| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
 BlawBlaw
Joined: 30 Jan 2006 Total posts: 6604 Location: Toronto, ON Age: 43 Gender: Male
|
 Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 4:21 pm Post subject: 100% Conviction..unless Christians complain! |
 |
|
We have heard a lot about human rights commissions and their 100% conviction rate regarding allegations of hate speech. However, I think that the figure originally was in reference to the Canadian Human Rights Commission. The various provincial commissions may or pay not have a perfect record, but one in particular does not.
Ezra Levant is currently being investigated by the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (although why they muck about with citizenship when it is a federal matter, I am not so sure). A commission panel held a hearing in 2003 and decided that it was not a case of hate speech.
http://www.albertahumanrights.ab.ca/legislation/Panel_Decisions/panel_decisJohnson.asp
Now, before you go and read the entire decision, if you are inclined to do so at all, think about your immediate reaction to the following:
| Quote: | You are the one we despise
Day in day out your words compromise lies
I will love watching you die
Soon it will be and by your own demise
Buried in hypocrisy
Lacerate your faith in God
Morally diseased
On the cross of Calvary your body bashed defeated stabbed
Blessing as you hate
Loyal to your enemies
Monetary faith
As him you will pay for the lies of your prophecy
Satan wants you dead
Kill the Christian, kill the Christian
Kill the Christian, kill the Christian
Kill the Christian, kill the Christian, kill the Christian
Armies of darkness unite
Destroy their temples and churches with fire
Where in this world will you hide
Sentenced to death, the anointment of Christ
In due time your path leads to me
Put you out of your misery
The death of prediction
Kill the Christian
Kill the Christian, dead! |
Rejigger the lyrics of this heavy metal song to reference Jews or Mulsims or Blacks or whathaveyou, and what is anyone's eyeball guestimation of the outcome of such a hearing?
But no, the band, it's record producer, distributor and retailer all got a walk after a Christian man complained.
Unusually, the hearing was heard by a 3-member panel and they spilt 2-1, not on the question of whether there was a violation of the hate speech law, but rather for the reason why it did not.
The majority made some of the following comments:
| Quote: | | This panel finds that, while the content and tone of the communications appear on the face of them to be discriminatory, there is very little vulnerability of the target group. |
The target group is Christians, ans what they are basically saying is that because Christians are "Da Man" and control everything, that they can't be discriminated against. Poor little gays or Muslims are "vulnerable" so different rules apply. However, all you Christians: just suck it up!
| Quote: | | The expressions used do not reinforce existing stereotypes, nor do the messages appeal to well-publicized issues. |
So what? Are they saying that it's ok to call for the death of Christians, unless you give a reason for it? "Kill all the Christians because......" would cross the line?
| Quote: | | More importantly, however, the medium used to convey the message is extremely suspect, lacks credibility and has a small circulation. |
So cliquish crackpots are immune to regulation under human rights laws?
| Quote: | | The context of the publication is not presented as a debate or any purportedly authoritative analysis . . . |
As if a bunch of cartoons are, or that "kill, kill, kill the Muslims" would not attract liability because it was simply an irrational chant?
| Quote: | | . . .and the target group is not vulnerable as, in order for the group to receive the message, the purchase of these would be by an extremely limited audience and only an audience seeking to receive messages such as those conveyed. |
Not too many Christians will be buying satanic death metal music CDs, but then again, what are gays and Jews doing perusing Nazi web sites other than to troll for complaints? The panel members confuse the "target group" of the media itself and the "target group" of possible contempt or hatred. Nazi propaganda is still illegal even if it was only circulated among Nazis; it is only a practical, evidentiary consideration that someone who finds it offensive would have to view the material and make a complaint.
| Quote: | | The fact that in the case of “Bloody Kisses” the artist himself does not expect to be taken seriously and communicates this willingly to the public, underscores that the content of the communication is not to be taken seriously. |
And what does that have to do with whether anyone does take it seriously? I guess this is where more of the thought crime aspect comes in, even though technically intent and truth are irrelevant.
The third panel member made the mistake of emphasizing the lengths to which someone would have to go to in order to actually hear the music. Again, that is not the point: as a matter of law what is wrong with hate speech is not simply that it offends someone, but that it will be communicated to others who may agree with it, and they in turn might act contemptuously.
Overall, this gives an example of how different groups have to play be different rules. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sponsor
|
Use PayPal to make regular monthly $20 donations to the free speech cause - quit any time! Or make a one time donation!
|
 |
 Edward Kennedy
Joined: 14 Apr 2005 Total posts: 16407 Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| As I said, HRC members/employees/investigators are hypocrits and trash, not worth a bucket of cold piss and the worst miscreant would have enough class to not want to piss on the best part of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| TomFoolery Joined: 18 Dec 2005 Total posts: 5870
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And yet the aforementioned lyrics appear to break federal criminal law.
So, Human Rights Laws trump federal criminal law, except when they don't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| thinkright Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Can we not see the truth of scripture in this? Why is it that the name of Christ is so hated? Why is it that these laws do not provide the protection to Christians, beyond any reasonable logic by those who made the rules (human rights etc), as they do to every other religion at emnity with christianity? Is it possible that a larger, spiritual battle is at work here? The Bible predicted this would happen and further, it will get worse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter O'Donnell
Joined: 10 Mar 2005 Total posts: 9071 Location: BC Age: 61 Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Conservatives in general should not reinforce the legitimacy of human rights tribunals by even considering taking cases before them.
If there is really any case of dangerous actions taken towards Christians, this should be handled through the ordinary legal processes and the established courts.
I don't consider these lyrics to be dangerous, they are perhaps pathetic, but not dangerous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Mark Fournier Member
Joined: 06 Jan 2001 Total posts: 15602 Location: Kingston, ON Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Where was the CHRC when radical feminists desecrated a Catholic Church in Montreal with used sanitary napkins? That was a blatantly obvious hate crime but the CHRC was nowhere to be seen.
The CHRC hasn't only been deciding what is a hate crime, they have also been deciding who gets to break the CHRC's own hate crimes definitions, with impunity. This is an incredibly dangerous combination and we shouldn't be surprised that it has led us to where we are today.
It was inevitable that we would arrive here.
_________________
"If it takes force to impose your ideas on your fellow man, there is something wrong with your ideas. If you are willing to use force to impose your ideas on your fellow man, there is something wrong with you." - Entropy Squared |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BlawBlaw
Joined: 30 Jan 2006 Total posts: 6604 Location: Toronto, ON Age: 43 Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter O'Donnell wrote: | Conservatives in general should not reinforce the legitimacy of human rights tribunals by even considering taking cases before them.
If there is really any case of dangerous actions taken towards Christians, this should be handled through the ordinary legal processes and the established courts.
I don't consider these lyrics to be dangerous, they are perhaps pathetic, but not dangerous. |
I consider it a sort of reverse-civil-disobedience. With civil disobedience propery, one knowlingly breaks the law in order to draw the harshest penalty to illustrate the unjust, immoral, and downright stupidity of the law in question. Flooding the system with complaints would accomplish the same thing. Repeated dismissals of complaints by Christians et al would reveal the political bias that we are pretty sure is there. Repeated convictions would cause Muslims and others to reconsider the efficacy of the tribunals. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| cinyc Location: New York Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Let me see if I get this straight:
A poster's intent in posting is irrelevant unless it's relevant. What's supposedly matters is if the post is "likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt", and it doesn't matter if no one has actually been so exposed. Unless you're a Christian, then it doesn't matter even IF you've been so exposed - you lose. And if you're found "guilty" by the CHRT - you've lost your right to complain to the CHRC, even if others may be so exposed.
In other words, all animals are equal to these HRCs. But some animals are more equal than others.
As an American, I know little about Canadian constitutional law. How does this HRC system pass constitutional muster? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tothechase
Joined: 14 Jun 2006 Total posts: 1692 Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
good post !
what amazes me is the denial that there freedom and empowerment to do such things and have these attitudes all take place in Judeo/Christian countries.
In communist countries would even the slightest sideways glance be tolerated.
etc.etc.
-------------
its is getting difficult to avoid this--- yes thinkright, as soon as governments, empowered by the people, started avoiding Christianity and promoting immorality (looking the other way counts) i turned the corner and am thinking this way as well.
_________________
http://www.jesusclips.com/view_video.php?viewkey=7c98c50f52ca1b52d373
Ephesians 2 (KJV)
8- For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9- Not of works, lest any man should boast.
James 2 (NIV)
18- But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds."
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.
19- You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darski
Joined: 20 Jul 2007 Total posts: 2685 Gender: Female
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cinyc wrote: |
As an American, I know little about Canadian constitutional law. How does this HRC system pass constitutional muster? |
_________________
My Canada does not include Quebec bring on the vote |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Edward Kennedy
Joined: 14 Apr 2005 Total posts: 16407 Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So does all this mean that since the HRC's do not uphold any law but their own bigotted and warped lieberalism, that I can slap the shite out of any of these idiots who tries to harass me? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T.G.
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 Total posts: 3187 Location: Ontario Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And I would say this current movie twists reality to expose Christians to hatred and contempt. Will there be a human rights action? Imagine if something similar had been produced about homosexuals.
http://torontosun.com/Entertainment/Movies/2008/01/11/4767287-sun.html
January 11, 2008
A serious knock at Bible thumpers
By JIM SLOTEK, SUN MEDIA
A few years back a local athlete, whose sexual preference had been a subject of rumours, got married.
