Ann Coulter - can we send her back?

I zone in on boobs and butt. How do I miss the "important" things?

We need more people like her up here.

Canada is so politically correct it's sickening. You can always choose to not listen.

zomby woof wrote: We need more people like her up here. You can always choose to not listen.

But, you cannot always protect yourself from a hate crime perpretrated by someone motivated by her vitriol. That's the issue -- and the fine-line in Canada that she has to negotiate.

We don't care much about promoting hatred up here in the Great White North. That's why we sent Ernst Zundel (a Holocaust denier) back to Germany.

She can rant all she wants, as far as I am concerned. But she can't, in my books, promote hatred. Seems reasonable. Personal freedoms and liberties really only extend to the point where they impinge upon someone else's freedoms and liberties.

ZOO wrote:

zomby woof wrote: We need more people like her up here. You can always choose to not listen.

But, you cannot always protect yourself from a hate crime perpretrated by someone motivated by her vitriol. That's the issue -- and the fine-line in Canada that she has to negotiate. We don't care much about promoting hatred up here in the Great White North. That's why we sent Ernst Zundel (a Holocaust denier) back to Germany. She can rant all she wants, as far as I am concerned. But she can't, in my books, promote hatred. Seems reasonable. Personal freedoms and liberties really only extend to the point where they impinge upon someone else's freedoms and liberties.

What, exactly, is "promoting hatred" ? Who gets to decide that? If you force people to shut up in public, they go underground and their ideas grow where we can't see them. All you can hope is they get a bit drunk and spout off to some reporters about their true thoughts, so we can take back their awards and know them for who they truly are. RIP Mr Ahenakew.

Appleseed wrote: She's nice to look at...but that's it.

In a "Bride of Skeletor" sense, maybe.

Streetwiseguy wrote: What, exactly, is "promoting hatred" ? Who gets to decide that? If you force people to shut up in public, they go underground and their ideas grow where we can't see them. All you can hope is they get a bit drunk and spout off to some reporters about their true thoughts, so we can take back their awards and know them for who they truly are. RIP Mr Ahenakew.

Good question -- and one always worth asking in a democracy that enshrines certain fundamental freedoms and liberties (such as in the US or in Canada). The American Justice Potter Stewart wrote "that hard-core pornography [is] hard to define, but I know it when I see it." I think that is where we need to turn. We have a Supreme Court who ultimately would make the final call (as you do in the US, too).

Here is the section and its application. It certainly is clear, and private speech is protected:

Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code make it a criminal offence to: advocate genocide; publicly incite hatred; or wilfully promote hatred against an identifiable group.

An identifiable group is defined as any section of the public distinguished by: colour; race; religion; ethnic origin; or sexual orientation (this is likely where Coulter runs into difficulties, based on my understanding).

The Criminal Code provisions are intended to prohibit the public distribution of hate propaganda. Wilfully promoting hatred can only be committed by communicating statements other than in a private conversation. And inciting hatred is only prohibited if statements are communicated in a public place.

Source: http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/online_hate/when_is_hate_a_crime.cfm

Is a university a private place? Is it a private place when access is restricted to those who purchase a ticket? More good questions -- and I am certainly not one to answer them.

Restrictions on civil liberties exist in all democracies with Bills of Rights, or Charters of Rights and Freedoms. For example, libel and slander laws are restrictions on rights to free speech.

Streetwiseguy wrote: What, exactly, is "promoting hatred" ? Who gets to decide that? If you force people to shut up in public, they go underground and their ideas grow where we can't see them.

I doubt that Ms. Coulter could go underground. She needs that public backlash to keep going.

That's the real question at heart isn't it? And who gets to decide where the right to free speech ends? While I agree that we are far too p.c. about some things (like the recent talk over whether to allow muslim women to wear their burkahs for ID photos) you can count me among those that don't believe public hate mongering is okay.

Not a big fan of hate crime legislation.

I don't think we need her, just people like her, who aren't afraid to say what they think. Not a lot (not enough) of that going on around here right now.

Wow it's hard to tell if she's self-parodying or not. She's like the Marilyn Manson of right-wing nutjobbery.

zomby woof wrote: Not a big fan of hate crime legislation. I don't think we need her, just people like her, who aren't afraid to say what they think. Not a lot (not enough) of that going on around here right now.

Sorry, I am with Lesley. We DON"T need people like her. I am not into political correctness, but I am also not into people telling other people to "go ride a camel".

Appleseed wrote: I zone in on boobs and butt. How do I miss the "important" things?

In Ann's case, it's because she ain't got either.

mad_machine wrote: this is true.. if you go too far.. you can easily become a parody of yourself

And if you parody weirdos, they get angry and make your parody pale in comparison..

Free speech is free speech. Once speech can be crinimalized, exactly what speech is deemed criminal is just a matter of fashion.

If Coulter were a Dem, she'd likely be a Senator by now.. ;-)

Bill

I don't disagree with that.

In reply to wcelliot:

There are definately alot of scrawny racist blonde chics on the democrat side in the senate.

Joey

friedgreencorrado wrote:

Appleseed wrote: I zone in on boobs and butt. How do I miss the "important" things?

In Ann's case, it's because she ain't got either.

Perversion is a matter of taste.

In reply to 914Driver:

It's kinda perverse to think anything about that pic resembles Coulter.

It came from somewhere.

http://dailycaller.com/2010/03/29/this-could-get-me-arrested-in-canada/print/

John Brown wrote:

Appleseed wrote: She's nice to look at...but that's it.

In a "Bride of Skeletor" sense, maybe.

+1