by their own admission and by the evidence, the plaintiffs however did engage in a pattern of behavior and organized others into the same pattern which resulted in a person not only being harassed but also losing their job.
it is not enough to say, 'I feel harrassed' or 'I feel hurt' - that does not meet the legal test. You have no right not to be offended.
by the token of 'feelings', I could say that your response is 'hate speech' towards me and that I 'felt' harrassed and I 'felt' that my personal safety was in jeopardy.
If I were to claim that, I should rightfully be pointed in the direction of a mental health professional, not a court of law.
If you hurt my feelings, that's neither a criminal nor civil offense.
"Sticks and stones..." silly me, I thought we all learned this in elementary school
Please don't speak for the majority of Canadians. I am not in agreement with this and I speculate that many people living in Canada would object to it as well.
One of the worst aspects of our country IMO. I wish we had millions of people willing to defend the basic right to say what you want.
What a horrible country. I hate it deeply.
How do you define hate, abuse and trolls? In certain countries atheists are considered terrorists. Those who blog about atheism are haters and a bigot. It's justified to hack them to death, imprison them or whip them.
In other countries female drivers are abusing the sensibilities of men.
Who is to say which ones are doing the censorship right, lol.
edit: although tangentially relevant, this case in Canada is hair raising: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchfor...