Oh yeah, there's nothing like making sure people are free to do as they please without unwarranted interference to make me think "Freedom is Slavery";-|
You might want to talk to Mark Steyn about being free to do as he pleases....
Incidentally, are you aware that pre-Nazi Germany had some of the most progressive hate-speech legislation of it's time? Hate speech legislation which was enforced on a regular basis?
You might want to look into exactly which part of existing legislation Hitler used in order to suppress the opposition parties. You might learn something about the nature of well-intentioned laws. And we have achieved godwin.
As for Steyn, since he made the following assertions following the March 2003 invasion of Iraq. Two weeks after military operations began, he wrote, âoeThe war is over. ⦠it's the Anglo-Aussie-American side who are the geniuses. Rumsfeld's view â¦has been vindicatedâ¦â, and for the fifth year of the Iraq War, Steyn reported, "To the Slow-Bleed Democrats, it's the Republicans' war. To an increasing number of what my radio pal Hugh Hewitt calls the White-Flag Republicans, it's Bush's war. To everyone else on the planet, it's America's war. And it will be America's defeat.", I won't be asking that bastard anything, he's a shrill jerk, and you two can go talk about hitler all you want.
1. This Act may be cited as the Canadian Human Rights Act.
Yep, that's the one. A truly Orwellian piece of legislation, isn't it? Oh yeah, there's nothing like making sure people are free to do as they please without unwarranted interference to make me think "Freedom is Slavery";-|
And I don't see why US citizens can't discuss (and even mock) other countries where some fuzzy notion of hate-speech is turned into a law. If you only see the kettle, you might not see why it's not ok for the pot to call the kettle black.
If you knew about all the fuzzy erosions of free speech that have been turned into law in the US, you'd understand why people are deriding an article that says "canadians can't do freedom the right way: The American Way, which is the best and perfect in every way".
Freedom of speech? There are still states where it is illegal to own or transport communist books. There are "free speech zones" where people are kept away from the government against which they have grievances they wish to express, the media is manipulated into giving a government-approved message on many topics (such as drugs), the 7 words you can't say on television, etc. Those are all restrictions on free speech, and people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Oh come on just because the U.S. has problems doesn't mean this is acceptable in any way.
Of course not, but he was replying to an article that said the US was the shining beacon of freedom that all should emulate, and pointing out the glaring flaws in that reasoning, and was therefore completely justified in his comment.
But that is no reason not to catapult the propaganda that any and all criticism of the US is unfounded, huh?
Oh come on just because the U.S. has problems doesn't mean this is acceptable in any way. Choice quote FTFA: "We do not envy the Canadians. They have entrusted to their government a power Americans never would "
Why do you rail on him for mentioning some of the many ways in which the US is worse than Canada on freedom issues, when the editorial in question is comparing the US to Canada?
And why, pray tell, is it not acceptable to make it illegal to expose a person... to hatred or contempt" because of race, religion, age, disability, sex, marital status or sexual orientation." ?
"Human Rights Commissions" (Orwellian speak for "thought-crimes inquisitions"). 1. This Act may be cited as the Canadian Human Rights Act.
1976-77, c. 33, s. 1. PURPOSE OF ACT
Purpose
2. The purpose of this Act is to extend the laws in Canada to give effect, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted.
From the article We do not envy the Canadians. They have entrusted to their government a power Americans never would, and they follow it into foolishness.
"These [Free Speech] zones routinely succeed in keeping protesters out of presidential sight and outside the view of media covering the event. When Bush came to the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002, 65-year-old retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to greet him with a sign proclaiming, 'The Bush family must surely love the poor, they made so many of us.' The local police, at the Secret Service's behest, set up a 'designated free-speech zone' on a baseball field surrounded by a chain-link fence a third of a mile from the location of Bush's speech. The police cleared the path of the motorcade of all critical signs, though folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line the president's path. Neel refused to go to the designated area and was arrested for disorderly conduct... Police detective John Ianachione testified that the Secret Service told local police to confine 'people that were there making a statement pretty much against the president and his views.'"
the solution it provides is that if we completely decimate this earth and it becomes uninhabitable, humanity will still exist elsewhere. Not that it will save the earth. That's "if I kill my accomplices I can have all the ransom money for myself" logic. I wouldn't turn my back to someone who actually thinks like that.
