5PM UPDATE:
Steyn’s opening statement is up at Denyse O’Leary’s blog.
She ran home to transcribe this for us all while we went out for coffee nearby: GirlOnTheRight, Mike Brock, Dr. Roy and a few others, along with Steyn his own self.
More about that later. Right now I need to have dinner and work on an article (or two).
***
I’ll be out much of today, hoping to hear Mark Steyn’s testimony at Queen’s Park this afternoon.
GirlOnTheRight is LIVEBLOGGING the hearing on her Blackberry.
Can’t find room 151? Just follow the buzzing sound: Steyn tends to be surrounded by a flock of ardent admirers.
Speaking of the Human Rights Commissions:
The controversial section of the Canadian Human Rights Act governing hate speech comes under scrutiny today when federal politicians decide whether to debate the limits it places on freedom of expression.
What’s wrong with Section 13.1? Well…
That printer and others like him — almost always conservatives and usually Christians — including one Catholic bishop charged with “homophobia,” Steyn and Macleans, and the defendant in Warman vs. Lemire, have all attracted the CHRC’s ire because they’ve said or done something “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt.”
That’s from Section 13.1 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Note that magic word: “likely.” No need to prove certain words or images inspired tangible hate crimes, like arson or assault. Rather, CHRC bureaucrats need merely deem it “likely” that persons unknown might commit such crimes between now and the end of the world. That’s “thought crime” meets “future crime.” And it is enshrined in Canadian law.
PS:
The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights will be debating the CHRC today (Monday Feb.9) from 3:30 – 5:30 Ottawa [Eastern] time.
