Does Canada Need Our Human Rights Commissions?

Reproduced below are some of the more interesting online comments posted on the Web site of the National Post Comment pages,www.fullcomment.com,in reaction to Bernie M. Farber and Len Rudner's Feb. 19. column, "Hatred killed Pamela Waechter." Join the debate atwww.fullcomment.com

IainGFoulds Prejudice is the tribal assumption that we are divided into groups.

Weak-minded, insecure individuals will use prejudice to attempt to alleviate their insecurities by the denigration of others based on groupings.

Mike~ If I dislike someone who is a visible minority or a member of a designated faith, I am subjected to appearing before a tribunal for "hate" speech. Yet if I dislike my neighbour who is a white/pink or tanned person, I am subjected to nothing.

This is clearly wrong.

wyatt tune Ridiculous. You think it's better to silence these freaks so they can glorify themselves and plot in secrecy? Let them talk and identify themselves. From time to time, I see a Klan "rally" in the United States — a pathetic handful of nut bars and clowns, being cursed and mocked by their fellow citizens.

That's how you handle hate speech. You're losing this debate, Mr. Farber, because your approach lacks common sense.

Hobbeswasright The problem with human rights commissions is that they lack due process. Hate crimes — whether they are directed at minorities or anyone else — should be prosecuted, but not by these kangaroo courts.

IainGFoulds: Prejudice isn't the assumption that we are divided into groups. That division is a fact of life; it relates to prejudice only when one group decides another is inferior.

Mike~: Disliking someone is never grounds for prosecution. Expressing your dislike can be. And I agree that these laws ought to be applied more equally.

wyatt tune: I agree that this approach sometimes ends in giving lunatics more attention than they would otherwise receive. However, prosecuting crime always calls for judgment.

feldated Section 13 (1) of our Human Rights Act prohibits "any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt."

The notion that a person can be held guilty of potentially hurting some unnamed person's feelings sometime in the future is nauseating.

ohara8667 This is a clearheaded column that attacks the issue head-on. There has been much debate here suggesting the banishment of human rights codes because of the manner in which they were applied in the Steyn and Levant cases.

I am sympathetic to the argument that these were ridiculous complaints and should never have seen the light of day. But I am reluctant to throw the baby out with the bath water.