The Lynch List, 07-May-2012

First: 19-year-old William Swinimer was suspended for 15 days for wearing a t-shirt that read, “Life is wasted without Jesus”. Did he run and cry to a human rights tribunal? Nope, he decided to fight for his freedom of speech, and pledged to wear the t-shirt again when he was allowed back in class. Note that the young man never disrespected authority – he served his multiple suspensions without a fuss, didn’t organize a rock-throwing protest, and there’s no evidence he planned to blow up a bridge.

The school board responded by sending the matter to a “human rights expert” who would decide whether his t-shirt violated the rights of his fellow students, i.e. those who whined that their right not to be offended was being violated. Michael Den Tandt opines:

Here’s how the fuss might have been avoided: They could have told the kids who  complained to stop being so damned sensitive.

So what was waiting for William this morning at the school? The school board, the superintendant, faciliators from the provicial Justice department, and representatives from the human rights commission. The entire student body was invited to attend a “forum” at which William’s right to wear the shirt would be discussed, with all of those officials poised to set this troublesome kid straight. No wonder his father angrily yanked his son out of school.

(oh, and by the way, the atheists agree with Swinimer)

Second: I understand the argument that the Ottawa police shouldn’t object to the collection of race-based data if they aren’t doing anything wrong. What I object to about this sort of thing is what will be happening in practice. Just as speech controls “chill” expression, so will police officers be taking a conscious or unconscious tally of the races of people they stop, making sure their statistics don’t look out of place. That will result in a government initiative prompting police officers treating people of differently based on race.

We should be trying to encourage our police officers to be color-blind in their enforcement of the law. This policy does exactly the opposite.

Third: As the OHRC continues to campaign for the transfer of city planning authority from municipalities to itself, it is interesting to note the reasons behind Kitchener’s bylaws that restrict group home placement:

Kitchener, Ont., for example, a separation bylaw was enacted to arrest what was seen as the decline of a downtown neighbourhood where there was a concentration of multiple dwellings with absentee landlords, assisted and supportive housing, and residential care facilities, together with problems relating to drugs and prostitution, according to Kim Mullin, a partner with WeirFoulds LLP who acted for the City of Kitchener at an Ontario Municipal Board hearing challenging the separation bylaw on the basis it was discriminatory.

So the effect of the OHRC’s plan on the disabled in Kitchener would be to consign them to dilapidated housing infested with drugs and prostitution, and run by absentee landlords. So glad that they have the best interests of the disabled at heart.

Fourth: The UN is here to promote yet another positive right – the “right” to food. And not just any food, but high-quality, nutritious, and sustainable food. And guess who would end up paying for it if the UN’s latest wet dream came true. Hide those wallets, but be sure to invite anyone in your town who is truly hungry to your supper table. I’m sure you won’t find a single one willing to attend…

Advertisements

12 Responses to The Lynch List, 07-May-2012

  1. Bubby says:

    “So glad that they have the best interests of the disabled at heart.”

    This is a hilarious comment from someone who takse the position that building wheelchairs ramps for the disabled to access public facilities is discrimination against the able bodied. I think every disabled rights group in teh country would label you as teh greatest threat to their well being around, if anyone actually read your crack-pot ideas otehr than me.

    “Fourth: The UN is here to promote yet another positive right – the “right” to food. And not just any food, but high-quality, nutritious, and sustainable food.”

    Thank you. Another great example of what an unhuman monster you are. You would rather people starve to death than take a loaf of bread from a rich man that would be throwing it in the garbage anyway. Also a great reflection of your religion.

  2. Kat says:

    Hi there,
    I enjoy reading this blog and usually finding myself agreeing to many of your points. But I am confused by your tone in #4. Are you saying that people don’t have the right to access nutritious food? I would think that’s a very basic right, to everyone. Could you explain your opinion a little more?

  3. Bubby says:

    Scary takes the view that the only right people have is to property. So if you don’t own property, you have no rights whatsoever. Is people are starving to death, no matter if it is as severe as a large scale famine, it is always immoral for the government to take any action to feel them.

