Home (Post) Mobile Authors Say Anything Register Login

Saturday, June 28, 2008

Free Speech On Canada Off Life Support

Speech Warriors expressed shock and the whole world sighed in relief as the Canadian Human Rights Commission delivered its predictable verdict in the Macleans case this week.

In its ruling, posted on Maclean’s website, the commission acknowledges “the writing is polemical, colourful and emphatic, and was obviously calculated to excite discussion and even offend certain readers, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.”

But the commission also says that, overall, “the views expressed in the Steyn article, when considered as a whole and in context, are not of an extreme nature, as defined by the Supreme Court.”

While doubtless of little solace to Mr. Steyn and a group of Canadian writers seeking to wring every last drop of martyrdom from the affair, the reasonable ruling demonstrates that, once again, the system works if you let it.

Well done CHRC.

Comments

It’s still conditional speech, not free speech.  I don’t know that facing prosecution for disseminating ideas is any sort of “martyrdom”, either.
I have yet to see any factual refutation of anything that Steyn wrote.


If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

robert108 on June 28, 2008 at 07:46 pm
Rob
Rob
17893 comments
Send a private message

Oh come off it Mike.  That these commissions even exist shows there’s a problem.  Steyn et. al. weren’t just looking for martydom, jackass.  They were pointing out very real problems with freedom of speech in your country.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on June 28, 2008 at 07:52 pm

Sure, free speech is off of life support, but only if one doesn’t cross the undefined “extreme nature” threshold.

In reality, simply writing an opinion that a protected group doesn’t like is enough to land one with enormous legal bills to defend what is, essentially, free speech.

So, nice try but no cigar, Mike.

In the end, we’ll never know if these are your real opinions, since you’re a Canadian who doesn’t have free speech. Your system is broken.

likwidshoe on June 28, 2008 at 07:57 pm

To be truthful, it wouldn’t bother me too much if the Commissions didn’t handle cases like this as I prefer obnoxious and hateful opinions be confronted in wide open debate rather than a quasi judicial setting. That said, nobody with half a brain expected Macleans magazine to lose the case and the posturing of some writers and bloggers who suggested that free speech in Canada was under assault really was just that...posturing.

It’s true that speech isn’t as free in Canada as it is in America but most Canadians don’t lose much sleep over it. I’m sympathetic to the view that any restriction on speech is too much but in practical terms Canadians feel well served in this area.


"The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced if the nation doesn’t want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”
Cicero, 55 BC

MikeAdamson on June 29, 2008 at 01:06 pm

...but in practical terms Canadians
feel well served in this area.

Well, as long as they “feel” that way…


If life doesn’t begin at conception, why do they call it birth control?

robert108 on June 29, 2008 at 02:14 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses. Confirm your email address here.