Comments on: Canada anti-hate law should not extend to Internet jokes, critics say

By: John

John — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 00:37:50 +0000

Terrence,

Of course, the United States Supreme Court disagrees with the “American point of view” on free speech. The high court has generally upheld the constitutionality of hate crime laws (including ones that limit certain forms of speech).

For example, the Supreme Court upheld San Francisco’s law against advertisements with “scientifically unproven” claims – which was enacted to stop an ex-gay ministry from buying billboard space – because it represented a “legitimate state interest” to discourage unlicensed forms of medical treatment. It is pathetic that Americans don’t even know what the legal situation is in their own country.

By: Terrence

Terrence — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 17:26:29 +0000

As a Canadian, I find it very interesting the American point of view that freedom of speech must not have ANY limits. This just strikes me as reckless and thoughtless. I mean you would get arrested if you “joked” about bombs in an airport or yelled fire in a crowded theater. Why should hate speech not be taken as seriously? We are not talking about a difference of opinion here, we are talking about hate speech that is published on the Internet with the obvious intention to incite hate and violence to a vulnerable minority. Characterizing limits on hate speech as gagging dissent, and comparing Canada to China is laughable if it were not so serious. For far too long hate mongers have felt entitled and have been getting away with their hurtful, violent, hateful speech, it is high time in a modern civil society that they be held to account for it. Plain and simple – free speech ends where hate speech begins. When your freedom of speech starts to infringe on my freedom to live without fear of violence and contempt, that is where your freedom of speech ends. Likewise, freedom of religion ends when it starts to infringe on the individual rights and freedoms of others to live in peace from religious based hate. Putting limits on what religious leaders can say or write about how some people should be treated and what human and civil rights should be afforded to sexual minorities is not only appropriate but required in modern civil society. I am very proud of our Canadian Charter of Human Rights, and wish our good neighbors will pull back from their absolutism and consider thoughtful responsible limits on their free speech too. Blessings.

By: jibii

jibii — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 15:45:29 +0000

Speech needs to be free, period. Even for the people who are serious and bigoted. “Hurtful” speech happens in all shapes and forms (ex, pro-choice speech is hurtful to me, but I won’t deny them their rights to openly discuss it) and as sad as it is, unless someone is attacking you personally with their words, you need to learn to ignore them. Especially when it’s words on the internet!

My good friends and I (all gay) use some pretty nasty words with each other when we joke, should we be censored or punished because we may offend someone else? How do we legally separate the acceptable from the unacceptable? “Oh, you’re gay, so it’s ok for you to use that word” or “You’re straight, so you can’t”? Doesn’t seem right.

By: John

John — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:04:41 +0000

Canadian police never enforce this law anyway. And in truth, it is probably unenforceble. Hate speech can occur anywhere. Go to any major city – Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary, Winnepeg, Montreal – and walk around. It might take a while, but you’ll hear somebody utter racial and homophobic slurs eventually. It may have more progressive legislation than most countries, but Canada isn’t some sort of utopia. There are bigots everywhere. It is human nature to fall into “us” versus “them” mentalities.

By: Quasi

Quasi — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:34:37 +0000

As the old saying goes:
“Many a truth is told in jest!”

Let there be no question, stiffling truth, no matter the hurt, is not acceptable.

I do not support hateful speech, but the best remedy is to take that person to court for slander or libel or hateful comments.

If you hit them in their pocket book, they will learn a lesson much more quickly than if they go to prison for it.