    • Grassrute says:

      Kat, as you read the comments section you will notice that Bubby’s errors aren’t limited to his typos. Scary also believes in the right to life.
      Bubby doesn’t believe in personal responsibility, but does advocate taxing the crap out of both the responsible and the citizens like himself, so that government can carry out the work of charity. The onus, then, is no longer on the citizen to be charitable, courteous, etc, but for the government to mandate it.

      • Bubby says:

        That is not true in the slightest. Scary does not believe in a right to life. Scary believes in vastly expanding the scope of self-defense laws so that it is legal to murder anyone who sets foot on your private property. And even beyond – he supported the application of self-defense to a man who tracked down (off his property) adn murdered in cold blood his daughter’s boyfriend, who supplied her with drugs.

        So the only rael right he believes in is property…. which extends to one’s children, who also constitute his property.

        He believes that it is immoral for the government to take action to provide healthcare to dying people or to feel starving people. That is not a right to life in any reasonable interpretation.

        Heh…. it’s always funny to hear conservatives pull out the old “liberals are just deadbeats who don’t pay taxes line”. Hey grassrute…. I dare you to post a copy of last year’s T4 with names redacted. I bet you my left testicle I made more than you and paid more taxes than you.

        • Grassrute says:

          Of course you paid more tax than I did. The less you give to charity, the more tax you pay. Thanks for clarifying!

          • Bubby says:

            That’s a very nice and cowardly way of backtrackign on your implication that liberals are all jobless deadbeats.

            And yuo shoudl also know that donating money to muslim dehumanization propagandists and anti-gay activist groups isn’t donating to charity.

  4. Bubby says:

    Just to clarify what that means Kat…. Scary would eliminate all public education, public infrastructure, health care, social security, all environmental laws, all laws mandating worker safety, all employment and labout laws, etc, etc, etc. Basically, he wants to be able to discriminate against gays, and is willign to dismantle every social institution we have to do it.

  5. Bubby says:

    Scary – you must really be excited about Mitt Romney for President:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mitt-romneys-prep-school-classmates-recall-pranks-but-also-troubling-incidents/2012/05/10/gIQA3WOKFU_story.html

    Not only will be have your back in opposing anti-bullying programs that recognize the basic humanity of gays and lesbians, he actually has real life experience in bullying and assaulting gays!

  6. Kat – so sorry not to respond earlier, but I tend to ignore the comments (I’m sure you can guess why). The definition of the “right to food” is what is at question here.

    I believe everyone has a negative right to nutritious, wholesome food. That’s part of your right to life and liberty. As long as you can do the legwork to acquire it yourself, nobody should be stopping you. For example, you want to grow healthy vegetables in your backyard and your municipality unreasonably prohibits it, I would agree that this would be a violation of your rights. If the federal government unreasonably prohibits a business from importing fresh, organic food for its customers, only to satisfy some giant GMO corporation, then ditto.

    However, the UN and our human rights commissions and tribunals often see rights as positive rights, which means that the government or even other citizens should be forced to provide you with a good or service. So if you want to live in the middle of nowhere and refuse to pay for the increased costs of getting wholesome, nutritious food, then the UN says the taxpayer should do it for you.

    The end of my comment is meant to illustrate my opinion that there are really very few people in Canada, if any, who truly want nutritious food but cannot access it. For the most part, they are unwilling to make the small sacrifices to afford or acquire it, or prefer unhealthy food but are using this cause to generate sympathy.

  7. btw, if any sane reader is inclined to believe anything that Bubby says, I would be happy to rebut it.

    • Bubby says:

      Rebut your support for the murder of that druge dealer.

      Rebut my characterization of any of your political positions. I don’t frame them nicely (because they are monstrous positions that seem designed to inflict the greatest amount of suffering on humanity as possible), but everything I have written is accurate.

      Btw…. one of my favour bible verses is when Paul writes to the Corinthians – “You may ignore that homeless person begging outside your church. He is most likely a charlatan that has plenty to eat. As far as Jesus and the Church are concerned, he doesn’t exist.”

      Ok…. that one is fake. The bible doesn’t really say that. You just act as if it does.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: