Meet the People’s Rights Amendment.

…it’s important to recognize that the proposal goes far beyond denying free speech rights to entities organized as corporations. It would deny them all other constitutional rights as well. Section 1 of the proposed amendment states that the “the rights protected by this Constitution” are limited to “the rights of natural persons.”
Notice that this is not limited to free speech rights or even to First Amendment rights generally. Section emphasizes that “People, person, or persons as used in this Constitution does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.” Notice that this is not limited to for-profit corporations lobbying for their narrow self-interest. It applies to all corporations of any kind, including nonprofits, media corporations, churches, and others.
Thus, the PRA would deny all constitutional rights to all entities organized as corporations. If the Amendment passes, government would be free to search corporate-owned premises at will, restrict freedom of religion at houses of worship owned by corporate entities (which includes most churches), condemn corporate-owned property for private uses and without paying compensation…

Via Instapundit

Via Marc Lemire;

Starting at 11:00am, Conservative MP and freedom fighter Brian Storseth (Conservative, Westlock – St. Paul, Alberta) is going to be testifying for an hour before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights (JUST) about Bill C-304, An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act (protecting freedom). Bill C-304 is landmark legislation, which will see the censorship powers (Section 13) stripped from the fanatics at the Canadian Human Rights Commission. So far, Bill C-304 has passed two readings in the House of Commons, and has the support of the Justice Minister and the Conservative Party of Canada.
If you are in Ottawa on April 24th, 2012, you can attend the JUST sub-committee at:
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
Room 306, La Promenade Building
151 Sparks St.
Ottawa, Ontario

ParlVu is going to be broadcasting MP Brian Storseth’s testimony live. (JUST Meeting No. 31)

At Sun News…

Related!

The major media’s double standard, elucidated by Publius:

Death of the Prime Minister
Just for laughs:

On Bob Rae’s schedule for Wednesday night [Feb. 22]: some time boxed in to deliberate Stephen Harper’s demise. All for fun, though!
The Liberal Party of Canada seatwarmer is one of the rent-a-dons booked for the annual wit-whack that is the Leacock Debate. Hart House. Great Hall. Toronto. 6 p.m. The issue up for pedantic undressing? “A plane carrying Celine Dion, Rob Ford, Stephen Harper and Don Cherry is about to crash. There is only one parachute. Who lives?” Debate amongst yourselves.

Such wit! Such originality! Nothing like telling jokes about Stephen Harper meeting a painful and gruesome end…
The location for this laughing with death debate is Hart House, that’s the student center for the University of Toronto…

h/t Matt from Mississauga

Update: Commenter ‘doowleb’ posted this gem: “Give me Liberty or Give me death has been replaced with Give me.”

In overturning the 2010 decision of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario to award $2,000 to each man for “violation of their inherent right to be free from discrimination and for injury to their dignity, feelings and self-respect,” the Divisional Court instead ordered them and the tribunal to pay legal costs of $20,000 to the librarian and to the Peel Law Association, which runs the library.
The three-judge panel found that tribunal vice-chairman Eric Whist unfairly reversed the onus of proof from the complainant to the respondent, and “placed [the librarian] in the difficult position of trying to prove a negative, namely, that her conduct in the performance of her routine duties was not motivated by race and colour.” It also criticized the tribunal’s “misconceived” comparison of the librarian’s conduct to racial profiling by police.

h/t Rita

[… Ray Honeyford] taught in a variety of inner-city schools before taking over at Drummond in 1981. Honeyford’s experience of running a largely Asian school gave him a special insight into the iniquities of multiculturalism, the official doctrine that had held sway in state education since the 1970s.
According to this policy, ethnic minority children were encouraged to cling on to their cultures, customs, even languages, while the concept of a shared British identity was treated with contempt. Honeyford thought this approach was deeply damaging.
He feared that it promoted division, hindered integration and undermined pupils’ opportunities to succeed in wider British society.
He voiced his concerns by writing an article in the obscure conservative political magazine The Salisbury Review, which was then edited by the distinguished philosopher Roger Scruton.
In it, Honeyford stated that white children constituted the ‘ethnic minority’ in many urban schools: ‘It is very difficult to write honestly and openly of my experiences and the reflections they evoke,’ he wrote, ‘since the race lobby is extremely powerful in the State education service.
‘The term racism functions not as a word with which to create insight, but as a slogan designed to suppress constructive thought.’
The race lobby had become so powerful, he added, that ‘decent people are not only afraid of voicing certain thoughts, they are even uncertain of their right to think those thoughts.

h/t EBD

With Paul Weston from the New Freedom Party in England.

Following in the footsteps of *Geert Wilder’s *Freedom* Party* of the Netherlands, Mr. Weston’s goals are to counteract the spread of fundamentalist Islam in Britain.

Event will be Monday, February 20, 2012 in Toronto. More info here.

CBC reports;

There have been layoffs at the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, CBC News has confirmed.

Best part?

MORE TO COME

h/t Marc

This is one of the most insidious evils I can imagine.

Cherenkov;

I’m not a project manager by trade, but I have worked on projects and taken project management training and I am confident in saying this: if you want your project to come in on time and on budget it needs to be properly managed. Especially if it’s a large project like, oh I don’t know … just pulling something out of the air here … the Canadian Museum for Human Rights.

More at Black Rod.

A fish rots from the belly.

What is “social infrastructure”? Just a big, fat pipeline through which tax dollars hurtle into the abyss.

Giant House of Death on the Prairie;

There is something perverse about building a “human rights” monument in the same country where one human rights commission prosecuted a publisher for reprinting the “Muhammad cartoons” and another banned a preacher for life from quoting “homophobic” Bible verses, even in private correspondence—to cite two of the most egregious cases.
Furthermore, there’s the obvious deduction that Asper really wanted another Holocaust museum to rival Yad Vashem and its Washington, DC counterpart. But Canada being “diverse” and “multicultural,” that simply wouldn’t do, so the project devolved into a more “inclusive” atrocity exhibition.

Black Rod;

On Friday, the biggest boosters of the Canadian Museum for Human Rights threw in the towel.
Like a punch-drunk fighter, the CMHR is still swinging, refusing to give up. But the Winnipeg Free Press, the propaganda arm of the museum, admitted in an editorial that the cost overruns of the CMHR are beyond the ability of the private sector to pay. The charade is over.
The numbers are so grim that the FP refuses to publish them.
So we’ll do it for them.

Jonathan Kay: Three [other] reasons why Winnipeg’s Human Rights Museum is doomed to failure
(Or you could just go to the Black Rod: “Remember, THEY HAVE NO MONEY.”)

“Cavoukian better hope that censorship isn’t expanded to talentless hacks who offend the musical sensibilities of anyone who has outlived kindergarten.”