A more detailed report from the Globe&Mail goes into more details on the CHRC/government intrusion into free speech that I first talked about here.
Ms. Blight argued against a recommendation by Mr. Lemire that jokes and emotional expressions which are a spontaneous reaction to material already posted should be exempted from prosecution as a human rights violation.
“The jokes for which the exemption is sought are not, in my submission, funny,” Ms. Blight said. “There is no free pass for jokes, either.”
Does this mean stand-up comedians have even a bigger target on their backs?
I as a blogger should not be held accountable for what people post in response to my stories. Period, end of discussion. To even entertain otherwise is an affront to free speech and the rule of (what should be common) law.
I am not a lawyer, I am not an advocate of human rights, or a participant in a sham industry to designed to profit serial "victims". So wow am I to judge when a comment crosses the line between legit political discourse, and the normal cut and thrust of online debate into the fuzzy area an expression of “calumny or detestation” toward a minority?
What will happen if a someone posts a comment French on my blog that is a strong expression of “calumny or detestation” toward a minority? While I can muddle through some written French I doubt I can properly decipher a full paragraph filled with hateful ramblings, and would also likely be filled with slang.
Where will this end?
Free Speech Advocates:
You know "Blazing Cat Fur" seems to imply harm to felines, perhaps a CHRC investigation is in order. /sarcasm
No comments:
Post a Comment