Unbelievable. A judge in Canada sentenced this cat to no petting for 30 days after it caught an Aurora Trout, which is a threatened species. This is Canada under Trudeau.
Moderator: Community Team
saxitoxin wrote:Unbelievable. A judge in Canada sentenced this cat to no petting for 30 days after it caught an Aurora Trout, which is a threatened species. This is Canada under Trudeau.
ConfederateSS wrote:--------I don't know....But I heard that a Father in Canada ,was fined or arrested...For calling his child...Daughter...You are not allowed to do that anymore in Canada ,I guess...It was on one of the Fox shows last week...... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...
cdbridges wrote:ConfederateSS wrote:--------I don't know....But I heard that a Father in Canada ,was fined or arrested...For calling his child...Daughter...You are not allowed to do that anymore in Canada ,I guess...It was on one of the Fox shows last week...... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...
FOX is not a credible news source. Their own lawyers, when defending a libel charge stated that "No reasonable person takes statements from Fox News seriously" .
Dukasaur wrote:cdbridges wrote:ConfederateSS wrote:--------I don't know....But I heard that a Father in Canada ,was fined or arrested...For calling his child...Daughter...You are not allowed to do that anymore in Canada ,I guess...It was on one of the Fox shows last week...... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...
FOX is not a credible news source. Their own lawyers, when defending a libel charge stated that "No reasonable person takes statements from Fox News seriously" .
Fox news is pretty dishonest, but not completely so. The story he's talking about did happen. Some broad who decided to become a boy went and got a court injunction to prevent her father from calling her by her real name and original gender. He did get arrested for violating the injunction.
I don't think it's a uniquely Canadian situation. Ignoring a court injunction will get you thrown in jail in most countries.
I suppose the number of countries where you could get an injunction against your father calling you by your real name is a smaller list, but still a lot more than just Canada.
cdbridges wrote:FOX is not a credible news source. Their own lawyers, when defending a libel charge stated that "No reasonable person takes statements from Fox News seriously" .
A New York state Supreme Court judge rebuked the Times last week for pioneering a novel defense against libel. The paper is now asserting it is entitled to assert opinions in news stories, without labeling or distinguishing the opinion from fact.
The Times’ responded to the defamation suit by asking for it to be dismissed on multiple grounds, including the notion that some of the most damning accusations the paper leveled at Project Veritas in its news stories were really matters of opinion. “In part, Defendants argue that their statements describing Veritas’ Video as ‘deceptive,’ ‘false,’ and ‘without evidence’ were mere opinion incapable of being judged true or false,” observes Wood in his opinion rejecting the motion for dismissal.
This isn’t the first time the paper has defended potentially defamatory reporting by claiming it is opinion ex post facto. The Times employed this defense successfully in federal court last year. In Peter Brimelow v. The New York Times Company, it was sued for calling an editor at VDARE, an immigration website accused of publishing racist material, an “open white nationalist” before stealth editing the article to merely calling him a “white nationalist.” Brimelow denies he’s a white nationalist.
The judge in that case, Katherine Polk Failla of the Southern District of New York, noted the news outlet’s defense of its description of Brimelow was that the term “constitute[s] nonactionable statements of opinion rather than false statements of fact.”
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/artic ... 45476.html
jimboston wrote:people don’t like nuance?
Dukasaur wrote:jimboston wrote:people don’t like nuance?
No, it's good that you presented it.
I think there's a real crime there in terms of making his daughter the subject of a political crusade. No matter what your kid does, and how much you privately hate it, I think it's a real breach of faith to publicly humiliate him/her/it.
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users