Far left students shuts down Professor from speaking at free speech event in Toronto

[HamburgerBoy]

In no way is the Throne Speech considered a public event. She chose to break the rules. Protesting an event on campus is not against the rules, that is why there was no arrests.

Like I said, you are free to say whatever you want, but others may react to it and express their opinion to you.

Also, freedom of expression in Canada differs from USA's.

I don't understand your point by posting that story then, it seems completely unrelated to these kinds of college "protests".

I realize that hate speech is not allowed in Canada and that's fine, it's your country, but afaik this Peterson guy has never said anything that could be classified as hate speech.

 

[sdifox]

I don't understand your point by posting that story then, it seems completely unrelated to these kinds of college "protests".

I realize that hate speech is not allowed in Canada and that's fine, it's your country, but afaik this Peterson guy has never said anything that could be classified as hate speech.

I guess it was kind of pointless. I was trying to make the point that one may choose to excercise one's freedom of speech anywhere, but don't expect to not be prosecuted by whatever laws or rules in place.

I am not even sure Peterson himself was objecting to the presence of the protesters. I do think one of the protesters at McMaster crossed the line when (he/she/whatever, I don't have that detail) blew an airhorn near the prof's ear. That can cause serious damage and it is overboard.


It was kind of odd that his opponents pulled out.

https://www.google.ca/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4031843

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Peterson continued to engage them for a bit outside for a little bit, which he has done before. He doesn't seem too afraid of criticism. Nothing odd about his opponents dropping out; when an organized group of professional trouble-makers go around sending threatening emails to anyone wanting to engage him, obviously they don't want any part of that. They were right to be concerned about security, which was clearly ineffectual when hundreds were allowed to pour in and violate safety codes and force the event to close. It's just a passive-aggressive way to get the police to shut down speech people don't like.

 

[UglyCasanova]

You want to protect open bigotry and preserve it in society? Please explain its value.

It has no value, the klan has no value, burning flags has no value. They do have a right to exist though. Who gets to decide what has value or not, you really want to go down that road? Start banning bigotry, etc? What if Trump said BLM are racist bigots, should they be outlawed?

 

[Blue_Max]

I realize that hate speech is not allowed in Canada and that's fine, it's your country, but afaik this Peterson guy has never said anything that could be classified as hate speech.

The short version is that he was outspoken against the new Canadian law that punishes people for not using preferred gender pronouns.

That's it. So what makes that "hate speech"? Lefties hate their narratives being challenged.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Lest anyone think that li'l Max actually knows what he's talking about:

Bill C-16
An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code
Sponsor
Jody Wilson-Raybould Liberal

Status
In committee (Senate), as of March 2, 2017

Subscribe to a feed of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-16.

Summary
This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment amends the Canadian Human Rights Act to add gender identity and gender expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination.

The enactment also amends the Criminal Code to extend the protection against hate propaganda set out in that Act to any section of the public that is distinguished by gender identity or expression and to clearly set out that evidence that an offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on gender identity or expression constitutes an aggravating circumstance that a court must take into consideration when it imposes a sentence.

Elsewhere
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, provided by the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Votes

• Oct. 18, 2016 Passed That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

• House debate
• All House mentions

https://openparliament.ca/bills/42-1/C-16/

and background/analysis

Edit to add this quote from the link below:

The federal government is late to this game – most of the provinces and territories already include gender identity and gender expression in their provincial Human Rights Codes.

In 2002 the Northwest Territories were the first government in the Canada to explicitly prohibit discrimination against trans people by including gender identity in their Human Rights Code. In 2012, Manitoba added gender identity to their human rights legislation. In that same year, Ontario and Nova Scotia added both gender identity and gender expression to their human rights laws. Prince Edward Island as well as Newfoundland and Labrador followed suit in 2013. In 2014 Saskatchewan made provisions for gender identity, and in 2015 Alberta joined the club, adding both gender identity and expression to their Human Rights Code.

