No joking around here. After all, it’s a human rights violation to do so…
First: Furious reaction all over the ‘net to the Guy Earle ruling:
Ezra Levant: “The BCHRT said Pardy’s counterfeit human right not to be embarrassed by a comedian trumps the real right to freedom of speech”.
Mark Steyn: The Human Right Not To Be Offended
Las Vegas Review-Journal: “I hope this kind of thing never comes to America“.
Punch Line Magazine: “For comedians worldwide, the ruling sets a scary precedent and forces performers to ask some serious questions, namely, “Will the next thing I say on stage cost me $15,000?”
Stand Up For Freedom: Points out Tribunal Member Murray Geiger-Adams’ penchant for redefinitions.
Moonbattery: A comic’s job is to ridicule people – but not the special people.
Scaramouche: Even Fox News picked it up!
Christopher DiArmani: “Welcome to British Columbia! We hope you’ve left your sense of humour at home”
Brian Lilley: “In my view the whacky rulings were slowing down but…….seems I was wrong.”
Adrian McNair: But Earle never stood a chance…
Second: Yes, this case was eventuall dismissed. But it highlights exactly what activists are trying to use the Tribunals to do:
The issue in this Application is whether the Code applies to a monument erected on the grounds of a Catholic church and bearing the following inscription:
“Let us pray that all life rests in the hands of God from conception until natural death.” [Translation]
…The applicant explained in her submissions that she is deeply offended by the Catholic Church’s teachings on abortion and that she feels that they and the monument in question are discriminatory towards women.
It’s a weapon in their culture war. Fighting fair was never their intention.
Third: Just in case you thought freedom of speech was only being wrenched from the cold, dead, hands of comedians, consider the final resolution of this one out of Quebec:
The matter dates back to July 11, 2006. On that date, only workers of Chinese origin had been summoned to a meeting in the company warehouse to hear the owner’s criticisms. Mr. Rapps said through an interpreter: “This is Canada, not China. We take showers and shampoo every day, wash hands with soap, flush the toilet after use. Don’t piss on the floor…This is my kitchen, not yours. My kitchen, I want it clean. You Chinese eat like pigs.”
That tirade cost the company $150,000. In addition, the respondent was spat on by the Tribunal for daring to defend himself:
The judge (sic) noted that Calego International Inc. and its owner had attempted, during the trial, to minimize the nature of the discriminatory comments
Maybe Calego International missed the memo: there is no defence to a human rights complaint. The company is appealing, though; good on them.
Note also that the head of Quebec’s HRC waved his finger at the public, proudly trumpeting another newly-minted “human right”:
“This ruling serves as reminder that employers must abide by the Québec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms which guarantees the right to… be treated with dignity.”
Fourth: Another complaint against a university for not being racist enough:
“When two candidates are judged equivalently meritorious, the principle of employment equity states the position should go to the member of the equity-seeking group,” Chan told QMI.
Fifth: Yet another invented human right. Did you know that you have the right to the same “quality of life” as everyone else?