"secular bigotry"

[HappySqurriel]

sethnintendo said:

HappySqurriel said:
From what I have seen in Canada, the freedom of religion and/or freedom of speech can be put at risk in favor of the false freedom from offense and/or freedom from inconvenient truths in the name of protecting minority groups. Realistically, the interests of everyone would be met in a superior fashion if they allowed/encouraged civil class action lawsuits for slander and liable.

Sounds like a potential for a lot of bs lawsuits.  I suppose what I mean is how you look at the word slander.  Slander could mean very different between two people although it shouldn't.  For instance something that is a little disturbing in the wikipedia page on defamation is that it states "It is usually a requirement that this claim be false".  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

That I find pretty damn disturbing considering it should be always false.  If a statement is true then how the hell can they sue over it?   Anyways, the defenition gets better explained later on the page but that part just caught my eye since I already consider some people may not be able to come to the same conclusion on the definition.

I agree with you, but I think that the vast majority of "Hate Speech" cases are not that different from slandering an individual except that they're targeting an group of people. While there is potential for abuse, these kinds of lawsuits are rarely abused when it comes to individuals because it is difficult to prove (and certain conditions need to exist in order to have a viable case).

From what I have seen in human rights tribunals in Canada, there is far more room for abuse in the kind of pseudo-legal system that can be formed to deal with these kinds of complaints.