We've always got room to improve though because as a fellow Canadian I don't feel my country men are all similarly free.

Mike Ward, a comedian up here was sued for $35k because of a joke he made on set.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/mike-ward-verdict-1.3688089

Greg Elliott disagreed with a feminist blogger over twitter and was hit a three year criminal trial over criminal harassment, including a bail condition throughout the trial banning him from internet access. His job relied on that internet access so even though he was cleared of all charges...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Elliott

You aren't supposed to dress up as Mulan unless you are Asian, or even worse as Pocahantas unless your first nations.
http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/universities-crack-down-on-offensive-halloween-costumes-at-campus-parties/wcm/b1b50639-0157-4a7d-b7fc-fd45718c4d6d

If you run want to run a Women's only naked spa, you still must allow those with male genitals entry or face a human rights commission complaint which is still in progress:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/body-blitz-transgender-policy-1.4158397

Those a re recent examples easy to mind, but this is pretty frequent.

Fellow Canuck here. Good to live in a land free to tolerate, not discriminate.

There is no economy without demand.

Why do these folks forget about Ford, who enraged his fellow company owners by raising his wages so astronomically? He created his buying public with the higher wages, which made him more money.

That's funny. Not referring to your shit joke but your poor ability in making it. Lol. Yeah, not me, or my dog.

Fantomas pointed out the location before I did (hello fellow Australian!).

BTW, I used to be a paramedic. I've scrapped lots of people up off of the road (alive and dead) from this sort of small driver error. This is just one of the reasons I'm happy about the advent of driverless cars.

Is road safety funny to you?

Wasn't there, but I'm sympathetic to their cause.

I would say, like the people quoted in the article linked by Scud, these people aren't against "stepping out of their comfort zone" to learn. But there are certain norms and boundaries to ideas we hold in both every day discourse and academic discourse.

Some of that is how we don't entertain the idea of bringing back phrenology or that the earth is flat in serious discussion. But, unlike those antiquated ideas, other sorts of ideas lead to real and harmful consequences to marginalized groups. Ideas like entire classes of people either not being worth basic human rights or specifically targeting them for dehumanization/harassment.

I think people who shut down events like that or ones where Milo Yiounappolos specifically singled out trans individuals are weighing whether giving a larger audience to ideas like "these people aren't normal/don't deserve basic rights" is worth the real harm and harassment that follows. People see it as essentially saying, "Hey now, lets hear what these National Socialist fellows have to say about Jewish people without all the whining, ok?"

And these things aren't really as cut and dry "they don't want to hear differences of opinion" when every single trans person, person of color, gay person, etc has had these "differing opinions" yelled at them or forced into their life on a daily basis.

I'm reminded very much of this fellow.

Shinyblury might be better at weighing on some of this now .

I agree, the entire old testament seems at odds with Jesus's teachings....unless you interpret murder of infidels as somehow loving them to death.
With how many different christian churchs there are in every single town having a slightly different view it's hard to give a singular answer. I'd hazard the most common explanation though is that the old school laws basically demonstrated one thing to humanity, every last one of you by rights deserves death. Everybody is, by God's standards, inadequate and the penalty is death.
That's why his statements about the laws still being in full effect don't jibe with his teachings of love and acceptance, and no where does he, or God, or any prophet say his death erases God's laws that I find
Continuing what I think is the most common explanation, Jesus message was that the 'spirit' of the old school laws was to encourage humanity to love god and fellow man without exceptions. Strictly following the letter of the laws was to miss the point entire. Also, the punishment for failing to live up to the standard of universal love for God and fellow man was death, fire, brimstone and all the nasty old testament sentences.

So taking those as axioms you have God's law for humanity was and always had been love for him and each other. God's punishment for failing that measure, even in the least, was and always had been death and eternal damnation.

Again, I can't say all Christians are universally agreed on what to do from that, but I would say that the majority again follow Jesus teachings that the punishment for those that fall short was to be left to God and not to humans. As in, no more going around killing each other for breaking the law in letter or in spirit. Evangelicals are probably also universally agreed that ALL of humanity fails to meet the morality bar and thus was doomed to death until Jesus was killed. Jesus having met the bar of perfection required by the law, was thus payment through his death for the rest of humanity. So Evangelicals for the most part then take the entirety of the Bible as a message telling them they should go out and love God and everyone and in the humility that they are but for the grace of God equally deserving of damnation.

