Lock The Bastard Up - Page 3

Felch · February 4, 2003, 00:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Hey, two wrongs don't make a right.

Sure they do. Somebody does something bad to me, like rejoicing at the death of my countrymen, and I in turn, beat him senseless with a shovel. They'll learn not to be a giant *****, and I'll feel better afterwards, and thus, everybody benefits. Two wrongs can make a right.

Imran Siddiqui · February 4, 2003, 00:57

notyoueither · February 4, 2003, 04:02

Most civilised countries put limits on freedoms. Free speech? Are Americans allowed to yell 'FIRE' in a theatre? Thought not.

Actually, there are some decent reasons for having laws against hateful expressions. May have done wonders if they had existed and had they been enforced in Weimar Germany.

For my part, I am not entirely unhappy that you may be jailed if you spew hate meant as incitement against an identifiable group if you do it in Canada. I think we can get along just fine without that crap being allowed to fester in our midst.

Solly · February 4, 2003, 07:45

Non-whites can say and do whatever they like with regards to whites, it appears.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=76000

Racist attacks on white people are not being taken seriously enough, according to a Labour MP whose town was hit by race riots.

Phil Woolas, whose Oldham constituency was the scene of running battles between Asian and white youths in the summer of 2001, has written to the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) complaining about the problem.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2719847.stm

Provost Harrison · February 4, 2003, 19:13

It's a very slippery slope though nye...where do you define the boundaries?

There is an issue of reverse discrimination Bods, the problem is when it becomes institutionalised...one objection I once had was for a job I was applying for. I had to send a CV and covering letter whereas someone who is disabled would automatically be given an interview? Surely people should be judged on their own merits!

chequita guevara · February 5, 2003, 01:36

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
Most civilised countries put limits on freedoms. Free speech? Are Americans allowed to yell 'FIRE' in a theatre? Thought not.

What if the theater's on fire? This is a reasonbale restriction based on the assertion that such speach would lead to a panic and cause physical harm (although the actual case when Wendel-Holmes said this was over a trial of Socialist Party members and Wobblies who were protesting the entry of the US into WWI).

BTW, Canada doesn't allow porn to be imported. That's a restriction on free speech.

chequita guevara · February 5, 2003, 01:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Sikander
Really, if they were happy previous to the incident do you think they would have spent their time obsessing about McDonalds? They were already mentally ill.

They were political activists in Greenpeace. Being political doesn't mean being mentally ill.

Shi Huangdi · February 5, 2003, 02:55

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

They were political activists in Greenpeace. Being political doesn't mean being mentally ill.

Unless you live in a communist country and you disagree with the government.

chequita guevara · February 5, 2003, 03:51

Smart-ass.

notyoueither · February 5, 2003, 04:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
It's a very slippery slope though nye...where do you define the boundaries?

Very good question. We tend to draw the line when the expressions are outrageous, demonstrably false, and inflamatory. Even then we tend to let the loons alone. The anti-hate law is almost never used, but it is there for when it is warranted. I can think of once it was used. That was a prosecution of a school teacher who thought it was good to introduce holocaust denial points of view into a high school class room as required reading.

notyoueither · February 5, 2003, 04:01

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
BTW, Canada doesn't allow porn to be imported. That's a restriction on free speech.

Hey. We don't have the constitutional right to fully automatic weapons either. I'll take our POV on the subject of rights, anyday.

KrazyHorse · February 5, 2003, 04:06

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
BTW, Canada doesn't allow porn to be imported. That's a restriction on free speech.

Yes it does.

I just watched a documentary during which they spoke to members of Ontario's film ratings board, who have to view ~700 imported pornography movies per year for content.

KrazyHorse · February 5, 2003, 04:08

You might also want to speak to the good folks at Hustler, Playboy, etc. whose fine publications decorate the top shelves of every depanneur I've ever been in.

That leaves me wondering how they get their CanCon quota in, though. Maybe due to all the beavers.

Sikander · February 5, 2003, 04:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger
Yes it does.

I just watched a documentary during which they spoke to members of Ontario's film ratings board, who have to view ~700 imported pornography movies per year for content.

You applied for a job there, didn't you?

notyoueither · February 5, 2003, 04:15

Wrong province. They don't review where he is from.

KrazyHorse · February 5, 2003, 04:15

****ers really looked at me weird when I showed up. I think it was the "Related Experience" section of my CV...

notyoueither · February 5, 2003, 04:16

See? He wanted to move for all that free, work related porn.

KrazyHorse · February 5, 2003, 04:16

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
Wrong province. They don't review where he is from.

Yes we do, but only to make sure that the French version is released simultaneously.

chequita guevara · February 5, 2003, 04:17

All I know is that Canada passed an anti-porn law based on the efforts of Catherine McKinnon. Andrea Dworkin's anti-porn book Pornography got banned because of some of the images she uses in the book to illustrate her position.

I suppose I may have overstated it, but Canada does band the importation of quite a bit of porn, especially gay porn.

Asher · February 5, 2003, 04:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Frogger
****ers really looked at me weird when I showed up. I think it was the "Related Experience" section of my CV...

And probably because you called it your CV.

Asher · February 5, 2003, 04:19

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
All I know is that Canada passed an anti-porn law based on the efforts of Catherine McKinnon. Andrea Dworkin's anti-porn book Pornography got banned because of some of the images she uses in the book to illustrate her position.

I suppose I may have overstated it, but Canada does band the importation of quite a bit of porn, especially gay porn.

This is news to me...there doesn't seem to be a shortage here, and I don't think most of it is local.

KrazyHorse · February 5, 2003, 04:19

Possibly. I know there are restrictions (but not many, from what my brother's told me after working in a video store for a few weeks). That's why the ratings board is there. I got the impression that the thing they have the most problems with is explicit sexual violence.

notyoueither · February 5, 2003, 04:21

Sexual violence or depictions of underage persons in erotic images. Many 'books' can run afoul of that.

notyoueither · February 5, 2003, 04:24

Quote:

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
All I know is that Canada passed an anti-porn law based on the efforts of Catherine McKinnon.

BTW, can you site a source for that? I thought we got our ideas of banning child porn all on our own.

KrazyHorse · February 5, 2003, 04:24

I feel proud to know that a board of 3 government authorities had to sit down and watch every single second of every single pornographic film that enters this country.

The group they interviewed all seemed to have looks of permanent distaste attached to their faces.

notyoueither · February 5, 2003, 04:26

I'm sure we didn't get them from the home of the 'free to express themselves' with child porn or whatever the hell else some scum bag wants to spew.