The Stormy Days of March
"I’m sorry, but I really think that you’re missing the point. As noted in earlier comments, I was arguing that no one has a right to advocate the violation of a group of people’s human rights.The above is a response I posted to a blog of the title above which Mark Steyn had captured for his Reader of the Day segment on his online blog.
No, actually you're not. You're arguing, poorly, and with malice, that the violation of the rights of individuals should not be discussed. Steyn isn't advocating violation of anybody's rights. He is simply pointing out what should be obvious to many. You should actually read his book. Your reaction is the written equivalent of holding your hands over your ears and loudly proclaiming "I can't hear you!" There is much to discuss about the impact of Islam on western civilization. Islam is not a religion, its a blueprint for society. While you wish to be free from Christianity as you walk down the street, the reality is, no society exists without a religious morality at its core. There is really no such thing as a secular society.
Going through your responses to other commentors, you are all over the place intellectually, contradictory at best.
The irony is that you represent a demographic that can most benefit from a dialogue sparked by the MacLeans' article, but won't listen.
And then there is the Upperdate... "... Here’s another quote for you Steyn; You’re a sad, pathetic excuse for a human masquerading as a writer. Clearly a tapeworm has more talent than you. How you manage to stay employed is beyond me. I suppose I’ll chalk it up to wingnut welfare.
How is it that so many leftist secularists don't know what a bigot is, when you demonstrate with every phrase, every sneer, every condescension, that you are one?"
I've reproduced it here because I've found that leftist bloggers don't take criticism well, and tend to be highly selective about who gets to offer an opinion on their blogsites. I fully expect that my post on her website will be deleted (as my post to yesterday's Reader of the Day blogsite was).
Update: Well, to her credit, she let the comment stand, and has some dialogue going. Good for her.
I guess it really shouldn't be a surprise that leftist bloggers support the censorship mantra that has become the principal raison d'etre of Canada's human rights tribunals/inquisitors/star chambers.
If the oblique statements in the last paragraph are puzzling to you, then I would direct you to, firstly, order a copy of Steyn's America Alone (available from his website), secondly, read it, and third, or maybe even first, visit his blog, above, and also visit Ezra Levant for a broader overview of what's been happening (and about to happen)to Canadian freedoms you've always assumed existed and took for granted.
While you're at it, work through Andrew Coyne's liveblog from the BCHRC hearings in which Maclean's is being drubbed by a coven of witch-hunters. Better set aside a couple of evenings. The sorry details will lead you through a tortuous path that will leave you speechless (or should, because that's what the Human Rights Commissions intend). Pick a day when you can sleep in the next morning...
Random thoughts....
Given that the HRCs are hellbent on destroying the fundamental freedoms that our lads are committing themselves to die for in Afghanistan, it begs the question, why would any right thinking lad (or lass) want to do that, over there? We might be better served to keep our boys close to home. Its becoming clearer by the day, they'll be needed here, to restore democracy to Canada.
I've said before that the closest historical antecedent to Canada's future is the former state of Yugoslavia. The multi-culti plan to turn Canada into the world's largest First World refugee camp will pretty much ensure the analogy. Given the existing and building tensions between anglophone and francophone Canadians, eastern, central and western Canadians, non-aboriginal native and aboriginal native Canadians, and now Christian, Jewish and Muslim Canadians, the outcome seems inevitable. Taken together with the loss of sovereignty of our non-renewable resources to huge emerging second world economies pretty much completes a view for Canada that is extremely bleak. Once, Canada was about the land. Now, that's pretty much done with as we rush to develop, sell, and ghettoize it. An intellectual Tent City.
posted by Stephen | 6/08/2008 02:03:00 PM
6 Comments:
Dear Ed:
Great stuff and to respond fully to the boob in question that didn't seem to er, care for Mark Steyn, would be pretty exhausting.
It's true. The internal contradictions and logical fallacy defaults at many a Left blog could give one whiplash!
Great writing, rational thought and a nice laugh too. I see you have some other intriguing pieces too. You're on Steyn's site. All the best from Colonel Neville.
