Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Illegal Photo Radar AGAIN | Main | Petition for free speech »

Thursday, October 15, 2009

SMU Professor calls to repeal section 13

In the latest issue of the Saint Mary's University student newspaper The Journal, professor Mark Mercer writes about the current censorship issue in Canada; in particular, section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. The article outlines recent happenings surrounding the unpopular section, and the problems that come with reforming or revising section 13. Mr. Mercer instead suggests repealing it, as many are advocating:

Improved censorship is still censorship; improved censorship will no more serve the interests of society's marginal or vulnerable than the old censorship did; improved censorship will still be the enemy of discussion, candour, and autonomy; improved censorship will still be the friend of identity politics and the cult of victimization.

Similar to the call by Blazing Cat Fur, Mr. Mercer prescribes the most effective way to win the battle of free speech in Canada:

Canadians must present to their elected representatives the case for making Canada a free and open society, The justice committee of the House of Commons began meetings on [October 5] to consider section 13. The wicked are eager to embrace revisions and reforms. In response, we must press our members of parliament to delete the section entirely and put the censors out of business for good.

It's also worth mentioning the amazing speeches by Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn, located here. Watch or listen to a very well crafted argument and be prepared to be either reassured or converted into a soldier of free speech!

[Cross-posted at The Right Coast]

Posted by Dane Richard on October 15, 2009 in Canadian Conservative Politics | Permalink


I agree, but can we rid Canada of our treachery defamtion laws as well. They can be abused as I know full well having been sued for $100,000 for a simple letter I wrote to a local newspaper.
It is easy to "libel chill" someone with these outdated laws.

Posted by: Merle Terlesky | 2009-10-15 7:06:47 PM

Maybe we should try for a society where one would be frowned upon for being offended by free speech. For instance, those who show in public that they are offended by citizens' exercise of free speech may be subject to a term in stocks of not more than two weeks and/or a fine not exceeding $10,000.00. I think that kind of punishment for that kind of offence would allow a more refreshing perspective. If you don't like that idea, then maybe you prefer a punishment for free speech practitioners.

Posted by: Agha Ali Arkahn | 2009-10-15 10:39:12 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.