I often tell my American friends that they’re entitled to have 10 times the number of nitwits than Canada does because they have 10 times the population. But if you’d like positive proof that idiocracy is alive & well in Canuckistan, look no further than “Professor” Darren E. Lund of the University of Calgary. This fellow recently wrote a vindictive piece in the Calgary Herald, aimed squarely at anyone who supports free speech … and thus disagrees with him.
Throughout his screed, Lund goes on & on condemning others for hate speech while unable to fathom that he’s pumping out a whole lot of his own. And he has the audacity to utter this not so clever totalitarian paragraph:
What Carpay and other fear-mongers fail to notice is that most Albertans, and most Canadians for that matter, are deeply repulsed by hate speech. In this great land, we enjoy our freedoms with an understanding that there must be reasonable limits on those who seek to take away others’ humanity or safety.
To the casual reader this may sound just wonderful, like apple pie and butterflies, but to anyone who has followed the free speech debate in Canada it is downright scary. Who is it that decides what is “hate speech” and what are “reasonable limits”? But of course, the Far Left zealots at the disgraced “human rights” commissions – folks who don’t believe that facts matter and are instead just driven by their unalterable ideology, namely: Anyone who disagrees with us must be uttering hate speech and thus must be silenced.
Ezra Levant is not unfamiliar with Lund, having talked at length about him in his book, Shakedown. Others have exposed Lund for being an anti-Christian bigot.
One particular line of Lund’s had me gobsmacked because of the deep irony:
Building a strong democracy must not include the freedom to poison the public discourse and actually threaten the safety of vulnerable people.
Emphasis mine. This makes one wonder if Darren Lund has covered up all of the mirrors in his home? He clearly hasn’t been observing his own words or actions in a very long time.
Earlier this year, Lund’s crusade against free speech was discussed on Michael Coren’s show:
The only reason Oz believes homosexuality isn’t a choice is blah blah blah…Powerfactor at October 2, 2011 5:57 PM
On the contrary, I’ve been arguing all along that homosexuality is a choice.
I shown that from their own terms, homosexuals agree it is a choice/preference.
I’ve also shown there is no scientific basis for precluding that homosexuality is a choice.
And last but not least, I hold the conservative principle that people are personally responsible for their behaviour.
I have never proselytized on SDA and don’t give a fig if other people hold my religious beliefs.
While my faith does influence my position on many issues, I have not mentioned my faith or justified my position on this subject on this thread using my faith or tenets of my faith as a justification.
All I have done is exploded the myth of the “gay gene”, none have given any evidence in rebuttal or reason why people cannot have chosen homosexuality as a sexual preference and are therefore responsible for that choice.
In closing, I do believe God creates some people for the purpose of destruction, after all He is the Alpha and the Omega.
ROMANS Chapter 9
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Black Mamba >
“I strongly suspect that a lot of men could fancy lolita-age girls if they wanted to, but most guys couldn’t live with themselves….”
This is where it gets sticky with that one. I believe your right; the troubling argument lies within certain cultures, aka Islam/ Arabic cultures where pedophilia is rampant as is homosexuality. Islam itself promotes pedophilia and reviles homosexuality. I suspect the homosexuality is more or less linked to the Islamic segregation of men and women like jailhouse homosexuality. The pedophilia is something else, cultural norm backed up by community & religion?
Regardless there are abnormal (criminal) sexual behaviours in all races and cultures, some much more than others. There are exponentially more violent rapes and murders committed by black males than whites (FBI statistics) in the US for example. Is this behaviour simply cultural or is it geneticly linked? Africa seems to have the same problem, which is culturally far removed from generations of a US upbringing.
Powerfactor >
“And if there is one thing we know about God, it’s that He hates fags.”
Not just god, a lot of people hate fags. It’s not allot different than fags who hate god along with allot of other people.
The biggest difference I see is the self destruction and self humiliation within the “Gay Community”. Generally it is a far left suicidal mental illness that detests a Christian “loving god”, defends by proxy an Islamic “gay killing god”, partakes in known risky lifestyles and promotes social anarchy within their own society.
Instead of “staying in the closet” and getting on with normal lives, the gay community likes to go public by flaunting pierced naked body parts in huge public parades while acting like frothing sexual predators. The craziest thing is that the same people turn around and tell the public that their children are going to be forced to accept and study this abhorrent lifestyle in schools, and in fact they would like to adopt a few hundred thousand of them and keep them at home.
Now how messed up is that?
Good grief. I am not gay,but some of my best friends (both guys and gals) are.To Ken(kulak) and others,it is the radical gays and lezbos who give a bad name to the rest.And they are radicals because they are brain dead leftards.
And guess what? I have the right to say that. If it offends somebody,tough s$$t,sticks and stones??
And no offense to Ken.
What a great thread.
Let me be the first to mention that while homosexuality may not be genetic,it can be induced by parents and doctors, that should not be doctors,cheered on by an inept society. I don’t have a link for this,check out yesterday’s posts.
A person’s sexuality does not have any bearing on their worth. However,I do find that many of the gay activists and their supporters are not very nice people,intolerant and self-centered.
Their free speech is two legs good,my speech is four legs bad. I can live with that,just don’t get into my face about it.
@ Justthinkin, none taken. At least the topic is being discussed rationally by most here.
Andrew @ 10:20 p.m.: “There is fundamental difference between anti-gay bigots and anti-Christian bigots: Gays don’t have a choice; Christians do.”
Then by extension Muslims must have a choice too, which throws “Islamophobia” out the window, doesn’t it?
As for Marianne Meed Ward, she was a Sun columnist up until a couple of years ago, and I seem to recall seeing a column or two after the 2008 meltdown that clearly demonstrated she knew nothing whatsoever about economics.