Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually, I immigrated from Latin America to the US and then up to Canada for graduate school. Then scooted back home to the US.
Look Canada is a fine country.
However, the emphasis is on conformity not creativity. That is why there are so many creative Canadians.....working in the US.
We're actually not discussing conformity or creativity here, we're discussing free speech.
Be that as it may ...... there are even more numbers of Canadians that are creative and working and living in Canada than there are those who chose to move to USA. The creative Canadians that moved to USA did so for more profit, exposure, fame and aggressive self-aggrandizement, they did not do it for greater opportunities of expression of their creativity or free speech. Just because they're living in USA does not mean they are better and more creative and outspoken than those who prefer to stay home. The creative Canadians that stay home are not being prevented from expressing their creativity or their speech.
As for those who moved away - there is nothing good or creative about being negative, insulting, hateful and abusive and then claiming expression of free speech and creativity as an ignorant excuse for being that way. Anybody can be that way no matter what country they live in but some countries seem to encourage and reward such ignorant social behaviour more than others.
I see several people at this thread (including you) are absolutely delighted about the fact that a conservative journalist has been shut down in Ottawa. And then you start to lecture about how Canada is a freest in the world (with all these scores, ratings and lists as usual). I don't see much congruence.
Yes nothing is more despicable than telling a person that what might be legal in their home country MIGHT be illegal in this country. Hate speech is one that promotes hatred and possibly violence towards an idetificable group. If I remember correctly Coulter decided not to take the chance and spun that into an attack on the university.
I would not say she is a journalist anymore than Rick Mercer is.
How many cases of hate speech have been laid against speakers at universities or even the Rebel Media.
There are lots of limits on our speech other than hate speech. False accusations, misrepresentation of a product when you are selling it and yelling fire in a crowed theatre are several examples.
Coulter was free to make a choice and stay within our laws, which her speech might well if. She is obviously free to back out and Blame the messanger. And you are free to accept her claim of being shut down, even if it is a false ine. Personally I think the University did the right thing in giving her a heads up on the differences in law between the two countries and students had the right to protest her speaking or not speaking.
And the evidence is clear that Canada is a free country. Maybe in this instance a person not being able to spread hatred and fear about another group is something you oppose to. We're you as upset that Galloway , the far left guy from Scotland was not even allowed into Canada to speak?
I am pretty sure Ann Coulter was not prevented from speaking in Ottawa by anything related to the law. It is because of a concern that protests against her might turn violent.
Canadian law allows people like Ann Coulter to speak.
I am pretty sure Ann Coulter was not prevented from speaking in Ottawa by anything related to the law. It is because of a concern that protests against her might turn violent.
Canadian law allows people like Ann Coulter to speak.
No the university did inform her of the differences in the laws. Perhaps knowing that her speech was going to be heavily protested she thought the better 9f it and blamed the school.
In keeping with freedoms of expression while not acting as an agent of your employer, while on your own time, and even using social media like facebook. Am I correct in surmising that employees in Canada cannot be expected to have their rights under the charter abrogated by signing some employer demanded code of conduct as a condition of employment?
In keeping with freedoms of expression while not acting as an agent of your employer, while on your own time, and even using social media like facebook. Am I correct in surmising that employees in Canada cannot be expected to have their rights under the charter abrogated by signing some employer demanded code of conduct as a condition of employment?
I'd like opinions.
I wouldn't hire on with any employer that demanded a code of conduct in my personal life away from work.
In keeping with freedoms of expression while not acting as an agent of your employer, while on your own time, and even using social media like facebook. Am I correct in surmising that employees in Canada cannot be expected to have their rights under the charter abrogated by signing some employer demanded code of conduct as a condition of employment?
I'd like opinions.
I do know that in some companies, depending on your position, that if you quit you can not immediately go to a competitor with your former employers " secrets ". I believe the timeline was 2 years where I worked.
As for the regular workers, we were bound by an ethics agreement in regards to discussing outside of work, customers personal info. They were very adamant on that, which is a good thing.
As for what else we did in our off time...well I was involved in protests, and marches etc. My employer NEVER said anything, and I was quite open about things like that as were others.
The only thing I can imagine happening is if your outside actions included things against your employer, I can see a " talk in the office " happening.
I guess we need Chevy to explain how enforceable code of conducts are.
I wouldn't hire on with any employer that demanded a code of conduct in my personal life away from work.
.
On the surface, that sounds admirable, but in reality it happens all the time, and that is not necessarily a bad thing.
Take teachers. There are standards they must maintain outside of school. Here's a BC teachers regulation.
"Educators are role models who act ethically and honestly.
Educators act with integrity, maintaining the dignity and credibility of the profession. They understand that their individual conduct contributes to the perception of the profession as a whole. Educators are accountable for their conduct while on duty, as well as off duty, where that conduct has an effect on the education system. Educators have an understanding of the education system in BC and the law as it relates to their duties."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
