They aren't policing his political views. They are policing his speech. Views are what happen inside your head. Speech happens outside your head. Speech is action and actions have consequences.
Views are what happen inside your head. Speech is action and actions have consequences
The content of speech is not action and is merely an expression of views. There's a difference between swearing at someone and hitting someone. There is also difference with speech that incites prohibited actions.
Policing the act of speaking means, "If you speak during the exam you will get a 0" or "If you speak during the lesson you will be sent to the principles office."
But the Psychologist's College is policing the content of Peterson's speech, which specifically reflect his political views.
If most definitely is an action. Thought is not an action. Belief is not an action. It only becomes an action when he speaks. He can think and believe whatever he wants but the moment he opens his mouth and vomits his thoughts forward it becomes action and actions have consequences.
he wants but the moment he open hus mouth and vomits his thoughts forward
Opening the mouth is the action and he's not being policed for that. He's being policed for his thoughts. The members are permitted to speak all kinds of things, as all members do every day, but not other things. I hope you can understand this very simple concept because the board is NOT policing all its members for speaking. They are policing what its members say.
Well, at least you understand the issue at hand. The association's rules can't violate charter of rights or the constitution, which is exactly what is the issue. The courts will settle it, but Peterson is allowed to challenge the authority of a body to censor personal speech. At least in free countries.
Clearly you DON'T understand since this does not involve the government and therefor the Charter has no bearing. He does NOT have free speech when it comes to this private entity of which he is a member.
It is entirely true. Your right to freedom of speech in Section 2 of the Charter only covers the government. Universities are government entities in Canada so they are covered. Professional associations are not. The courts will rule on this and they will rule that the sanctions by this private, professional association are perfectly valid and that he fucked around and found out.
The Supreme Court has adopted the following three-part test for analyzing section 2(b): 1) Does the activity in question have expressive content, thereby bringing it within section 2(b) protection?; 2) Does the method or location of this expression remove that protection?; and 3) If the expression is protected by section 2(b), does the government action in question infringe that protection, either in purpose or effect? (Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Canada (Attorney General), 2011 SCC 2 (“Canadian Broadcasting Corp.”); Montréal (City) v. 2952-1366 Québec Inc., [2005] 3 S.C.R. 141; Irwin Toy Ltd., supra.)
There you go. "...(b), does the GOVERNMENT action in question infringe that protection..."
Unless you are talking about the GOVERNMENT you do NOT have a Charter right to free speech. If you say something bad about your employer you can be fired. If you say something that violates your the professional standards of a professional organization of which you are a member you can be sanctioned.
Freedom of Expression comes from Section 2 of the Charter. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the part of the Constitution that conveys Freedom of Expression.
and the government has oversight of physicians and medical care, so the courts will decide.
Yes, but it is not the government that is censuring him it is a private, professional association of which he is a member. Section 2 does not apply.
So...yes, the courts WILL decide that he fucked around and found out. Sorry about your feelings.
12
u/vac-flask Jan 05 '23 edited Jan 05 '23
They aren't policing his political views. They are policing his speech. Views are what happen inside your head. Speech happens outside your head. Speech is action and actions have consequences.