When liberal laws go too far ....

[BruceVC]

https://factcheck.afp.com/no-canadians-cannot-be-jailed-or-fined-just-using-wrong-gender-pronoun

https://www.independentsentinel.com/father-jailed-in-canada-for-using-incorrect-pronouns/

I was having this discussion with Malc and I thought it was an important one where we can debate an example of government overreach and liberal, well meaning laws being abused and being used to prosecutor citizens in an unreasonable way IMO  

In summary Canada passed a law that states, to quote from link 1 

The bill also allowed for more severe sentencing if it is proved that a particular offense was motivated by a bias or prejudice against a person's gender identity or gender expression.

However, experts say misusing a pronoun would not constitute hate propaganda, nor can it be used as sole evidence of discrimination.

So a son got her father jailed for  not using the new gender title after a Transgender operation, I dont think this is right ...something about it seems very wrong

And this is not a homophobic or anti-LGBT  thread so please dont respond like that, this is just about this example and the overall slippery slope the law created 

 

[Hurlshort]

It looks like he was found to be in contempt of court. So no, he isn't going to prison because of a pronoun. He went to the media before his arrest, despite the court telling him not to do so. Father of the year material, for sure.

That article was crap, btw. Sadly most of the coverage seems to be pretty heavy on the bias.

[HoonDing]

Oh, that kind of liberal.

[ComradeYellow]

It's the people who the laws trigger what matters here!

White socially reactionary beta males who constantly praise Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump, and like to lie and say Nazi's were socialists.

Edited May 27, 2021 by ComradeYellow

[Malcador]

 

[213374U]

7 hours ago, Hurlsnot said:

It looks like he was found to be in contempt of court. So no, he isn't going to prison because of a pronoun. He went to the media before his arrest, despite the court telling him not to do so. Father of the year material, for sure.

That article was crap, btw. Sadly most of the coverage seems to be pretty heavy on the bias.

Way to miss the point. He was found in contempt for disobeying a previous ruling which compelled him to use a certain pronoun and, more to the point, shut up about it.

Heh, "heavy on the bias" alright.

edit: why is this not in the politics thread with all the rest of the culture wars garbage?

Edited May 27, 2021 by 213374U

[Hurlshort]

5 minutes ago, 213374U said:

Way to miss the point. He was found in contempt for disobeying a previous ruling which compelled him to use a certain pronoun and, more to the point, shut up about it.

Heh, "heavy on the bias" alright.

edit: why is this not in the politics thread with all the rest of the culture wars garbage?

What article did you read that said that?

[213374U]

4 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

What article did you read that said that?

https://thepostmillennial.com/father-who-was-jailed-for-violating-gag-order-about-childs-medical-gender-transition-pleads-guilty

"a) CD shall be restrained from: i. attempting to persuade AB to abandon treatment for gender dysphoria; ii. addressing AB by his birth name; and iii. referring to AB as a girl or with female pronouns whether to AB directly or to third parties;
"b) CD shall not directly, or indirectly through an agent or third party, publish or share information or documentation relating to AB’s sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, mental or physical health, medical status or therapies."

It's in a linked article in the piece Bruce posted.

[Malcador]

https://nationalpost.com/news/b-c-father-arrested-held-in-jail-for-repeatedly-violating-court-orders-over-childs-gender-transition-therapy

"The orders instruct him to not make public any information that would identify A.B., or the medical professionals involved, to call A.B. by the child’s preferred name and gender pronoun, and to not share his opinions of the case publicly.

 

The British Columbia Court of Appeal laid out the court orders C.D. was to abide by in January 2020. Since then, the B.C. Prosecution Service alleges he has failed to do so on multiple occasions.

In June 2020, C.D. gave an interview to a YouTube channel, where he’s alleged to have identified health-care providers, revealed information about A.B.’s mental health, medical status or treatments, and gave out information that could reveal C.D., A.B. and the mother’s identity."

Seems he did a bit more than just that, though.  

[Hurlshort]

Again, father of the year material.

[Malcador]

46 minutes ago, 213374U said:

why is this not in the politics thread with all the rest of the culture wars garbage?

I think this forum is the reason Youtube keeps suggesting me stuff like Shapiro....

[BruceVC]

4 hours ago, 213374U said:

 

edit: why is this not in the politics thread with all the rest of the culture wars garbage?

You seem to have an issue with people wanting to discuss topics that you personally dont think are worthwhile or relevant? This is not the first time you have made this type of point, in the Political thread recently you made a similar condescending  comment about  people being posting nonsense and how the level of debate is below you 

Can I give you some constructive advice, if you think a topic or discussion is garbage then just dont comment but allow others to discuss it without  being insulted. You are  an intelligent person and in the past you have made some good posts even if I dont always agree with you

But end of the day if you dont agree with a topic or debate then tell us why and make your case, that is the definition of debate and that is what most of us do on this forum 

https://thepostmillennial.com/father-who-was-jailed-for-violating-gag-order-about-childs-medical-gender-transition-pleads-guilty

Saying all that I realize from your post  above that I misunderstood this entire event and I shouldn't have made this post as its not what I thought. In my defense I  did do some research but all the initial search results  were " father jailed for not using pronouns" 

I must apologize for wasting peoples time on this topic and in future I will do better research before assuming something like this and starting a discussion 

Also as @Hurlshot mentioned the guy is a really bad father. For me as someone with friends in the LBGT community the worst thing any parent can do is reject their children because of sexual orientation.....being born a certain way and then having your own  parents reject you is unforgivable for me. So the fathers actions were contemptible  and then he defied a legal, binding court order....he deserves to be in jail 

[Skarpen]

4 hours ago, 213374U said:

"a) CD shall be restrained from: i. attempting to persuade AB to abandon treatment for gender dysphoria; ii. addressing AB by his birth name; and iii. referring to AB as a girl or with female pronouns whether to AB directly or to third parties;

"b) CD shall not directly, or indirectly through an agent or third party, publish or share information or documentation relating to AB’s sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, mental or physical health, medical status or therapies."

While I might be ok with the b part being a court mandate behavior the a part is pure BS and something Orwelian Thought Police comes to mind. Scary stuff. 

[Hurlshort]

A is the part that isn't going to hold up to criminal prosecution, I'd imagine, so I don't think you need to be too scared of it. I believe family courts directing parents on how to act in the best interests of the child is pretty common. 

The B part is what is going to stick. Pretty difficult to convince anyone you are acting in the best interests of the child when you keep running to media outlets with sensitive information about said child. I'd imagine he has a lawyer that keeps telling him to shut his trap.

[BruceVC]

35 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

While I might be ok with the b part being a court mandate behavior the a part is pure BS and something Orwelian Thought Police comes to mind. Scary stuff. 

I hear you but the father has a real responsibility to think about the fact its his child....his child that deserves to not be rejected for how he was born. Also they divorced the parents so its not like he is a big part of his sons life, yes I am assuming this but clearly they not close 

And to be fair this is what the court order ruled so its not like he cant talk about it in private , he just cant talk about it to the media and in public  and that is only reasonable. This is from Malcs link which I posted at the end 

“This order should not restrict C.D.’s right to express his opinion in his private communications with family, close friends and close advisors, provided none of these individuals is part of or connected with the media or any public forum, and provided C.D. obtain assurances from those with whom he shares information or views that they will not share that information with others,” the court said.

https://nationalpost.com/news/b-c-father-arrested-held-in-jail-for-repeatedly-violating-court-orders-over-childs-gender-transition-therapy

Edited May 28, 2021 by BruceVC

[Skarpen]

32 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

 I believe family courts directing parents on how to act in the best interests of the child is pretty common. 

And excluding an actual abuse cases courts shouldn't interfere in how parents raise their children. 

18 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

And to be fair this is what the court order ruled so its not like he cant talk about it in private

Except this part: "whether to AB directly or to third parties; " does exactly that. 

And if this part will not hold up then please tell why was it in court ruling? For funsies? I don't think a person that gets a court ruling is allowed to choose this part is important and I have to follow it and this part I can skip. 

[Amentep]

5 hours ago, BruceVC said:

You seem to have an issue with people wanting to discuss topics that you personally dont think are worthwhile or relevant?

Numbers is a mod, he's asking for a justification as to why this needs a separate thread from the existing political thread, or if you prefer - why shouldn't this thread be merged with the existing one that covers this same area.

I am curious about this as well.

 

4 hours ago, BruceVC said:

 

“This order should not restrict C.D.’s right to express his opinion in his private communications with family, close friends and close advisors, provided none of these individuals is part of or connected with the media or any public forum, and provided C.D. obtain assurances from those with whom he shares information or views that they will not share that information with others,” the court said.

How does he prove that he had their assurance? Seems like anyone who wanted to, could set him up - assuring they will not share it then doing so.

Also, if the 'public forum' include social media, he pretty much can't talk to anyone.

 

[BruceVC]

22 minutes ago, Amentep said:

Numbers is a mod, he's asking for a justification as to why this needs a separate thread from the existing political thread, or if you prefer - why shouldn't this thread be merged with the existing one that covers this same area.

I am curious about this as well.

 

How does he prove that he had their assurance? Seems like anyone who wanted to, could set him up - assuring they will not share it then doing so.

Also, if the 'public forum' include social media, he pretty much can't talk to anyone.

 

2133 referred to this post  as another " culture wars garbage" its not that and never was. It was a legitimate discussion about a controversial  law that had consequence, its a debate   for those interested. It wasn't necessarily about politics but law and SJ  which is why I made a separate post 

Subsequently to making the post I realized I was mistaken and this is not the issue I thought  it was, so please move it to politics if you prefer 

And C.D has every right to use SM  to discuss this but it must be private and not get to the mainstream media, if he was prudent he wouldnt discuss it on SM but rather in person

I dont understand what you mean by what  "assurances he has ", the ruling is clear. He doesnt need assurances because he cant be charged for something he hasnt done so even a scurrilous  accusation created to set him up wont succeed because it cannot be proven? 

 

Edited May 28, 2021 by BruceVC

[Amentep]

The assurance thing is from your quote:

"and provided C.D. obtain assurances from those with whom he shares information or views that they will not share that information with others,"

[BruceVC]

46 minutes ago, Amentep said:

The assurance thing is from your quote:

"and provided C.D. obtain assurances from those with whom he shares information or views that they will not share that information with others,"

Yes okay I see what you asking. I would use a principle, if I was him, of  common sense. Anyone he talks to about this he needs to ask them not to repeat what he said to media. If he doesnt trust someone then he mustnt talk to them because then he will be held liable if they go to the media 

I know I could tell my family and certain friends and I know they wont repeat it to the media but I wouldnt tell my whole family 

So the assurances can only be based on trust, I cant see people signing a document ?

[Amentep]

Which means the assurance is worthless, as legally it becomes his word against theirs that those assurances were provided.

[Skarpen]

Are those assurance even legal? Basically he would want assurance that someone will not tell on him that he broke the court order, which is something people are compelled by law to do. At least in some countries. 

[Gfted1]

He would have to ask everyone to sign an NDA.

Aside, seems like despicable human being.

[BruceVC]

3 minutes ago, Amentep said:

Which means the assurance is worthless, as legally it becomes his word against theirs that those assurances were provided.

Fair enough, yes they become worthless if his trusted family goes to the media with what he says. Sorry to ask this but what is the overall point ? Are you saying he should or shouldnt have been jailed and can you clarify why ?

[BruceVC]

2 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

He would have to ask everyone to sign an NDA.

Aside, seems like despicable human being.

Yeah, you right. I feel the father failed in his primary role to support his children in such an epic way thats the biggest issue for me