At least post-America hasn't gone
this far yet:
Canada passed a law Thursday making it illegal to use the wrong gender pronouns. Critics say that Canadians who do not subscribe to progressive gender theory could be accused of hate crimes, jailed, fined, and made to take anti-bias training.
Canada’s Senate passed Bill C-16, which puts “gender identity” and “gender expression” into both the country’s Human Rights Code, as well as the hate crime category of its Criminal Code by a vote of 67-11, according to
LifeSiteNews. The bill now only
needs royal assent from the House of Commons to pass into law.
“Great news,” announced Justin Trudeau, Canada’s prime minister. “Bill C-16 has passed the Senate – making it illegal to discriminate based on gender identity or expression. #LoveisLove.”
Not everyone is so enthused:
Jordan Peterson, a professor at the University of Toronto, and one of the bill’s fiercest critics, spoke to the Senate before the vote, insisting that it infringed upon citizens’ freedom of speech and institutes what he views as dubious gender ideology into law.
“Compelled speech has come to Canada,” stated Peterson. “We will seriously regret this.”
“[Ideologues are] using unsuspecting and sometimes complicit members of the so-called transgender community to push their ideological vanguard forward,” said the professor to the Senate in May. “The very idea that calling someone a term that they didn’t choose causes them such irreparable harm that legal remedies should be sought [is] an indication of just how deeply the culture of victimization has sunk into our society.”
Peterson has previously pledged not to use irregular gender pronouns and students have protested him for his opposition to political correctness.
“This tyrannical bill is nothing but social engineering to the nth degree, all in the name of political correctness,” Jeff Gunnarson, vice president of Campaign Life Toronto, a pro-life political group in Canada, told LifeSiteNews.
When we codify little-kid-let's-play-pretend-wheee-we-can-invent-ourselves delusions as policy and law, we are looking at a moribund civilization.
But still open season on fat people and tobacco users.
ReplyDeleteShirley Jackson nailed it,
ReplyDeleteJackson's husband, the literary critic Stanley Edgar Hyman insisted that the dark visions found in Jackson's work were not, as some critics claimed, the product of "personal, even neurotic, fantasies", but, rather, comprised "a sensitive and faithful anatomy" of the Cold War era in which she lived, "fitting symbols for [a] distressing world of the concentration camp and the Bomb."Jackson may even have taken pleasure in the subversive impact of her work, as revealed by Hyman's statement that she "was always proud that the Union of South Africa banned 'The Lottery', and she felt that they at least understood the story".
read more at wiki or elsewhere
The Canadians have always had a thing about language via the split French -English and the silly rules there. Ideologues are everywhere, we elected one.
ReplyDeleteNot this last time around, Michael. That's exactly what we did not elect. DJT is a lot of things, but ideologue is not one of them.
ReplyDeleteAnd Mr. Dings, the nanny-state intrusion into the lifestyles of smokers and fat people is actually of a piece with this criminalization of use of "Wrong gender pronouns." The managers of the collectivist leviathan want a well-behaved, utterly conformist, healthy (other than being neutered) army of technocrats to keep their machine humming.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMaybe you are right, ideologue is not exactly correct. Ideology should not include DJT in any way. We have installed a pragmatic Machiavellian character as President, lets hope that works out well. It did not work out so well long term for the Medici's working with Machiavelli. Is this not also a form of ideologue?
ReplyDeleteNo, because by definition he is winging it.
ReplyDeleteLess us never forget the desolation of Atlantic City New Jersey which DJT played no small part.
ReplyDeleteI think the apt word for Trump is demagogue.
ReplyDelete"Legally, speech in the United States is protected to a degree unmatched in almost any industrialized country. The U.S. has avoided unpredictable Canadian-style restrictions on speech, for example. I remain optimistic that as long as we have the First Amendment in the U.S., any attempt at formal legal censorship will be vigorously challenged.
ReplyDeleteCulturally, however, matters are very different in America. The regressive left is the forerunner threatening free speech on any issue that is important to progressives. The current pressure coming from those who call themselves “social-justice warriors” is unlikely to lead to successful legislation to curb the First Amendment. Instead, censorship is spreading in the cultural realm, particularly at institutions of higher learning."
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/free-speech-threat-united-states/