I know re-reading that it reads more like a sermon than anything, but it's also the most concisely I could manage to fit in how I understand most evangelicals to read the bible.

ah,the days of being in a relationship with a woman,who loved painkilllers with her jug wine.

who would wake me up in the dead of the night,using the super heated metal tops of a bic lighter on the bottom of my feet (those are called "smileys" for those who do not know) to scream at me about some girl who had the audacity to look my way at target,because 3:30am is the time to find out if i am having sexual thoughts about random women.

or an earlier girlfriend whose father was a prominent artist in the country and was holding a weekend jazz festival.i had a customer who had cerebal palsy,and one leg had been amputated,whose boyfriend had just broke up with her and she was a wreck.

so i had this bright idea! why doesn't this poor emotional wreck of a woman come to the jazz festival of my girlfriends dad? that will get her mind off things right?

but,having a second person accompany made me a little late.so when i finally showed up,my girlfriend was already half in the bag,and mad.i tried to explain and introduce her to mary,the heartbroken girl.

and my girlfriend broke my nose with a bottle of michelob.i do not think she cared that mary was heart broken,and an utter wreck in need of human company.i could be wrong,this is just a guess,but the bleeding from my broken nose may have been a strong indicator.

or how about the time i was counseling a long time friend,who had pulled a midnight move out to escape a man who had basically had her trapped in a spare room,chaining her to the wall.that man had gone as far as severing her achilles tendons,after her first attempt to escape,and this woman suffered from a severe case of PTSD.

now she did form an almost childlike bond to me.maybe because i had offered her the first taste of true compassion,and offered her safety and comfort,and allowed her to talk the poison and bile out that had been building inside her for over three years.

but her attachment to me,which was to be expected,was not viewed favorably by my girlfriend.i spent a lot of time and attention in drawing this broken and damaged young woman to feel safe,and to begin to feel human again(which infuriated my girlfriend).my patio was always filled with friends,artists and people of interest,and i did my best to bring a normalcy to this young womans life in order to help her acclimate,and to feel human again.

and my girlfriend would come home,get drunk,and start to whisper the most vile.and disgusting things..not about this young woman,but about me.

which,of course,if you understand the mentality of an abuse victim.especially one who had suffered such as she had.any criticism,or perceived threat to the person who had (in their mind) saved them,will create incredible anger and anxiety.

so because of my girlfriends irrational jealousy of this woman,and in her drunken selfishness,she went out of her way to make this woman feel as uncomfortable,and as unsafe (the exact opposite of what i was trying to do).so much so that the young woman...who didn't want to be a burden,or affect my life in a negative way...left my home,and wrote me she would never come back,because she loved me and didnt want to cause problems.

two weeks later she was found dead in motel room.over dose of piankiller and xanax...and wrists slashed to ribbons.

or how about the time one of my girlfriends broke three of my ribs,because i was being kind to a waitress?

or the time another girlfriend stabbed me,because while she was unhappy with our relationship,she could not abide me talking to anyone who owned a vagina.in this case a fellow artist i was collaborating with,and who happened to be not only an amazing human being but beautiful as well.

or that one time,when i broke up with a girl,because it simply was not working out and she repeatedly rammed her ford fairmont station wagon into my brand new firebird?

oh..the stories i can tell about all my wonderful relationships,and the women i have shared portions of my life with.i could write a book...

and then i watch this video,and i am overcome with an urge to drive cross country to the creators home,walk inside,grab him by the ankles and crag him outsides....and beat him senseless.

because he is coming from a false premise.
he is implying the that the benefits of relationships outweigh he selective memory our brains create when reliving our moments of singlehood.

when the reality is this:as long as you have friends,who love and accept you for who you are,you are never actually single.you are surrounded and loved by an extended family.

i do not need a girlfriend.
i do not want a girlfriend.
i am not interested in getting married.
and as i have revealed here,i would prefer some memories to remain buried under the much happier and adoring memories of my actual friends who put up with my eccentricities,and my overall oddness,rather than deal with a woman who is smitten with the ideas fed to them by institutions,and periodicals such as comsopolitian and vogue.

though,ironically,i have two ex girlfriends living in my home as i write this.
one is a former porn star,and current stripper who suffers from paranoid schizophrenia,and is a recovering addict.

