91–93 of 93 posts
Channel 4 interview with Peterson that's popular atm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54
Thanks. I watched it, and I love it. I really like how the interviewer did, she presented the feminist view pretty well, while keeping her cool. Sure, she used her position as the one controlling the agenda well, quickly switching topics when pressed into a corner, but that's her job.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. That wouldn't be harassment. Here is the Canadian legal definition of harassment: https://www.crcvc.ca/docs/crimharass.pdf Now, if I repeatedly followed you around, loudly mocking you and your use of "his majesty" and interfering with your life, then yes that would be harassment.
I'm confused. If someone requested a certain pronoun, and someone else politely but repeatedly refrained from using it, would that be harassment under the new bill?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you ever listened to him for one hour? He never answers a direct question, it's always wordsalad(no wonder people don't understand him) , he has a few interesting concepts which he repeats constantly His claim to fame is misunderstanding a discrimination law about transgenders. Which is all you need to know about him.
"His claim to fame is misunderstanding a discrimination law about transgenders." If that was true, why did his university send him a warning letter that essentially confirms his concerns? He consulted a lawyer on the matter, he confirmed them as well. Laws are subject to interpretation, bad laws are subject to bad interpretations. He considers bill C-16 a bad law . There no "one correct understanding" of a law, other…
The Canadian Bar Association which represents over 37,000 lawyers, judges, notaries, law associates, law professors and students across Canada says this is a good thing and not the freedom of speech slippery slope that its been made out to be.
https://www.cba.org/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=be34d5a4-8850...