TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Unicornmayo Archive

View 0 posts and 8 comments by Unicornmayo on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

My reading comprehension is fine, thank you. Was there a particular part that is not clear to you?
/r/TheRedPill25/06/13 12:58 PM
-2

In Canada, it's always been very clear that civil liberties (such as freedom of speech) have been balanced with public goals. Not saying the law shouldn't be changed, but as the court determines, section 8 of the human rights code in BC is constitutional. The comedian could elevate this to the Supreme Court of Canada if he doesn't agree with the ruling, but I would imagine it's likely to fail to the proportionality test. Free speech does not give you the right to say whatever you want without re…
/r/TheRedPill25/06/13 12:57 PM
-1

Then you should note that the challenge is not based on the facts, it's whether section 8 of the BC Human Rights Code is constitutional. The facts are no longer in dispute.
/r/TheRedPill25/06/13 12:50 PM
1

I'll admit that I did not read the court report as it was long and exceedingly boring to me. Ok. Personally, if I am debating or arguing something I would read everything I could about the subject. However, this seems to be a game of "he said, she said," as the comedian stated that they were heckling him and threw water at him. It is made clear that the tribunal conducted interviews of witnesses and tried to clear up as many discrepancies as possible before determining damages. That's where it l…
/r/TheRedPill25/06/13 12:48 PM
-1

In your opinion. The judge considered lowering the damages if the tribunal had erred in its process but ultimately determined the tribunal and followed its own process. And bear in mind it was paid to two individuals not one ($7500 each) and its not just the comedian but the venue who is also liable since they were the employer.
/r/TheRedPill25/06/13 12:35 PM
-3

To be clear; this ruling is on a constitutional challenge of the Human Rights Code in BC brought forth by Zesty and Mr. Earle. So one tribunal has already found harm. So every time someone is mean to you, they should have to pay you? That's not what it means. It means that the individuals comments went beyond mere jest or poking fun and the judge stated that: [338] In deciding whether Mr. Earle’s words and conduct constituted discrimination contrary to s. 8 of the Code, the Tribunal had to give …
/r/TheRedPill25/06/13 02:16 AM
-4

He could have them removed from the premises then, and perhaps should have. To say (as paragraph 71 states): "Somebody shut her up. Put a cock in her mouth and shut her the fuck up" is not an appropriate response.
/r/TheRedPill25/06/13 01:39 AM
-1

Maybe someone should actually read the court decision: [66] In the next very short while, Mr. Earle, from the stage, using a microphone, and in his capacity as host or master-of-ceremonies of the open mic night, said the following words, directed exclusively at Ms. Pardy, Ms. Broomsgrove, and Ms. Sandor, or words to substantially the same effect: "Don't mind that inconsiderate dyke table over there. You know lesbians are always ruining it for everybody." "Do you have a strap-on? You can take you…
/r/TheRedPill24/06/13 10:16 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter