Quote:
Originally Posted by FlameBaked
Wow did you miss the point of what I was saying... probably my fault though I was very wordy.
What is important isn't that Keegstra was found guilty or even that the cases are not simmilar. THE RESULT is the important part... as a result of Keegstra being found guilty the Supreme Court basicaly told Canada that freedom of expression is restricted by Canadian Law... infact the Justices very clearly stated that any act which infinges upon the criminal code specificaly the law against showing people graphic material like the posters at the UofC against their will is illigal.
I'm not saying the pro-life people are wrong, I'm saying what they are doing is wrong and unless they can find a new and legal way to express their message they should not be allowed to express the message.
|
Look, little guy, your words didn't bother me, just your novel and naive interpretation of the Keegstra case. Keegstra was convicted of hate speech under the Criminal Code. Seeing as how you haven't even read the judgement, I'm going to guess that you don't know that the Keegstra case essentially revolved around the issue of Canadian multiculturalism and a society's response to overt anti-Semiticism.
Once again, your analysis totally misses the point.