Comments on: Muslims and Human Rights Complaints … The Resident Canuck Weighs In

By: Michelle

Michelle — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:11:22 +0000

Well, you have my sympathies with regard to the ACLU, that’s for sure. Just another example of a good idea perverted beyond belief, IMO.

By: Max Damage

Max Damage — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:04:55 +0000

Michelle, I hold The Law to be a thing almost on the scale of Divine Intervention – all Men are Created Equal and under The Law they are. Thus my gripe here is that The Law has taken time and property from Ezra in this case as well as property from the Canadian taxpayer to bring forth. Even if its not a legal case yet, and this is in the discovery process, it’s legalistic application of leeches to an anemic person — the leech didn’t kill you directly, the blood loss was the ultimate cause of death.

Honestly, I only thought things were this bad in my country.

We in the USA don’t generally have Human Rights Commissions. For one reason, there isn’t much need as local district prosecutors tend to be fairly responsive, and second if the local folks don’t prosecute you can always get the ACLU or a Federal prosecutor involved, or even a lawyer who will work for nothing and write it off as pro-bono work on his taxes. Given that the loser never pays in this country, for the lawyer every case is like arguing for the death penalty — if you lose, it’s not the lawyer that’s going to die, so might as well go all out. If you win, you get a negotiated percentage which can be quite nice given the American jury only decides the winner and the judge awards at his discretion.

Now I admit if I’m a single mother of 4 kids and forced out of my apartment because the landlord doesn’t like the color of my nose hairs and I’ve no money to hire a lawyer this is a very good system. A lawyer working pro-bono for me can defend me, seek compensation, whatever is appropriate.

The problem as I see it is that not only are we taking from people’s sustinence to hire lawyers, on both sides of the bench, we’re taking from them under the threat of later prosecution.

Common Law. Used to be applicable to all. Used to cost the same to all. Used to be….

Times have changed, haven’t they?

By: Michelle

Michelle — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:54:49 +0000

And I will do my best to be there with bells on.
Something tells me one thing we won’t have to worry debating about is Lex’s flying skills!

By: Babs

Babs — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:49:19 +0000

Thanks and, let’s get back to our adoration of plane pron…

When I set up my “Lex travel vacation package”; airfare, two nights hotel, meet and greet Lex, airplane extravaganza with Lex at the controls, and farewell cocktails… I will be sure to send you an invite!

By: Michelle

Michelle — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:47:28 +0000

Oh yeah, if you ever do want me to actually check it out, you need to provide a link.

By: Michelle

Michelle — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:46:46 +0000

And to think I thought you had stopped debating. Sorry, will check it out later if I have a chance, right now I really do need to get out of here. I will do my best to control the eye rolling though.

By: Babs

Babs — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:42:39 +0000

Roll your eyes all you want Michelle, then check out the decision by the AHRC which found the Christian Pastor guilty, led by a divorce lawyer!

By: Michelle

Michelle — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:38:49 +0000

Whatever.
I just wanted to be sure you had your facts straight. Barricades? Heh.

Speaking of facts, one last one. In front of a 3 person panel, where divorce lawyers may or may not be welcome. (rolling eyes)

By: Babs

Babs — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:31:51 +0000

Ezra will have his opportunity to confront his accuser, cross-examine him, call witnesses and other forms of evidence, etc. Okay?

In front of a divorce lawyer Michelle?

There really is no point in debating this with you anymore. It is bad law when functionaries adjudicate thought crime and free speech. It is bad law when the accused has to pay any financial burden to defend themselves against the state while the plaintive rides for free courtesy of the taxpayer; whether or not the plaintive somewhere down the road needs to start kicking in, initially the respondent has to pay to defend themselves in front of the state.
You have set up your barricades, and I have tried to make my case.

Note to self; do not debate Michelle on health insurance or free speech.

By: Michelle

Michelle — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:15:35 +0000

PS
Max, just wanted to thank you for acknowledging the faults in the American system as we critically examine the Canadian one.

Which reminds me … do none of the states have human rights commissions?