2 ms·

You read a single sentence, and presumed a LOT about the law. Have a quick glance at Section 319(3) of the law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_

You read a single sentence, and presumed a LOT about the law. Have a quick glance at Section 319(3) of the law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Canada#Section_319:_Inciting_or_promoting_hatred https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Canada#Sec... In short, there are four defenses for hate speech (my summary): statements were true, statements expressing sincerely held religious beliefs, statements were of public interest, statements were talking about hate speech or hate. We've had hate speech laws for a long time, my entire lifetime, and they are not used to quell debate or political discourse, unless you consider calling for violence against various groups "political speech". The bar is high, and defenses are strong.

perl4ever 5y ago
>You read a single sentence, and presumed a LOT about the law. Which is to say I assumed sufficient context was provided as is customary in polite conversation. I also made it quite clear in the first six words of my comment that I was allowing it might not be, as frequently happens. Thanks for the elaboration. The claim that the law regulates only "calling for violence against various groups" doesn't seem to jibe with what I read on the Wikipedia page though. It mentions promoting, inciting, tending to produce feelings of, hatred. And 319(2) doesn't even appear to me to require the speech to be "likely" to result in violence. I'm not telling you what the laws should be, how they are enforced, or what effect they have had, because I don't know and don't particularly care. I'm just interested in what the law is. On my first impression it seems rather broad, and after considering the additional context, it still seems potentially rather broad.
throwaway85405 5y ago
> statements expressing sincerely held religious beliefs I have an issue with this one. What is it about a religious belief that makes it any more important and protected than an atheistic belief? And how can "sincerely held" be defined? If I make a religion for the sole purpose of hating a group I would otherwise be prohibited from hating, is that OK? What if I indoctrinate somebody into that religion, can they say hate speech and be OK because they're sincerely holding that religious belief?
- jbay808 5y ago
  There's already a defense for truth, so I imagine the religious belief defense is there to avoid the Crown getting stuck in an argument about whether or not a given religion is "true", and the courts having to rule that it is not. For a secular belief, you'd probably stick to arguing that it is true, seeing as you sincerely believe it to be true.

perl4ever 5y ago

>You read a single sentence, and presumed a LOT about the law. Which is to say I assumed sufficient context was provided as is customary in polite conversation. I also made it quite clear in the first six words of my comment that I was allowing it might not be, as frequently happens. Thanks for the elaboration. The claim that the law regulates only "calling for violence against various groups" doesn't seem to jibe with what I read on the Wikipedia page though. It mentions promoting, inciting, tending to produce feelings of, hatred. And 319(2) doesn't even appear to me to require the speech to be "likely" to result in violence. I'm not telling you what the laws should be, how they are enforced, or what effect they have had, because I don't know and don't particularly care. I'm just interested in what the law is. On my first impression it seems rather broad, and after considering the additional context, it still seems potentially rather broad.

throwaway85405 5y ago

> statements expressing sincerely held religious beliefs I have an issue with this one. What is it about a religious belief that makes it any more important and protected than an atheistic belief? And how can "sincerely held" be defined? If I make a religion for the sole purpose of hating a group I would otherwise be prohibited from hating, is that OK? What if I indoctrinate somebody into that religion, can they say hate speech and be OK because they're sincerely holding that religious belief?

jbay808 5y ago
There's already a defense for truth, so I imagine the religious belief defense is there to avoid the Crown getting stuck in an argument about whether or not a given religion is "true", and the courts having to rule that it is not. For a secular belief, you'd probably stick to arguing that it is true, seeing as you sincerely believe it to be true.