Oh, you see, they only took their case to the [Canadian] Human Rights Commission after Macleans magazine refused to agree to these folks' demands that they get a cover story rebuttal to Mark Steyn's article, as well as full editorial control. (Link.) I like how National Review's Stanley Kurtz puts it:
Imagine NR, after publishing, say, a cover story critical of Al Gore's movie, being forced by a government body to allow Gore to write a cover story in rebuttal, with full editorial control. Imagine Gore running his legal case against NR for free, while NR is forced to shoulder court costs. And don't forget that Canada's Human Rights Commissions have the ability to compel apologies. Imagine NR's editors being forced by a government body to apologize to Al Gore for refusing to give him control over their own magazine, or even for the content of one of their critical articles.
This is truly beyond pathetic. Much of Europe has similar "human rights" commissions that exercise chilling prohibitions on speech deemed "offensive." So the next time you're being lectured on the "superiority" of our Western allies' cultures and political systems, just bring up a little thing called the First Amendment and ask that person why these "superior" societies don't have anything like it.
UPDATE: Catholics are now becoming a target of Canadian "human rights" commissions too because of their religious views of homosexuality.
I've always said that the way to prove someone isn't really open to alternative opinions on all issues is to try to explain to them Catholic teaching on same-sex sexual activities. All of a sudden they change their minds on the importance of being open to alternative viewpoints.
Posted by: Paul Smith at December 21, 2007 10:15 AMI'll take that a bit further -- not only will they not be open to it, but the mere fact that you are able to explain it to them in a rational, non-judgmental way will be take as proof that you AGREE with the position, not merely that you have researched it and understand it.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at December 22, 2007 04:45 PMHube:
I have not been following this much.
Is the MSM covering this story at all? Generally the MSM would refer to this type of govt scrutiny as "having a chilling affect on the First Amendment".
And Merry Christmas to you and all your visitors even Jason.
Posted by: AJ Lynch at December 23, 2007 12:08 PMIs the MSM covering this story at all?
AJ: Is the Pope Jewish?
The MSM doesn't really care about "good" censorship stories.
Posted by: Hube at December 23, 2007 03:45 PM