Not too difficult to know why the left supports this HR censorship crap so avidly - because whenever they get in a real debate with a conservative, they get the shit kicked out of them! I guess that could become tiring after awhile, so why not invent some fellow-traveling pseudo court to obviate the difficulty by outlawing the debate? Who's going to notice?
Skip,
Wow! Reading through your comments and the others on the lady's blog, I was struck by the fact that Wikipedia should use that as the definition of a "flame war".
You held your ground, but she clearly is stuck in one gear and will never be able to get out of it. What an irony that her and her ilk are actually in support of silencing such democratic, open debate. Yes, yes, they always have long winded, convoluted reasons to justify it but the fact remains that in doing so, they're complete hypocrites.
When you meet such people in person, an early warning indicator is when they start telling you how open-minded they are. Over the years I've learned to attach the following silent words onto theirs: "... as long as you agree with me, that is!"
To give her big credit, she hung in their and left things open, even tho she took an awful beating from some. She knew she was getting beat on specifics - you could see it in her responses, and for a brief moment I thought she had some understanding (I think she does, but that creates an ideological conflict for her).
I actually don't think she herself is adverse to open debate, but she's not willing to let her entrenched position go, even if its shown to be indefensible. I believe she's reachable, but it means she has to back away from her lefty cousins. I think she's smart enough to have a Eureka! moment one day, if she'll give herself permission. For now, however, she's stuck on stupid. In the end, she ran back to her original thesis to hide behind it, as if letting go meant she'd been compromised.
What I can't get is the foul mouthed blog behavior so characteristic of lefties. It a huge sign of immaturity, which of course is the problem for many them right from the outset. Its like they've finally moved away from home and momma isn't there to tell them to STFU.
Khuram Awan is not KW, as Ezra is known to rely his whole case on.
Besides formulation,dosage,timing and restraint for fatal interaction is different for prescription of branded & copy right/trade mark medications.
Where as alternate medication is based on centuries of use & experience with what was naturally found. Quacks were thriving in communities due to there know how of what works on what kind of personal nature,body tendencies & experience of the of drug,dosage and response.
Hakims were traditional families,with generation of inheritance in their field,off course Patients mostly came from the descendent of the family inheritance.
Alternate medication lost clientèle due to geopolitical conditions in mid 19th century, only recently we started hearing squeaks of Quacks to object heavy inspections & medicine record verification by Canadian health inspectors.
Now, if you can match it with present scenario of British court system we inherit in Canada,with re-emerging basic justice system,like olden days of village elders solving community disputes,you can safely come close to, what Human Rights Commissions are here for today.
You must agree to skepticlawyer,as he is direct sales agent for Branded prescription medication. He has rightly raised concern about medical qualification of Khuram Awan.
But discussion & debate is with the learned people of this global village, aka Human Rights commission. You don't need to be a lawyer or need a lawyer to be responding in a HRC, similarly you don't need services of a lawyer to file a complaint. Its that straight forward and simplistic way of justice.
Only problem with HRCs,is Hakims are not experienced enough, nor complainant or respondents know where they are heading for.
Honesty,related facts & desire to resolve the dispute is what it takes to get to HRC.
Off course lucrative patented,patronised & government sponsored Legal justice system will prevail,as any decline in its clientèle will seriously jeopardise the interests of Lawyers,court clerks, judges,Law reference libraries & off course the leverage of political governments in keeping trial dates, bail processes,detention centres,etc.
You do the maths of financial impact on Canadian economy or for that matter of the world,if the balance of two rivals changes.
1) Prescription patented medication system vs Alternate medication system. 2)Legal-Justice system vs human Rights commissions.
World has changed since 911, so have things. Perhaps its a new learning curve,hard to get.
Extempore,non edited comments by "F*i*x*h*i*s*t"
What a load of poorly written claptrap.
Thankfully for us, and sadly for you, the Supreme Court of Canada has very clearly stated that Free Speech trumps the rights of people to not be offended.
You and your ilk and everyone involved with the corrupt HRCs are on a sinking ship. It's actually more pathetic than sad that you just don't "get it".
Post a Comment
<< Home