Orision

I thought I was dealing with someone capable of discussing their viewpoint civilly. You have proven me wrong. Congratulations, a victory to you! With the way you defend your views when questions, it is probably the only type of victory you are capable of achieving, so please, feel free to have a trophy made!

Again with the libelous statements from someone who claims to hate libelers. It appears we differ significantly on the motives of Steyn and Levant. I believe that Levant is doing what he is doing to protect freedom of speech. I don’t care if you believe that or not, we are all free to believe as we wish. Except that under your system, we would not be allowed to discuss what we believe, and under freedom of speech we would be.

The so-called “death-threat” that I found is as follows:

“Somebody must grab that creep Warman, put a noose around his neck, stick electrodes up his ass and mike it look like erotic self-asphyxiation, something that he practiced all his life as a matter of fact!!!”

While that statement indicates that the writer has questionable self-control and little decency (something which your own statements here indicate about you), it is not, in fact, a death threat. A death threat is just that; a threat to cause the death of someone. That quote is not a quote of a death threat, but rather, a quote of someone wishing someone else a violent and immediate end. Wishing someone to have a violent and immediate end is not a death threat; threatening to kill someone or have someone killed is a death threat. Were you to have the same education which you claim I need, you would already know this.

It appears I was mistaken in my statement that your spelling was wrong, as British spelling is every bit as real as American spelling and your spelling is British. Then again, the spelling of things is relatively unimportant, and as such, I probably shouldn’t have brought it up. Another victory to you! Want a second trophy? Then again, it is very hard to find either “libelers” or “libelers” in many of the online dictionaries I have tried… maybe we are both wrong. But, as I said before, it doesn’t matter.

For you to state that American English is not real English is absurd, and that statement indicates that you have some sort of prejudice against America and/or Americans. Is this true? Bear in mind that if you say you have a prejudice against Americans, you are now guilty of racism, and had better watch out for the HRC… oh wait; they only go after people who say things they don’t like to hear.

Note: before instructing me to go back to school, you should try learning to spell the words you really like to use, such as “libelers”, not “libellers". Note: I am currently in my third year of a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering, so my education is already upgraded from the average. Even if my education wasn’t upgraded, that alone would not invalidate my opinions. I would ask you your education, since it seems that you have little, but I really don’t care whether you’re an imbecile or a genius, you should still be allowed to discuss things in a friendly manner.

Libel: a false and malicious publication printed for the purpose of defaming a living person

Speaking of libelous comments, "you are as dumb as a sack of hammers". How dare you insult hammers in that manner? Hammers have a fundamentals right to protection, a protection that should be granted by the HRCs. Your defamation of hammers is a view which must be silenced before it causes people to take their hammers out of sacks.

Also, there is definitely an intelligence difference between inanimate objects and humans, making your statement obviously false. At least I believe in your freedom to express your opinions, which this is, as evidenced by the "I think..." part of you statement (a part of your statement which I seriously question).

Moving right along, away from the childish insults (speaking of being educated)...

It is not up to the state to decide what opinions are acceptable for people to express. Bear in mind that means that expression of opinions should be protected, not necessarily everything that people have to say.

Libel can destroy a person’s life, and as such, libel should not be protected. Also, an attempt to deliberately provoke violence should not be protected (that would not be an expression of an opinion, but rather an attempt at endangering human safety).

I, personally, hate racism, but I believe that all, regardless of the validity of their opinion, have a right to express it. If we do not have the right to express our opinions, then we are not free. Freedom, to me, is more important than life, and I would fight, even if it would cost me my life, to prevent the loss of freedom of expression in Canada to the extent that it is approaching. The freedom of expression is a fundamental belief that our fathers and grandfathers fought in WWII to protect. Wars have been fought for the freedoms you would so gladly give away, falsely believing that you give them away in the name of human rights. The freedom of speech is a value that has been held as sacred by many throughout the world, especially Canada. By supporting the end to freedom of speech, you are betraying a Canadian value. Steyn and Levant are Canadian heroes, fighting for the rights of us all to express that which we believe, to worship as we see fit, and listen to the views of others.

You claim to believe in freedom of speech, yet you fail the test of whether a person truly supports freedom of speech. Noam Chomsky put it quite succinctly: If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.

As you do not believe in freedom of expression for racists, which it seems that you hate, you do not believe in freedom of speech, and as freedom of speech is a fundamental Canadian value, you are a traitor to Canadian values.

The author seems to believe that freedom of speech is an issue only to right-wing wackos. His belief that Liberals are the only safe choice because they will continue to cap our free speech shows not only that he against freedom of speech, but also displays his ignorance. Many Liberals are also decrying the Human Rights Commissions thwarting of fundamental Canadian freedoms. The myopia is not ours, Werner, but yours. You fail to see that not only are the current limitations on speech from the HRCs terrible, but that if they aren’t stopped and reversed they will inevitable worm their way into every debate, every controversial discussion, silencing those that they disagree with under the banner of "Human Rights". There is no right not to be offended, but there is supossed to be a right to freedom of speech. Many Conservatives hate racism. I know that I hate racism. But I believe that just because I hate hearing things, I don’t have the right to stop people from saying them. For example, I hate your beliefs that freedom of speech is trivial, you apparent underlying belief that being a conservative is evil, that fact that you are offended by someone daring to show their beliefs about Environtology and pretty much any display of anything that goes against your values, but I still respect your right to say such things. If only you respected mine, and the rights of every human to express vieews that are contrary to yours. Silencing dissent does not increase human rights, it limits them. The very censoring that the HRCs commit destroys Human Rights, not upholds them. In summation, you have failed to recognize that many Liberals support freedom of speech, which you obviously do not, to the point where a Liberal MP has proposed a bill to amend legislation in favor of freedom of speech, you do not appreciate that others have a right to their opinions despite what you think of them, and you are a traitor to Canadian values.

If "Canadians" ever stop caring about free speech, then we will no longer be Canadians.