Human Rights attack on Free Dominion

Documenting free speech attacks by Richard Warman, Warren Kinsella, the Human Rights Commissions and others who would seek to silence conservative discourse in Canada.

Postby leewgrant » 08/ 03/ 07 3:04 pm

Paycheck wrote:I have little patience for people who would call that petition "strident". Let me guess, liberals right? That petition can be signed by anyone, left, right, or center.


I was telling you what other people said. If I was writing it the tone might be different but I would sign it the way it is written if I could.

As far as the letter itself, Leew, we do not have time to address parliament. And I can assure you that even if we did, it would mean didly squat since all petitions addressed to Parliament mean didly squat. The only thing that politicians listen to are issues which directly impact the majority of Canadians. Free speech? When would the vast majority of Canadians be threatened by CHRC? Not very many I assure you, since it is only a tiny minority of us where free speech becomes an issue.


I was never asked my views on it so my choice was simply to sign it or not. If I were drafting it I would have focused it more to the case at hand and not to the general issue that the CHRC can't do anything about anyway.

It is your petition so send it to whomever you want. But if you are going to send it to the CHRC as a minimum send a copy top the Minister of Justice.
When to speak is unpopular it is less pardonable to be silent than to say too much.
User avatar
leewgrant
 
Posts: 6948
Joined: 06/ 22/ 04 5:59 pm
Location: Gilmour and Causeyside Sts

Postby WestViking » 08/ 03/ 07 3:16 pm

We need to muster all the help we can get from every source available.

I am signing the petition, writing to MPs and personally petitioning my own MP along with others I have worked with.

Human rights tribunals are trying to amend our laws and social standards and that is what we elect MPs to do. These quasi-judicial tribunals have far too much poser and the appeal process is flawed in my opinion.

They are leading the way to judges amending the law as happened with the same-sex marriage issue. Parliament must regain control over its exclusive constitutional authority to make laws in the ehnumerated subjects under s90 of the constitution. Courts of any kind, including the Supreme Court have no such constitutional authority. When it comes to enacting laws, Parliament, not the courts, is the final authority.

The currentr mess arose when the SCC issued a judgement and the Liberal government of the day ignored it. That led to court activism and the illegal actions of today.
The most effective way to stifle democracy is to transfer decision-making from the public arena to unaccountable institutions: activist judges, human rights tribunals, parliamentary committees, civil service bureaucrats and political party hacks.
User avatar
WestViking
Member
 
Posts: 21604
Joined: 12/ 14/ 01 2:01 am
Location: Winipeg, MB

Postby Paycheck » 08/ 03/ 07 3:23 pm

leewgrant wrote:
Paycheck wrote:I have little patience for people who would call that petition "strident". Let me guess, liberals right? That petition can be signed by anyone, left, right, or center.


I was telling you what other people said. If I was writing it the tone might be different but I would sign it the way it is written if I could.


The ones spamming the list and taking a strident view are liberals, for the most part. All conservatives that I have had communication with have either been very positive or offered constructive criticisms. In my opinion, obviously, the tone was just right. :D We are in a war for our freedom of speech. The time for soft ball stuff went out the window when Scott Brockie had to fork over $200K in defending himself in these Commissions. And there will be many, many more of us. And let me give you a hint on who those people are going to be: Christians who do not have the benefit of anonymity on a discussion board.

I had a good friend of mine who is a reporter for a pretty large radio station in one of Canada's big cities tell me that we must hit back hard against liberals. That's the only way we are going to get some respect and stop the relentless attack on Christians (and let's face it, that's what this whole thing is about). This is not about an attack against "conservatives". Nobody is going to file a complaint against you because you are for lower taxes, I can assure you of that.

I told him that it would likely not happen because we are too fearful and are not willing to put our necks on the line for it. Who is going to do it? "Not me" is the unanimous reply. So, little by little, day after day, month after month, year after year, tyranny keeps advancing popping us off one by one, until it has total control. And why? Because we live, breathe, eat, and think in a culture of fear. We are too afraid and too timid to risk what we have. And once we've descended there, you can kiss your freedom goodbye. It's not that there are tyrants out there. There always will be. What kept them in check in the past is a large number of people who would be willing to sacrifice something to keep them in their place. That situation does not exist anymore.

