Last edited by PC2; 2016-05-30 at 02:54 PM.
Hate speech is very well defined in Canada. This is not hate speech.
Furthermore this would not be considered hate speech, this would be libel, and the prosecutor would only win if he can actually prove that the joke has wrongfully damaged his reputation or career.1. The hate speech must be the most severe of the genre;
2. The hate speech must be targeted to an identifiable group;
3. It must be public;
4. It must be deliberate, not careless;
5. Excluded from hate speech are good faith interpretations of religious doctrine, discussion of issues of public interest, and literary devices like sarcasm and irony;
6. The statements must be hateful when considered in their social and historical context;
7. No prosecution can proceed without approval of the attorney-general, which introduces political accountability because the attorney-general is a cabinet minister.
(This signature was removed for violation of the Avatar & Signature Guidelines)
Oh, please, He was a meanie face, and he's not being oppressed, he's just being compelled by threat of physical force to testify before a kangaroo court and faces potential fines that would require him to labour away for the rest of his life for little else than paying them off.
You guys seriously need to look up the definition of oppression. Or are you in league with the meanies...
Adults should have a way of "telling mommy" and somebody to cry to also.
Now if you excuse me I'm going to have my 234ml milk and a cookie and take my nap.
Last edited by Gheld; 2016-05-30 at 04:16 PM.
dont care for the comedian but he should be given immunity regarding what he says in the line of humor because thats his style. Its a very slippery slope we are going down when people get sent into court for saying an off color or dark joke.
You know, I never understood this.
From what I know, even in the USA it's forbidden to yell "fire" or "bomb" in a crowded place if it's not true or tell lies about someone that could land them in jail or have them have problems.
My point is, since those things are forbidden, doesn't it mean that the free speech is not as free actually and in the US speech is simply more free than in other places, but still not full free speech?
I know that the most obvious argument is that "well you can say whatever but you're not protected by the consequences". Ok... but that is also true for North Korea. One can say whatever there, but if you insult the glorious leader you're sent to the internment camp... doesn't mean you can't say it. Yes, speech is more free in the USA than in North Korea, this goes without saying, but there is never full free speech anywhere, is there?
Your poor feels getting hurt?
This board is filled to the fucking brim with posts laughing at or questioning the sanity of the U.S.
You can live with the once in a blue moon "WTF Canada?!" thread. It'll be OK, you'll still have Tennisfail to post 400 "Canada #1!" topics a day to offset it.