while the other i had to go do a midnight rescue from a place where she was renting a room,but the house was junkie house,and she is a recovering addict as well (and they also kept stealing everything from her).she has bought a house,but it needs work and that work is taking fooooooorever.

and BOTH of these women still harbor some residual feelings towards me.even though i have been quite clear,open and honest that i have ZERO interest in rekindling anything,with either of them,but that hasn't stopped them from being all catty with each other,and causing drama,and complaining about the smallest,tiniest and most ridiculous of things to bitch about.

at first i tried to play referee.
i did my best to help everyone get along,until i realized they both had no interest in getting along.they wanted to outdo the other in order to get my attention.

which is just.....dumb..but anyways,my new way of handling their insipid complaints is always this response:i don't care.

and it seems to work beautifully.

so there you have my story,or at least part of it.
and i have to say...this guy is kinda full of shit.

for those of you happily married,with a great partner,i salute you.good for you,and i mean that.

but for me?
no thanks.i am good.

@robdot
trying to unpack your comment.

"spent the entire election cycle ranting about hillary"

what the holy fuck are you blathering about?

the entire election cycle liberals fell asleep at the wheel,and tacitly bought the bullshit pie that:paid political pundits,pollsters and supposed "informed political journalists" were selling.

hillary is going to win,the polls reveal that hillary will beat trump handily.don't worry liberal democrats,hillary is going to win.do not pay attention to hillary's abysmal numbers,because trumps are just as horrid.

and just WHAT was hillary's platform?
what was her political messaging and vision for america's future?

"well,my fellow americans,at least i am not THAT guy".
that was it,that pathetic,weak and facile position,WAS her campaign!

if this is what you are referencing,then yes..i agree..the democrats fucking dropped the ball.they had no message,no platform,no vision.

the democrats lost a massively energized younger population when they openly,and brazenly,fucked over sanders,because sanders threatened the DNC and the democrats corporate money train,and we can't have a politician who has shown integrity,morals and vision now can we?

hillary on the other hand,had already proven to be a willing participant in the corporate train.you know..speak one way to the people,but another way behind closed doors..wink-wink-nudge nudge-know-what-i-mean.

if this is what you are talking about,then yes,i agree,liberal democrats need to take a big,giant bite out of that shit sandwich and stop behaving like they are fucking victims.

"Japanese pool players gives great interview"!?!?!?

More like "idiot Englishman imposes a bloody terrible interview to fellow human being, perpetuating bigotry and lack of cultural awareness as acceptable behaviour for a professional communicating adult.

I'm sorry for yelling.

Ummm.....so Tillman slandering his colleague and Tillman throwing the first punch...ignore that and blame the victim who called Tillman a liar for spreading lies on the senate floor and on the record about his fellow senator while they weren't present to defend themselves? I don't get that at all, both verbally and physically, Tillman was the clear instigator (and a piece of shit).
The rule had nothing to do with his blatant racism and everything to do with the personal insults and the fist fight on the Senate floor that involved numerous senators when it was done. It was to stop Tillman from repeating his personal attacks, not to stop his colleague from defending his own reputation from Tillman's slanderous lies by calling them lies, as I read the record.
Edit: don't take me wrong, I'm not arguing against your contention that some may have said protecting Tillman was the reason for the rule, or even that they meant it, just that, logically, it doesn't make a bit of sense.
I think the rule is proper if they change it to slander, not just apt but unbecoming description, and certainly not a reasonable interpretation of their actions as a public servant. Lies shouldn't be accepted, no matter what lies or about whom....imo.

All that said, I like the idea of calling it the Tillman rule and claiming it was created with the intent of protecting racists from having their public records made public.

Blythe's definitely an interesting fellow. I watched a couple of his videos [you?] posted and they were undeniably depressing but fascinating and made a lot of sense to me. I've never taken a xanax but have an ample supply of diazepam thankyouverymuch

Ok. Thank you for clarifying.
I feel you have now invited action against you by moderators AND verbal retaliation from fellow sifters.
You are welcome to your opinion, as disgusting as many may find it, but you are NOT welcome to use blatant racist hate speech when explaining your theories, not here. The rules on that subject are clear, and you have blatantly, repeatedly, and unapologetically violated them.
I do give you props for standing behind your words, that's far more adult than hiding from them and pretending you didn't mean it or were just joking.

Btw, calling you out on your inappropriate actions in no way equates to condoning Obama's inappropriate actions.