News

Y'all I just fell down a rabbit hole. I understood that Canada has a limited right to expression- meaning hate speech is prohibited, and checked the New Brunswick's human rights act- gender expression and gender identity are protected classes.

BUT it seems really similar to this case: https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/12876/index.do where the court ruled that the material was not hateful enough to be hate speech? I wonder if the best thing to do is make their own (better) flyers promoting love. It's unfortunate- falsehoods are actually protected under freedom of expression.

I can't imagine how devastating it must be for that mother to have to handle and disperse materials that challenge her daughter's right to exist and live in a way that makes her feel safe. I understand the importance of freedom of expression rules, but I have a feeling that if these flyers were going out saying that children with other medical conditions shouldn't be receiving care, or children with disabilities shouldn't receive accomodation in the classroom, there would be more of an uproar. It's so sad that one group of children seems to be an acceptable target.

I find it disturbing how many people here condemn or "both sides" her when all she did was refuse to distribute flyers advocating to take lifesaving medical care away from her child

Any halfways decent parent would've done the same. These bigots want to see her child dead or suffering, she is under no obligation to do their work for them

Tolerance may end with Intolerance, but idk how I feel about postal workers having the right to decide what does and does not get mailed.

It’s good actually that the mail doesn’t censor based on viewpoint

https://philosophyterms.com/paradox-of-tolerance/

There is a concept called the paradox of tolerance. In order for a society to be tolerant, it needs to accept all people. However, there are people who are intolerant. If society accepts them, they will have to elevate the speech of the intolerant which means incorporating intolerance into society. If society rejects them, they will have to be intolerant to a group of people which means incorporating intolerance into society. The paradox seems unsolvable until it is reframed.

https://conversational-leadership.net/tolerance-is-a-social-contract/

Rather than tolerance being a straight jacket it is instead a contract or peace treaty. As long as everyone is tolerant to each other everything is fine. As soon as a group chooses to be intolerant, they have breached the agreement. This means the intolerant group is no longer protected by the agreement. The rest of society no longer has to tolerate the intolerant group. Nor should they, because to do so would be to condone intolerance against members of society. The society as a whole remains tolerant because all the rest of the groups practice tolerance to each other.

https://www.healthline.com/health/what-is-gender-affirming-care

Gender affirming care involves helping trans people, both youths and adults, to transition to their gender identity through the use of therapy, puberty blockers, and hormone therapy. It is lifesaving care. Unsubstantiated attacks to gender affirming care are a threat to the lives of all trans people. Threatening the lives of people with a disinformation campaign is a breach of the social contract of tolerance. When fascists attempt to spread life-threatening disinformation campaigns, people at all levels of society should stand up to them.

This woman did the right thing. She put human life and liberty over the mail. Standing up to fascists doesn't always mean punching Nazis. It means seeing intolerance for what it is and refusing to tolerate it. We may all find ourselves in similar situations sooner rather than later. We should all seek to emulate this woman.

https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/harm-principle

To be as clear as possible, banning gender affirming care will put trans people in a life threatening situation. So this disinformation campaign to ban gender affirming care, if successful, can only lead to putting trans people in a life threatening situation. A person's freedoms should not extend to the point where they are free to harm other people. Disinformation that can only harm a group of people should not be protected speech.

I know this topic can be contentious as the mail is an essential service for many people. And I'm aware not everyone is familiar with trans issues. I spoke up because I saw people falling into a common trap. Standing up to fascists doesn't make us fascists. Freedom of speech rests on the foundation of the truth. If we tolerate lies, elevating them to the same status as the truth, we undermine free speech. My hope is that people will see this was not a moral disagreement. This was a strategic decision to defend a group's right to exist, that did not infringe on anyone else's freedoms. The right of an apolitical, uninterrupted mail service should not supersede a group's right to exist. edit: updated the third link edit: typo

People can refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple.

People get punished for not delivering hate mail.

Why is it so easy for hatred to do things but so hard for decency to push back?

I have nothing against trans but this person should have delivered them. If these are legal there is no reason not too. Just think of it as any other trash mail.

I don't disagree in therory but there is no way we can let postal workers have a say in what they can or cannot deliver. Fire them for doing it and move on.

While I sympathize… That's fair. Same as the people working in pharmacies and refusing to hand out birth control. If you have moral qualms about your job, find another job.

i assume there are federal laws on delivering mail to people, considering that like. That shits important sometimes.

People in this thread: sensible