tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post3499436262756216895..comments2024-03-15T00:12:57.489-07:00Comments on Covenant Zone: Moon reporttruepeershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16401984575637492845noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-14786724673641403112008-11-25T10:44:00.000-08:002008-11-25T10:44:00.000-08:00Yes, but returning to your first point, it is the ...Yes, but returning to your first point, it is the victim who is redeemable in their world view, not the normal which is the cause of all our problems. That is what the guilty white "Conservative" government fears so: being attacked for being normal, i.e. evil, hegemonic, victimizing. It would prefer to be the conservative wing of the "progressive", i.e. victim worshiping, "movement" (which is really a stasis in which all kinds of people are invested). So that's where we have to focus our intellectual critique. We have to make people believe that even the normal needs to be renewed, that we cannot go on forever seeking dividends from established victimary positions, that freedom and all the good things and wealth that goes with it will only be eroded and eventually destroyed by our "progressive" stasis. See <A HREF="http://dev.cdh.ucla.edu/GABlog/2008/11/victimary-modernity-and-covenantal-modernity/" REL="nofollow">Adam's latest</A>truepeershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16401984575637492845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-59109259485878774532008-11-25T08:12:00.000-08:002008-11-25T08:12:00.000-08:00It takes a Rachel Ehrenfeld to push things to the ...It takes a Rachel Ehrenfeld to push things to the end. It took Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn and Mark Lemire to make this happen here, to the degree free speech is defended. There needs be more yet by far. And one can be sure few will care if it's won or lost. Imagine if this case (and cases) against free speech had happened with the backing of a Saudi billionaire terrorist financier. Yes, there would still be a few of us defending freedom, but fewer of us, for sure. Even up against the Maoist faction of the NDP at the HCRs the best we get is so far being Mooned by a guy who really doesn't like the idea of people in a state of political freedom, and a Conservative government determined to be "canadian" by doing next to nothing that might possibly raise some objection about the possibility of hurt feelings someday maybe. Tepid all round, at best. <BR/><BR/>Well, we get what we pay for.Daghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664271893389366772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-8828668526757448492008-11-24T22:17:00.000-08:002008-11-24T22:17:00.000-08:00... or more precisely, in this case, with a strong...... or more precisely, in this case, with a strong regard for due legal process. It seems the law professor thinks it's ok to relieve people of their intellectual property based on "expert" opinion but not any kind of proper trial.truepeershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16401984575637492845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-21290008934626011972008-11-24T22:13:00.000-08:002008-11-24T22:13:00.000-08:00Well Dag, I suppose you'll get your answer when th...Well Dag, I suppose you'll get your answer when the Globe tells you whether they support Moon's proposal regarding web sites:<BR/><BR/><I>"The third set of recommendations concerns the role of non-state actors in the prevention of expression that is hateful or discriminatory in character.<BR/><BR/>The major Internet service providers (ISPs) should consider the creation of a hate speech complaint line and the establishment of an advisory body, composed of of individuals with expertise in hate speech law, that would give its opinion as to whether a particular website hosted by an ISP has violated section 13 of the CHRA or the "hate propaganda" provisions of the Criminal Code.<BR/><BR/>If this body were to decide that the complaint is well founded, the ISP host would then shut down the site on the basis of its user agreement with customers."</I><BR/><BR/>Moon may have given one nod to our position but he can hardly be considered a man with a strong regard for freedom.truepeershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16401984575637492845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-27773981730604588122008-11-24T22:01:00.000-08:002008-11-24T22:01:00.000-08:00From Tuesday's Globe and MailNovember 24, 2008 at ...From Tuesday's Globe and Mail<BR/><BR/>November 24, 2008 at 11:35 PM EST<BR/><BR/>"Allowing a human-rights commission to police the country's newspapers and magazines for their coverage of religious or other minorities is a terrible idea, yet that is the law, though most Canadians may not realize it. Now, an independent report requested by the Canadian Human Rights Commission recommends a repeal of the section on hate speech in the Canadian Human Rights Act. The report is a much-needed blast of common sense."<BR/><BR/>More at Globe and Mail.<BR/><BR/>The question now is whether we are still a fringe of Right Wing extremists, like we were when we stood on the sidewalk protesting last summer at the courthouse in Vancouver against the BCHRT campaign against Mark Steyn and Mcleans Magazine, or now that the Globe an d mail is in favor of our position are we redeemed and "normal"?Daghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664271893389366772noreply@blogger.com