1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

...

Discussion in 'Serious' started by jrs77, 2 Dec 2017.

  1. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,560
    Likes Received:
    371
    That's because not paying a fine is a criminal offense, there's a clear distinction in law between being held in contempt of court and going to jail for something like a non-payment of a fine and the original judgment.

    Like i said i suspect the workplace and human rights lawyer and the law-professor in those videos are either misunderstanding the bill or mischaracterising it.

    So because, what is it 2-3, workplace and human rights lawyers and a law-professor say that's how it is it must be true, despite the overwhelming majority of workplace and human rights lawyers and a law-professors saying the opposite.

    No, no there isn't, a pronoun can be anything as it's used to replace a noun when it's already been established what something is, it could be he, she, that, it, they, them, we, etc, etc.
     
    Last edited: 3 Dec 2017
  2. Nexxo

    Nexxo Stopped treating this country as if it was his own

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,806
    Likes Received:
    1,353
    In terms of gender pronouns in the English language, yes --at the moment (language being an always evolving construct). In other cultures, no. Just because you can't wrap your head around it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

    Please highlight where in that law it says that.

    Please highlight where that law tells him what to say.
     
    Last edited: 3 Dec 2017
  3. walle

    walle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    44
    That's not exactly true, and backseat drivers can be as dangerous.

    That was not what I took from it, what I took from what he said was that he would not want to adhere to someones mental disorder, currently there are around 50 of them and counting.
     
    Last edited: 3 Dec 2017
  4. Nexxo

    Nexxo Stopped treating this country as if it was his own

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,806
    Likes Received:
    1,353
    Depends on whether they egg on the lunatic driver, or try to hold him back.

    I was quoting him literally. You can take of it what you want.
     
  5. Tynecider

    Tynecider Since ZX81

    Joined:
    23 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    806
    Likes Received:
    28





    OP, As you can see the trickle down has already started, there are many more examples on gluetube.

    Fellow parents there are confusing times ahead, you may end up with kids that identify as.......


    [​IMG]


    As for today's universities, The next generation of teachers will come from this fountain of free thinking pond.
    It seems to me the universities are, and have been for some time, fanatically shutting down debate and outward thinking. True progression can never be biased yet time and time again we see militant level bullying enforcing this bias on campus around the western world.

    Your kids spend more time under the influence of teachers than they do with you. Take time to talk to them every day to find out what they have been learning in class and get to know their teachers and their background. The last thing you want is some sjw ideologue corrupting your offspring.
     
  6. walle

    walle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    44
    I know you were Nexxo, I just choose to put it into context of the bigger picture.

    @Tynecider
    That's child abuse. Full stop.

    I feel sorry for the children.
     
    Last edited: 3 Dec 2017
  7. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,560
    Likes Received:
    371
    Totally agree and if Jordan Peterson and the likes had limited their argument to "my university is curtailing freedom of speech" i could get on-board with that, however i suspect that if he'd not employed hyperbole and rhetoric in an attempt to link how his university interprets and enforces discrimination and equality laws, rules, and regulations with the way the real legal system work he'd probably not have received so much media coverage.
     
    Last edited: 3 Dec 2017
  8. Pliqu3011

    Pliqu3011 all flowers in time bend towards the sun

    Joined:
    8 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    2,736
    Likes Received:
    255
    Corky42 likes this.
  9. Nexxo

    Nexxo Stopped treating this country as if it was his own

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,806
    Likes Received:
    1,353
    No, you are Interpreting it in the context of your personal beliefs.

    Again, show me where in the text of Bill C16 it says that.
     
  10. walle

    walle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    44
    I'm put it into context of the bigger picture, and that of his reasoning, that he would not want to adhere to someones mental disorder.

    You chose to quote him literally without putting it into the bigger context, and that of his reasoning. Saying that he was arguing in defense of his right to be an argumentative dick.

    In any case, he brings a serious issue to peoples attention. I see that as good thing.
     
    Last edited: 3 Dec 2017
  11. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,560
    Likes Received:
    371
    No their not, the level of evidence needed to proceed with a criminal case is much, much higher than just someone using an incorrect gender specific pronoun.

    Firstly you'd need to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the person who didn't use the correct gender specific pronoun intended to do so (mens rea), in other words that they intended or had knowledge that a crime was being committed. Secondly they'd need to prove, again beyond reasonable doubt, that the person intended for their actions to be discriminatory (actus reus), in other words you'd need prove that the person both in thought and action intended to commit a crime.

    You'd need to prove that someone not using the correct gender specific pronoun was actively supporting or instigating the promotion of hatred, that's a pretty high bar to get over in itself as if there's any reasonable doubt then you can't be held culpable.

    Basically you need to prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the deliberate misuse of pronouns substantially promoted hatred and the person was fully aware that it would.
     
    Last edited: 3 Dec 2017
  12. Nexxo

    Nexxo Stopped treating this country as if it was his own

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,806
    Likes Received:
    1,353
    Show me where in the text it says that.
     
  13. Nexxo

    Nexxo Stopped treating this country as if it was his own

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,806
    Likes Received:
    1,353
    He literally said that he would choose not to use a person's preferred pronoun if he had the subjective impression that said person had, and I quote directly, "a chip on their shoulder". Sounds to me his motivation was belligerence.

    Shame he makes such a poor job of it.
     
  14. walle

    walle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    44
    Or based on his experience with some of these people, hence the “chip on their shoulder” comment.
     
  15. Nexxo

    Nexxo Stopped treating this country as if it was his own

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,806
    Likes Received:
    1,353
    That is again supposition to support your personal beliefs.

    What I want (fourth time) is for you to show me in the text of the C16 bill where it says that. I'm not sure how I can be any clearer.

    What it means is that people can no longer be discriminated based on their sexual or gender orientation. That's it. That's all. Unless you can show me otherwise in the text of the C16 bill.
     
  16. walle

    walle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    44
    Not at all, rather support of his personal experiences with these people, hence his comment "chip on their shoulder" which would suggest experience with both them, and with students in general.
     
  17. Nexxo

    Nexxo Stopped treating this country as if it was his own

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,806
    Likes Received:
    1,353
    Self-dependent justification, anyone? :hehe:
     
  18. walle

    walle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    44
    It's all based on what he says and with context, rather than as in your case, a dislike for the guy. :winking:
     
    Last edited: 3 Dec 2017
  19. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,560
    Likes Received:
    371
    I'm not sure how many different ways to say it but no, Bill C-16 does not do that, it does not make calling someone by the incorrect gender specific pronoun a criminal or legal offense.

    All it does is add specificity to what already existed, to discriminate against someone because of their sex is already written into the Canadian Human Rights Code and all this does is add specificity by including the term "gender identity or expression" in other words it prevents someone claiming they can discriminate against someone because they don't belong to a "sex"

    Besides Bill C-16 doesn't do anything that's not already being done by most of the provinces and territories, it's just the federal government catching up, (source)

     
  20. Nexxo

    Nexxo Stopped treating this country as if it was his own

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,806
    Likes Received:
    1,353
    Self-dependent justification again...
     

Share This Page