Doesn’t another column at PJM today quote Niemoeller? Here’s the Canadian version: “First they came for the homophobes, but since I was for gay rights, I said nothing; then they came for the anti-Semites, but since I hated Palestinians, I said nothing, now they’re coming for the anti-Moslems, and….?”
Reap what you sow. It’s not as if the various HRCs are newborn institutions. They’ve been in place for decades. They shouldn’t have been created. For decades political parties in Canada campaigned to implement ‘Canadian Values.’ Now your laws enforce those values.
Not what you wanted? Tough–it’s what Canada choose in election after election: not human rights (American, founding father-style) but Human Rights (U.N.-style). Canadian values backed by laws that create well-funded bureaucracies to compel obedience to those laws.
The HRCs function as the institutions of justice function everywhere According to heroes like Rev. Wright, the American justice system resembles that of the HRC: only the guilty are charged and convicted. The behavior of the HRC is like that of justice systems everywhere.
IIRC, I saw a blog entry stating that the money contributed to Steyn’s defense fund was mostly donated by Americans. To Americans: stop meddling! Canadians who support Canadian Values don’t defend hate criminals; neither should you.
You and Steyn are not Canadian enough for Canada. You’re not the kind of person Canada wants. You should flee to a country that is freer–your choice of countries, or revolt, slay your oppressors and install a limited government that supports freedom.
In this there should be no halfway measures: either the Canadian government may, like China, determine which speech is acceptable in Canada, or it may not. Obey the law or destroy the commissions.
tehag
