LogFAQs > #896232637

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Noted intellectual heavyweight Jordan Peterson argues with a bot on Twitter
nicklebro 02/16/18 10:37:11 PM #151:	Well duh, the law was passed less than a year ago, it'd take a while for a person to even get to the point that they could find themselves facing jail time. And you do know that even Peterson acknowledges that that would only arise if someone refused to pay a fine or some other court order, so the crime would actually be contempt of court right? It seems like you're looking for jail sentences in the actual Bill C 16, that's not how it works. Bill C16 opens up the possibility for this to happen, since "gender identity" and "gender expression" were purposely not defined in the bill. The argument has always been that Bill C 16 leaves open the possibility of compelled speech due to its shoddy writing. I thought you knew this. --- Now you can't call me a sigless user. <cite>nicklebro posted [p:896232637] in Noted inte... [t:76320153]...</cite> <quote>Well duh, the law was passed less than a year ago, it'd take a while for a person to even get to the point that they could find themselves facing jail time. And you do know that even Peterson acknowledges that that would only arise if someone refused to pay a fine or some other court order, so the crime would actually be contempt of court right? It seems like you're looking for jail sentences in the actual Bill C 16, that's not how it works. Bill C16 opens up the possibility for this to happen, since "gender identity" and "gender expression" were purposely not defined in the bill. The argument has always been that Bill C 16 leaves open the possibility of compelled speech due to its shoddy writing. I thought you knew this. --- Now you can't call me a sigless user.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1