Remember the Intoonfadah? When a Danish newspaper's publishing of cartoons mocking Muhammad led to a not-so-spontaneous display of cartoon violence and western journalistic cowardice? Though a very precious few U.S. publications (including this here blog) dared to run so much as an excerpt from the deadly caricatures, Canada's redoubtable conservative mag the Western Standard stepped right up. As a result, appallingly, former Standard publisher Ezra Levant has been hauled into court on charges abusing the human rights of Muslims.
Seriously? For just reprinting the cartoons? There's a difference between hateful degradation and just free speech, and apparently the Alberta Human Rights Commission can't figure it out. This better be dismissed.
I've never heard of this guy or his story. I read two dailies in Toronto and it wasn't news. From the links that you've posted he just seems like a jerk out to cause trouble. I don't agree with the human rights complaint but when the guy is publishing stuff for the only purpose of pissing off a segment of society there should be some recourse. It is designed to be hurtful.
I'm not exactly sure how I feel about this. Muslim reaction to the cartoons and any caricature of Muhammed is unreasonable. I'm all for free speech and in Canada you should be allowed to draw Muhammed if it is fair comment. At the same time if you know someone or a segment of society is particularly touchy about a issue you shouldn't do it just to piss them off. That's hateful. The only parallel that quickly comes to mind is flag burning. It can be a meaningful protest but if the flag is being desecrated just for the purpose of pissing off Americans or servicemen then it crosses the line. In fact didn't an anti-desecration law come very close to being constitutionalized?
Mookie4ever wrote:The only parallel that quickly comes to mind is flag burning. It can be a meaningful protest but if the flag is being desecrated just for the purpose of pissing off Americans or servicemen then it crosses the line. In fact didn't an anti-desecration law come very close to being constitutionalized?
I'm pretty sure that the anti-desecration laws were deemed unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court and then the proposal for an amendment failed.
Maine has a good swing for a pitcher but on anything that moves, he has no chance. And if it's a fastball, it has to be up in the zone. Basically, the pitcher has to hit his bat. - Mike Pelfrey
My thoughts as well, and this is exactly why this is such an important issue. Free speech exists for everybody and it needs to be fervently supported, especially in the case of doofuses (doofi?). To not do so marginalizes the ultimate importance of free speech and implies that it is permissable to not stick up for universal civil rights when it is for people who you find objectionable. Universal rights should be upheld for everyone, lest ye one day become objectionable to someone else.
I applaud this guy for purposely testing the system to show how weak it is and the fixing it needs.
Mookie4ever wrote:The only parallel that quickly comes to mind is flag burning. It can be a meaningful protest but if the flag is being desecrated just for the purpose of pissing off Americans or servicemen then it crosses the line. In fact didn't an anti-desecration law come very close to being constitutionalized?
I'm pretty sure that the anti-desecration laws were deemed unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court and then the proposal for an amendment failed.
Mookie4ever wrote:The only parallel that quickly comes to mind is flag burning. It can be a meaningful protest but if the flag is being desecrated just for the purpose of pissing off Americans or servicemen then it crosses the line. In fact didn't an anti-desecration law come very close to being constitutionalized?
I'm pretty sure that the anti-desecration laws were deemed unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court and then the proposal for an amendment failed.
Yeah, that's why I said "come very close".
I guess I was looking at it with a different interpretation of close.
Bottom line for me is the the freedom of expression was upheld even when it came to something as emotionally charged as the burning of the flag. I would imagine that the Canadian judicial system comes to a similar determination.
Maine has a good swing for a pitcher but on anything that moves, he has no chance. And if it's a fastball, it has to be up in the zone. Basically, the pitcher has to hit his bat. - Mike Pelfrey
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by RugbyD » Sun Jan 13, 2008 10:42 pm 