You know what? You are full of NATURE! You are, in fact, surrounded by nature! You are typing on nature in order to send electrons down the spine of a copper and glass part of nature. I've seen a lot of stupid on the intertubes, but it's the first time I've seen someone dumb enough to actually argue that computers grow on trees.
Besides, whats the fear? Its not like this planet cannot support double that if not more. Do people realize just how much arable land is not in use? None. All land is used by the organisms forming its ecosystem. If we double the number of humans, we must destroy their habitat and convert it to our needs, and through that we destroy entire species, simply to spread as much as possible.
Hell on my recent 1600 mile trip to and from Ohio I can tell you this, this country is empty in many spots and I am sure it is in others. Hell I know there are substantial areas of Europe that are essentially empty. Yeah there are villages and towns nearby but its not like we even try to exploit the lands we have. It is not empty. It is full of NATURE. Unexploited doesn't mean nonexistant.
One thing I have learned in my short time on this planet. Every doomsayer's predictions of over population and food shortages comes to nothing. We always shift how things are done and accommodate it. If we didn't we would not be here today. What you haven't learned yet is that if the predictions are heeded and countermeasures are taken, tragedies are averted. The doomsayers had been saying for years that if a cat 4 or more hurricane were to hit New Orleans... but nothing was done. The doomsayers had been saying for years that if Haitians kept clearcutting the hills for fire wood... and their warnings fell on deaf ears.
If you weren't so ignorant, you'd know about all the tragedies that were foretold, and all the ones that were averted.
but its not like we even try to exploit the lands we have. Look at Africa! How much of that is still like America of a hundred if not two hundred years ago? [...] We actually do very well in this day and age from allowing nature to takes its course. Hypocrite.
What Scalia should have said is that "the Constitution doesn't apply in Iraq or to Iraqi nationals." This is well-settled law, long before Scalia was on the Court. Non-US citizen not in US territory don't have Constitutional protections. 14th amendment: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
It specifically provides protection to BOTH citizens and any person within its jurisdiction.
The US constitution doesn't cover citizens of Uganda in the hands of Russian authorities, but it covers anyone in the hands of the US of A. And yes, a US military base in Iraq is within the jurisdiction of the US.
try explaining what the "warez-scene" is to any non-geek and see how far you get. Internet pirates, hackers and virus writers, who support terrorism through the distribution of violent paraphenalia detailing how to make IEDs, the very same kind killing our brave soldiers in Iraq AND hardcore pedophilia images too shocking to even describe.
I'm pretty sure it's criminally negligent to fail to disclose your whereabouts to people who are likely to worry and file a missing persons' report. Causing cops extra work for no reward is universally punishable by law, by some strange coincidence.
SCALIA: And you say he's punishing you? What's he punishing you for?... When he's hurting you in order to get information from you, you wouldn't say he's punishing you. What is he punishing you for?
Damn! I mean DAMN!
It should be blatantly obvious, he's punishing you for not giving him the information he wants! And since he's a judge supreme, we can't ascribe his statement of opinion on law to incompetence. We must therefore admit it was motivated by malice.
There are a few bright moments, too, including some handed to the Bush administration. Like the whole presidency?
Civility demands respect When they respect my rights, I respect their authority. Otherwise I wish to see their blood refresh the tree of liberty.
Slashdot Mirror
You might want to talk to Mark Steyn about being free to do as he pleases....
Incidentally, are you aware that pre-Nazi Germany had some of the most progressive hate-speech legislation of it's time? Hate speech legislation which was enforced on a regular basis?
You might want to look into exactly which part of existing legislation Hitler used in order to suppress the opposition parties. You might learn something about the nature of well-intentioned laws. And we have achieved godwin.
As for Steyn, since he made the following assertions following the March 2003 invasion of Iraq. Two weeks after military operations began, he wrote, âoeThe war is over. ⦠it's the Anglo-Aussie-American side who are the geniuses. Rumsfeld's view â¦has been vindicatedâ¦â, and for the fifth year of the Iraq War, Steyn reported, "To the Slow-Bleed Democrats, it's the Republicans' war. To an increasing number of what my radio pal Hugh Hewitt calls the White-Flag Republicans, it's Bush's war. To everyone else on the planet, it's America's war. And it will be America's defeat.", I won't be asking that bastard anything, he's a shrill jerk, and you two can go talk about hitler all you want.
Yep, that's the one. A truly Orwellian piece of legislation, isn't it? Oh yeah, there's nothing like making sure people are free to do as they please without unwarranted interference to make me think "Freedom is Slavery"
To be able to say things that may make people uncomfortable is. And to say things targeted to make a specific kind of people uncomfortable?
If you knew about all the fuzzy erosions of free speech that have been turned into law in the US, you'd understand why people are deriding an article that says "canadians can't do freedom the right way: The American Way, which is the best and perfect in every way".
Freedom of speech? There are still states where it is illegal to own or transport communist books. There are "free speech zones" where people are kept away from the government against which they have grievances they wish to express, the media is manipulated into giving a government-approved message on many topics (such as drugs), the 7 words you can't say on television, etc.
Those are all restrictions on free speech, and people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Of course not, but he was replying to an article that said the US was the shining beacon of freedom that all should emulate, and pointing out the glaring flaws in that reasoning, and was therefore completely justified in his comment.
But that is no reason not to catapult the propaganda that any and all criticism of the US is unfounded, huh?
Why do you rail on him for mentioning some of the many ways in which the US is worse than Canada on freedom issues, when the editorial in question is comparing the US to Canada?
And why, pray tell, is it not acceptable to make it illegal to expose a person
1976-77, c. 33, s. 1.
PURPOSE OF ACT
Purpose
2. The purpose of this Act is to extend the laws in Canada to give effect, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted.
From the article We do not envy the Canadians. They have entrusted to their government a power Americans never would, and they follow it into foolishness.
"These [Free Speech] zones routinely succeed in keeping protesters out of presidential sight and outside the view of media covering the event. When Bush came to the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002, 65-year-old retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to greet him with a sign proclaiming, 'The Bush family must surely love the poor, they made so many of us.' The local police, at the Secret Service's behest, set up a 'designated free-speech zone' on a baseball field surrounded by a chain-link fence a third of a mile from the location of Bush's speech. The police cleared the path of the motorcade of all critical signs, though folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line the president's path. Neel refused to go to the designated area and was arrested for disorderly conduct... Police detective John Ianachione testified that the Secret Service told local police to confine 'people that were there making a statement pretty much against the president and his views.'"
They weren't cows inside - they were waiting to be, but they forgot. Now they see sky, and remember what they are.
Is it wrong that what she just said made perfect sense to me? :-)
Hey! Spacecows!!! Don't quell the dream, man, come on!Somehow, I don't believe they're going to pack a year worth of hamburgers and a few cows along on the trip
I wouldn't turn my back to someone who actually thinks like that.
HOT With a chance of wet.
Unexploited doesn't mean nonexistant. One thing I have learned in my short time on this planet. Every doomsayer's predictions of over population and food shortages comes to nothing. We always shift how things are done and accommodate it. If we didn't we would not be here today. What you haven't learned yet is that if the predictions are heeded and countermeasures are taken, tragedies are averted.
The doomsayers had been saying for years that if a cat 4 or more hurricane were to hit New Orleans... but nothing was done.
The doomsayers had been saying for years that if Haitians kept clearcutting the hills for fire wood... and their warnings fell on deaf ears.
If you weren't so ignorant, you'd know about all the tragedies that were foretold, and all the ones that were averted. but its not like we even try to exploit the lands we have. Look at Africa! How much of that is still like America of a hundred if not two hundred years ago?
[...] We actually do very well in this day and age from allowing nature to takes its course. Hypocrite.
It specifically provides protection to BOTH citizens and any person within its jurisdiction.
The US constitution doesn't cover citizens of Uganda in the hands of Russian authorities, but it covers anyone in the hands of the US of A. And yes, a US military base in Iraq is within the jurisdiction of the US.
Think of the children!
How is it the "slashdot hivemind" to notice the hypocrisy?
Trolls say divisive things that are easily proven wrong.How is it spin to point out that the republicans consistently do the very same things they attack others for?
Don't feed the trolls.
I'm pretty sure it's criminally negligent to fail to disclose your whereabouts to people who are likely to worry and file a missing persons' report.
Causing cops extra work for no reward is universally punishable by law, by some strange coincidence.
Damn! I mean DAMN!
It should be blatantly obvious, he's punishing you for not giving him the information he wants! And since he's a judge supreme, we can't ascribe his statement of opinion on law to incompetence. We must therefore admit it was motivated by malice.
Otherwise I wish to see their blood refresh the tree of liberty.