The other five provinces and territories—British Columbia, Québec, New Brunswick, Nunavut Territory, and the Yukon—have implicit protection, having interpreted their Human Rights Codes as including gender variance under existing prohibited grounds.

Bill –C-16 is just the federal government catching up on long overdue human rights protections for individuals within its fairly limited jurisdiction.

http://sds.utoronto.ca/blog/bill-c-16-no-its-not-about-criminalizing-pronoun-misuse/

 

[Blue_Max]

Thanks for the reminder... this is MORE than just pronouns. If an obvious man in a dress demands a job in a female-only establishment the bill would make not hiring "shim" discrimination - and a punishable act.

Etc.

You really don't think Progressives aren't going to abuse this willy-nilly? Protection my arse, this is all about leverage for people to be as anti-establishment as possible.

Our great Liberal progressive leader.

 

[justoh]

Why is it a dumb question? I asked your opinion on free speech.

Because you've already seen the video and already know their position?

 

[Victorian Gray]

One can't help but wonder how you manage to find the floor each day when you wake up.

Thanks for the reminder... this is MORE than just pronouns. If an obvious man in a dress demands a job in a female-only establishment the bill would make not hiring "shim" discrimination - and a punishable act.

Etc.

You really don't think Progressives aren't going to abuse this willy-nilly? Protection my arse, this is all about leverage for people to be as anti-establishment as possible.

Our great Liberal progressive leader.

 

[agent00f]

Ok, as long as you can admit that you believe in selective protection of speech according to how much you like it.

All intelligent rule making by definition requires good judgment, which is why it's standard practice in all modern western liberal society.

 

[sdifox]

Thanks for the reminder... this is MORE than just pronouns. If an obvious man in a dress demands a job in a female-only establishment the bill would make not hiring "shim" discrimination - and a punishable act.

Etc.

You really don't think Progressives aren't going to abuse this willy-nilly? Protection my arse, this is all about leverage for people to be as anti-establishment as possible.

Our great Liberal progressive leader.

So you are just lamenting the fact that one more minority group will be protected from your bigotry. You are not in jail so your gaybashing, islamaphobic ways are still allowed it seems. So do the same to the trans people, since all C-16 does is extend the same protection.

 

[jackstar7]

It has no value, the klan has no value, burning flags has no value. They do have a right to exist though. Who gets to decide what has value or not, you really want to go down that road? Start banning bigotry, etc? What if Trump said BLM are racist bigots, should they be outlawed?

Sounds like we agree (except on flag burning) and you want to reframe me as an enemy to have your proxy war for freedom-loving.

So, as stated, you are dumb.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Sounds like we agree (except on flag burning) and you want to reframe me as an enemy to have your proxy war for freedom-loving.

So, as stated, you are dumb.

If you say so. Thanks for the constant calling me dumb though, much appreciated and speaks highly of you.

 

[jackstar7]

If you say so. Thanks for the constant calling me dumb though, much appreciated and speaks highly of you.

When you provide evidence of being dumb, it's not incorrect to call you out on it.

Hell, you should welcome it and try not to be dumb next time.

Feedback has value, dummy.

 

[UglyCasanova]

When you provide evidence of being dumb, it's not incorrect to call you out on it.

Hell, you should welcome it and try not to be dumb next time.

Feedback has value, dummy.

You've yet to actually respond to the question, I doubt you ever will, we'll leave it at that. Much easier to criticize people and call them dumb rather than actually engage in discussion, especially when you have nothing of substance to actually say..

 

[jackstar7]

You've yet to actually respond to the question, I doubt you ever will, we'll leave it at that. Much easier to criticize people and call them dumb rather than actually engage in discussion, especially when you have nothing of substance to actually say..

Oh, did you miss my response? Shame, dummy. Shame.

 

[BurnItDwn]

I like how "center left" is being called "far left" ... lol
silly children