Friday, October 10, 2008

The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal ruled today that a controversial article about Islam in Maclean's magazine did not violate the province's hate speech law.

In acquitting the magazine, the Tribunal ruled that the article, an excerpt from Mark Steyn's book America Alone in which he describes the demographic and ideological dangers posed by a growing Muslim population in the West, was not likely to expose Muslims to hatred or contempt.

The Canadian Islamic Congress, which brought the complaint, has previously failed in two other jurisdictions: Ontario, which said it did not have jurisdiction over printed material, and federally, where the complaint was rejected as without merit.

More to come.

I told you your "100% conviction rate", "top secret" court **** was bull****. Just like your claim that someone bet you to get this thread up to 100 posts.

/me flex.

[Boris Godunov]

Ok, well I think about 99.9% of the world's population would laugh at the idea that Canada was remotely totalitatian anyway. So crowing about your victory is a bit like a Mensa member doing a victory dance after beating a kindergartener at chess.

[Asher]

It's mostly just to catch Ben in his lies. It's so easy and happens so often, but it's always fun.

[Arrian]

[chequita guevara]

This thread is a lot less frustrating to read since I put BK on ignore.

[Ben Kenobi]

And it only took 3 months.

Yay democracy!

[Ben Kenobi]

So crowing about your victory is a bit like a Mensa member doing a victory dance after beating a kindergartener at chess

What did we ever do without you Boris?

Asher, now that's a high class insult. You'd be well off to observe and learn.