And the loss over marriage is a perfect example of why we are in the situation today in this country. If I asked you "what is marriage" in the past, there would be no problem in defining it. Today, of course, that is a different matter. The same holds true for freedom of speech. In the past, basically anything outside of physical threat or slander could pass. Today, that's not so clear.

My fellow Canadians, marriage and freedom are built on the same foundation of truth. If, as a nation, we deny the very union which sustains our country, what hope will we have in defending our country against attacks on civil and religious liberties? If we will not defend marriage, then we will not preserve freedom. If our government can redefine something so basic and timeless as marriage, they can also re-define our freedoms.

If Bill C-38 becomes law, the fundamental cornerstone of our society will have been toppled. And when a nation fails to recognize the most basic objective moral and physiological truths, democracy itself will be emptied of its power so that only an empty shell will remain. And when a strong wind blows, I ask you, what will happen to that empty shell?

My fellow Canadians, at this critical moment in our history when our country is on the brink of moral collapse, all of us are faced with the central question: Shall we defend marriage or shall we retreat? If we retreat to buy a little time, what will become of our freedoms when our opponents seek to dictate what is taught in our schools, our churches, and even our homes? And what will be left for our children and their posterity? What will become of their freedoms? Of their divine right to practice their faith and enjoy their civil liberties? Will we lie to ourselves today and say it won't impact us because we fear the sacrifices that come with it?
http://www.socon.ca/art-m4mspeech.html
Socon Or Bust: http://www.socon.ca/or_bust/

This triangle of truisms, of father, mother and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it. - G. K. Chesterton (The Superstition of Divorce)
User avatar
Paycheck
 
Posts: 3071
Joined: 04/ 29/ 05 5:05 pm

Postby leewgrant » 08/ 03/ 07 3:25 pm

WestViking wrote:We need to muster all the help we can get from every source available.

I am signing the petition, writing to MPs and personally petitioning my own MP along with others I have worked with.


Human rights tribunals are trying to amend our laws and social standards and that is what we elect MPs to do. These quasi-judicial tribunals have far too much poser and the appeal process is flawed in my opinion.

They are leading the way to judges amending the law as happened with the same-sex marriage issue. Parliament must regain control over its exclusive constitutional authority to make laws in the ehnumerated subjects under s90 of the constitution. Courts of any kind, including the Supreme Court have no such constitutional authority. When it comes to enacting laws, Parliament, not the courts, is the final authority.

The currentr mess arose when the SCC issued a judgement and the Liberal government of the day ignored it. That led to court activism and the illegal actions of today.


I strongly support this approach. I would urge people to write to their MP, Cabinet minsters, the Chief Commissioner and others they think would be interested.

The immediate goal is to get this dismissed. That is within the purview of the Commission and it will be made on the facts of the case. Anything beyond that will be up to Parliament.
When to speak is unpopular it is less pardonable to be silent than to say too much.
User avatar
leewgrant
 
Posts: 6948
Joined: 06/ 22/ 04 5:59 pm
Location: Gilmour and Causeyside Sts

Postby Paycheck » 08/ 03/ 07 3:26 pm

Socon Or Bust: http://www.socon.ca/or_bust/

This triangle of truisms, of father, mother and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it. - G. K. Chesterton (The Superstition of Divorce)
User avatar
Paycheck
 
Posts: 3071
Joined: 04/ 29/ 05 5:05 pm

Postby nickjbor » 08/ 03/ 07 4:29 pm

Paycheck wrote:http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=85209

Complaint withdrawn.


we win before we hit 100 pages :lol:
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.
User avatar
nickjbor
 
Posts: 8750
Joined: 03/ 12/ 04 9:44 pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Postby FutEtedge » 01/ 22/ 10 9:37 am

Spam content deleted.
FutEtedge
 

Postby wildernessvoice » 01/ 22/ 10 9:37 am

Hello FutEdge, who do you work for?
Don't forget- in November write in Ross Perot.
wildernessvoice
 
Posts: 5502
Joined: 04/ 25/ 01 1:01 am

Previous

Return to Censorship Files - The Blogosphere under attack

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests