Excellent news: Anti-abortion groups may soon be banned from Canadian universities

[PianoManGidley]

Originally Posted by Still Growing

How is someone protesting that they are against abortion hate speech?

You seem to be a person who has little tolerance for someone who doesn't share your view points. In previous posts you said that all Conservatives are a bunch of abortion clinic bombing gay bashers.

You seem to be a very narrow minded person.

You're taking a lot of what I say too literally. My intentions usually are to show a bigger picture, which includes more extreme examples from the same side of the fence, because so many people make these all-inclusive statements without thinking about the logical conclusions to the statement's extreme. In this case, it was the issue of censoring speech...in the other thread, it was the issue of Amadeus essentially stating that ALL Conservatives are ONLY contributing to society.

What's more, there ARE pro-lifers out there who DO spew hate speech.

[Tasaio]

This story is highly relevant:

Top court won't hear abortion picketer case

OTTAWA -- The Supreme Court of Canada chose on Thursday not to hear an appeal of a lower court decision that found that a nurse who picketed a Planned Parenthood clinic and referred to its workers as baby killers was protected by the right of free speech.

Excellent news. It is long past time Canada stopped wasting time protecting the "free speech" religious right trolls.

Someone said they would defend to the death someone's right to free speech, even if they disagreed. That's a silly position--why waste your time fighting for a neo-nazi's right to spout his racist, mysogynist views?

The reality here is that religious right trolls don't care about free speech, they only care about foisting their views on others.

I have my own quote: "The problem with being too open minded is that eventually your brain falls out."

Take a stand, rather than sitting around apathetically and saying that everyone deserves free speech. They don't deserve free speech, if they use violence, or hate speech, and refuse to listen to science or the law.

These people aren't being denied "free speech", they are being silenced for spouting irrational hate speech. They aren't innocent political victims, they are criminals promoting hate speech. They promote hate speech and violence, and they shall be tried and convicted before the law.

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Tasaio

This story is highly relevant:

Top court won't hear abortion picketer case



Excellent news. It is long past time Canada stopped wasting time protecting the "free speech" religious right trolls.

I think you read that wrong. Or I am. It sounds like the Supreme court refused to hear an appeal to the ruling that he was protected by free speech laws. Meaning the people who didn't like that he was protected wanted to appeal and the court said "no."

Originally Posted by Tasaio

Someone said they would defend to the death someone's right to free speech, even if they disagreed. That's a silly position--why waste your time fighting for a neo-nazi's right to spout his racist, mysogynist views?

Because if we take away rights based on our dislike of someone's views it's only a matter of time before we have our own rights taken away by someone who disagrees with us. For instance, perhaps there is someone who would like to stop you from calling anti-abortion protesters "religious right trolls" -- do you think you are entitled to that free speech or not?

Originally Posted by Tasaio

Take a stand, rather than sitting around apathetically and saying that everyone deserves free speech. They don't deserve free speech, if they use violence, or hate speech, and refuse to listen to science or the law.

These people aren't being denied "free speech", they are being silenced for spouting irrational hate speech. They aren't innocent political victims, they are criminals promoting hate speech. They promote hate speech and violence, and they shall be tried and convicted before the law.

I completely disagree with you. I am in no way apathetic to what these people are saying, however, they are granted the right to free speech (at least in the US according to our constitution) and I for one would like to keep it that way lest my rights are taken as well.

[Syr]

Originally Posted by Tasaio

Someone said they would defend to the death someone's right to free speech, even if they disagreed. That's a silly position--why waste your time fighting for a neo-nazi's right to spout his racist, mysogynist views?

Voltaire (the philosopher who made that statement) preceded the national-socialist philosophy with several centuries.

Irrational hate speech shouldn't be silenced. That way people can see different sides of a debate and draw their own conclusions. Besides, people openly blurting out hate speech are much easier to keep an eye on.

[John P]

Originally Posted by Tasaio

Excellent news. It is long past time Canada stopped wasting time protecting the "free speech" religious right trolls.

Someone said they would defend to the death someone's right to free speech, even if they disagreed. That's a silly position--why waste your time fighting for a neo-nazi's right to spout his racist, mysogynist views?

So the government should decide what is acceptable for the public to hear? Is that really what you want?

The reality here is that religious right trolls don't care about free speech, they only care about foisting their views on others.

That is just too ironic for words. Seriously, think about what you are saying. In fact, allow me to paraphrase:

You disagree with "these people" (the trolls). You think that what they have to say should be banned from public discussion. Therefore, you want society to agree with your view and ban the trolls from being able to exercise their right of free speech.

Does that seem problematic to you?

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Syr

Voltaire (the philosopher who made that statement) preceded the national-socialist philosophy with several centuries.

Just an FYI (for everyone) about the origin of the phrase:

Evelyn Beatrice Hall - Wikiquote

[Syr]

Thanks for clearing that up, atc! Still, this one preceded the nazi's as well (nazi's started in early to mid-twenties, at least some years after his death).

[{aspiring_to_clarity}]

Originally Posted by Syr

Thanks for clearing that up, atc! Still, this one preceded the nazi's as well (nazi's started in early to mid-twenties, at least some years after his death).

Yes, of course.

I find the origin of phrases and language and etc very fascinating so I thought it might interest others as well.

And I just noticed your statement about people being easier to keep an eye on .

[Brutha]

That's a silly position--why waste your time fighting for a neo-nazi's right to spout his racist, mysogynist views?

Because I rather deal with him on the area of words than to deal with him on the area of force.

If you choose to use force you get people who see no other option than to use force as well.

They don't deserve free speech, if they use violence, or hate speech, and refuse to listen to science or the law.

The abortion issue has nothing to do with either science or law.
Whether you define a fetus as a human or define him otherwise is a subjective judgement.
It's also not against the law to protest that you want a law to be changed.
Otherwise you would get no progress when you forbid speaking for changing the law.
It's also not about violence. The students group didn't use violence.
If it would be real hatespeech you could sue someone in a court (didn't you say you want to promote the law?). On the other hand it obviously wasn't that severe.

But last, when I think that one person who has a certain opinion uses violence it doesn't mean that everyone else who holds that opinion should also be forbidden to speak about the issue.

[Still Growing]

I agree with Brutha....

See Brutha we usually agree...

Tasaio,
If you ask me, calling people you disagree with Trolls is hate speech too. lol.

Canada should silence you ! lol