Free speech

Bueckert supported his earlier characterisations by pointing to Di Franco’s self-association with personalities that are frequently connected with the “alt-right” movement. On his Facebook profile, for example, Di Franco styles himself “Milo on facebook: James Damore in real life”.

In general, motions in Canada are largely symbolic. For example, in 2015 Parliament unanimously passed a motion to make combating anti-Semitism a priority in Canada’s domestic and international activities. So why all the fuss about a motion for similar action against Islamophobia?

Infringing on someone’s safety is never okay Over the past two weeks, the Internet has been abuzz over the latest human rights debate —the Return of Kings (ROK). For those who haven’t heard about it, they’re a group of men who, according to their website, believe in “the intellectual inferiority of women,” that “feminism (is) …

The privilege of being able to ignore such slaughter comes easily to the developed world. After so much misery has leaked into the news from crisis-ridden regions like Africa and the Middle-East, the exhaustion of public and political sympathy is no surprise.

“Ought there to be a code of conduct?” the taskforce asked, according to Rock. “If so, how should it be developed, what should it look like, how would it be administered, and what role does the university have in the responding to behaviour off-campus or in behaviour that’s not related to the academic role of the university?”

It’s great that we’re having a meaningful debate, but if we never arrive at a conclusion or even a semblance of one, what’s the point? Just watch the Piers Morgan gun control debate with Alex Jones, an American gun activist, to get a sense of how free speech on steroids becomes a verbal boxing match with no winner.