New law bad sign for liberties

Two things I would like to see.

1. The PM put his money where his mouth is and introduce a bill that would amend, if not eliminate, Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. There is wide-spread support for this, even from the head of the CHRC.

2. The other party leaders supporting the PM. This is a non-partisan issue and we are in danger here of looking like to the world that we do not support free speech.

I'm not sure if I agree or disagree with this, because it's written in some form of code.

Mmmm, looks kinda very similar to what happened in Bejing pre their olympics. Not good.

Screw Gordie's Gestapo. This is a direct challenge to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Removing section 13 of the CHRC won't be that productive. There are many countries that have similar laws. In Germany and France for example there are still strict anti Nazi and anti-hate message laws.

This isn't like an anti Nazi law. This law in BC is saying you can't, in a democracy, make any comment that puts your "elected" government in a negative light. You can't say that you didn't want the Olympics, that you don't want your tax dollars spent on the Olympics, the Olympics will bankrupt the province of British Columbia for a generation. This is nothing more than a government using brown shirt methods against it's own people to accomplish what it desires and screw the people who elected them. I'm glad our Prime Minister has had the balls to stand up and say that this law is sick and bullshit. (Even if he didn't use quite that terminology... )

I agree that these draconian measures, instituted in what certainly appears to be a direct contravention of the Charter by Jim Furlong, Vanoc and Gordon Campbell should be stopped, but in doing so, it also raises a question. Who the fuck gets to say what can and can't be enforced in the Charter?

For example, Gordo the magnificent and his minions can muzzle free speech in BC in what would appear to be a direct contravention of the charter, yet he can't convict a couple of pedophiles living in Bountiful BC because of the same Charter.

Does anyone else here see a pattern here where the Government, especially this Provincial one is picking and choosing for it's own benefit, what it wants to enforce in the charter and letting the rest go because it doesn't provide any economic stimulus for them.

If this is the case the whole charter should be thrown out and we should start again from square one with a replacement that limits or eliminates the "options" governments seem to have about enforcing the charter, while holding the citizens of Canada to a much higher standard when it comes to the same charter.

People in a free society should be allowed to express their opinions. If some people think the olympics are bad they should be able to say that.

All I can think this will do is mobilise diverse groups to act together to fight this.

FREE SPEECH!

Would be better to have him do something about it.. which I doubt.

People have to remember that with freedom comes responsibility. If people think that the Olympics are a waste of money, they should be allowed to say so. Restricting people's rights to say so is wrong and illegal. Resisting those who would silence peaceful opposition is every Canadian's right and responsibility.

However, there are some like a Mr. Hill, a self proclaimed 'native warrior', who are advocating the bombing of BC hydro towers and other violent actions. This is not an acceptable form of protest, as it could cause death and injury to innocent people. This is domestic terrorism and needs to be dealt with as such. Freedom with out limits is anarchy, and that is something no educated, sane or rational individual wants.

That's exactly it Shep.

People should be allowed a voice. But they shouldn't be able to permanently block roads or run on to highways or commit criminal acts with impunity.

Demonstrate against the state or authority but don’t infringe on other citizens rights or put them in jeopardy to make your point. That’s not freedom, it’s anarchy.

I think their worried about the protests disrupting the actual events. and of course, protecting the revenue and reputation of the Olympic logo.

I'm glad Harper said this but it's a meaningless, motherhood issue. Saying some nice platitudes about free speech in Ottawa isn't going to change the opinions or needs of our newly bought Olympic royalty.

I agree but free opinion ends when one incites violence.

For example race hate and jijadists websites and publications.


edit: Violent marches and protests are a no-no in any society.

Removing section 13 of the CHRC won't be that productive. There are many countries that have similar laws. In Germany and France for example there are still strict anti Nazi and anti-hate message laws.

Politically I don't think it could ever be removed. However, it could be amended to prevent the kind of abuse that has been made of the provision. As for France and Germany, I think we have to decide our own laws.