Liberal MP Scott Brison’s Brokeback Moment: Should Hateful, Homophobic Comments be Removed From Public Websites?
Liberal MP Scott Brison Photo Credit: CBC
Scott Brison, a Liberal MP, recently mailed out his Christmas card to constituents and supporters. As politicians’ Christmas cards go, it is pretty typical. It is attractive and depicts a pastoral scene. The only difference from other cards is that it includes Brison and his same-sex partner. It is also the first same-sex married MP Christmas card. Predictably, there were some hateful, homophobic comments posted on websites, and these sites removed these postings and closed the comments sections.
A few caveats are required. As a heterosexual male, I don’t claim to be an expert on gay culture, but I do sympathize with homosexuals and others when they are faced with discrimination and hostility. At the same time, I do not think it requires a lot of courage to do so, since I believe the level of hostility toward gays has diminished (although obviously has not been eliminated) over the past few decades. Homophobia in Canada, I believe, may now be approaching the degree of stigmatization that racism towards African Canadians has today. The stigmatization of these hateful sentiments, of course, doesn’t mean that they don’t exist or that polite racism and bigotry doesn’t occur.
The decision to remove the comments on the websites, on the surface, appears to be an easy one. Keeping hateful or libelous comments off websites protects the publishers from lawsuits, since they are often legally responsible for what appears on the websites. Furthermore, it also prevents upsetting some readers. Freedom of speech does exist in Canada, but this right is restricted: promoting hatred against others, such as gays, is not permitted.
Still, letting some of these comments stay on websites may provide an opportunity to respond and fight these harmful beliefs. The comments are exposed and can be dissected; their faulty reasoning can be revealed to others. Reasonable and responsible readers can counter the hateful comments with solid, rational arguments and thus educate others.
Related posts:
- “Bigots” Get the Vapours over Nova Scotia MP Scott Brison’s Christmas Card: Homophobia or Fair Comment? The House of Commons has adjourned until January 25th, so...
- CUPE Leader Sid Ryan Apologizes for Comments About Israel No, he did not apologize for his plan to ban...
- Proroguing Parliament: What Can We Learn From Facebook and Public Discourse? Bored and dipping in the whiskey last night, I decided...
- Baseless: Stephen Harper’s Liberal Solution HCBAX9NPSJB8 It is a truism that the Conservative’s base votes....
- Helena Guergis vs. Air Canada, PEI, and Airport Security – an Uncomfortable Diva Moment Flying can be stressful, and I suppose that being an...
Loading ...
December 26th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
As far as I see the expression of disapproval is acceptable (though I am quite supportive of the GLBT community). Where it crosses the line is at libel or where it encourages violence, or degrades into senseless name-calling and slander. By all means though, if evangelicals want to quote the first Chapter of Romans, or backward Levitical orders, by all means let them. If they want to say that homosexuality is the cause of flooding on the North Saskatchewan River I say let them do that too! Just so long as there is no slander, libel or language that provokes violence. Stupid people, no matter how ignorant, bigoted, or Mormon they happen to be should be allowed to express themselves. I agree that letting hate out in the open and forcing it to dialogue is better than penting it up in the isolated hearts and minds of the faithful and fanatical. The decision to paternally decide for us what is too offensive to listen to, and to take away our rights to respond to it is not the place of government.
Cheers.