The then sports editor here wrote an odd congratulatory note saying, "I guess that will put the rumours to rest."
A few of us howled and ribbed him over the naive notion that married men are ipso fatso not gay.
I hadn't thought about that for years, until seeing For the Bible Tells Me So, a thoughtful look at the complicated relationship between Christianity and homosexuality, a tangled theological and human conundrum between angry judgmentalism and that uncomfortable stuff that's often forgotten: grace, redemption, love and acceptance.
A hit at the Sundance fest, For the Bible Tells Me So introduces five Christian families who deal (sometimes in an ugly way) with the reality of a gay son or daughter. Some of the subjects are famous -- including Chrissie Gephardt, the daughter of ex-U.S. presidential candidate Dick Gephardt, and Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson, the first gay bishop in the world.
What's interesting is that a number of them, including Gephardt and Robinson, were in straight marriages. It seems like the ultimate price to pay to stay in the closet.
The sad thing about a movie like this is that it inevitably preaches to the choir. The ones who should see it, who spout from Leviticus Chapter 20, Verse 13 and then punch you in the stomach, never will.
There's a lot there to tackle in 97 minutes, covering more than mere religion. There has to be some psychological reason why people would obsess and even kill over a "sin" that Jesus never mentioned, that isn't in the 10 Commandments, and is on a list of "abominations" in Leviticus that includes eating shellfish and rabbits.
"When someone says to me, 'This is what the Bible says' my response is, 'No, that's what the Bible reads,'" says one Rev. Dr. Laurence Keene. "It is the struggle to understand context and language and culture and customs that helps us to understand the reading."
An upbeat movie overall, For The Bible Tells Me So spends relatively little time on the fringes of hate in favour of redemptive stories. Although in one of them, the two collide. Jake Reitan, the "out" son of erstwhile followers of Focus On the Family anti-gay activist Rev. Jim Dobson, is arrested at a protest along with his parents for trying to read an open letter to Dobson at Focus's Colorado Springs H.Q.
There are farther fringes that the movie avoids that I'd like to have seen addressed -- like the Topeka, Kan., Baptist minister Fred "God Hates homosexuals" Phelps, whose followers show up to mar the funerals of gay men and soldiers (he claims their deaths in battle are God's punishment for the nation's acceptance of homosexuality).
And while Chrissie Gephardt is interesting, where was Mary Cheney? It's much harder to understand how a right-wing Christian vice-president can still love his daughter in the face of his church's admonition (and reconcile his administration's unfriendly position on gays) than to understand the same thought process in a Christian liberal Democrat like Dick Gephardt.
An imperfect documentary, For the Bible Tells Me So is a primer for people who haven't given the subject much thought. But its heart is in the right place.
---
FOR THE BIBLE TELLS ME SO
1 HOUR, 37 MINUTES
STARRING: CHRISSIE GEPHARDT, GENE ROBINSON, JAKE REITAN
DIRECTOR: DANIEL KARSLAKE
Sun Rating: 3 out of 5 stars |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| thinkright Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | There's a lot there to tackle in 97 minutes, covering more than mere religion. There has to be some psychological reason why people would obsess and even kill over a "sin" that Jesus never mentioned, that isn't in the 10 Commandments, and is on a list of "abominations" in Leviticus that includes eating shellfish and rabbits.
"When someone says to me, 'This is what the Bible says' my response is, 'No, that's what the Bible reads,'" says one Rev. Dr. Laurence Keene. "It is the struggle to understand context and language and culture and customs that helps us to understand the reading."
|
"2Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. 3For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths."
2 Timothy 4: 2-4 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T.G.
Joined: 08 Dec 2006 Total posts: 3187 Location: Ontario Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thinkright wrote: | "2Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. 3For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths."
2 Timothy 4: 2-4 |
It's amazing that a movie critic, who probably hasn't even read the book, feels qualified to take on the role of biblical scholar and tell us what the Bible REALLY means. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adonick
Joined: 06 Oct 2004 Total posts: 2596 Location: St. John's, NL Age: 26 Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 23/ 08 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Deicide. Had heard of them before.... just listened to them. Not as good as Cannibal Corpse, but I'd probably still pay to see them at a bar or something.
_________________
Opinions posted on Free Dominion are those of the individual posters and are not necessarily the opinion of Free Dominion or its operators. Free Dominion does not advocate violence, hate speech or an overthrow of the government.
My opinion is my own. No one will silence me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sponsor
|
Use PayPal to make regular monthly $20 donations to the free speech cause - quit any time! Or make a one time donation!
|
|
|
| 100% Conviction..unless Christians complain! |
|
| Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
Page 1 of 4
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
