ArcticBill
ArcticBill
ArcticBill

This reminds me of an old episode from the original Law & Order involving a hate crime hoax. It is an unfortunate reality that there are those who will capitalize on the rape hype. I can't speak for the US, but there is a lot of attention in and around university campuses across Canada on campus rape. Given Canada is

The issue is not as controversial as one would think. Canada has similar legislation in place. The difference is our conception of individual rights and reconciling the clashing of competing rights. It is illegal in both the US and Canada to cry fire in a crowded theatre; the analysis to arriving at the same

Well that is nothing... I SWATed my ex who happens to run a small grow-op in her basement. Literally half the police in the city showed up. The funniest part was she was running a fucking grow-op in her basement.

Wouldn't be the first time a hate crime hoax was committed at Duke.

Yet, I can already imagine many (white) people saying it's no big deal, mostly because their privilege led them to be ignorant of how the noose was used historically.

There is no proof as to the origin or intent of the noose. It is possible it was a hate crime hoax. It reminds me of a South Park episode where a bunch of left-wing protestors beating themselves up to convince the media that was police "brutality." We had our fair share of shenanigans like that at my undergrad

Batgirl is a ginger?!?!

Unfortunately there are gaps in the law protecting employees from such reprisals. One of the most frustrating part of dealing with complaints filed under a human rights statute is the misunderstanding on the part of the complainant as to what a human rights tribunal can determine.

You beat me to this story lol ... The stupidity here is the use of an archaic test to establish the legality of personhood of a foetus. The leading of conflicting theories by the prosecution is not terribly uncommon. Defence does it, though at their own peril. The Supreme Court of Canada implicitly allowed a defendant

Yes, I agree. As I said, the "test" is stupid. Setting aside the absurdity of the test, the reliability of the test is on a scale, and I agree it is not terribly reliable. The hymen is often punctured in childhood through normal physical activity. Nonetheless it is "circumstantial" insofar as it some, albeit of

Ironically your objection to how her remains were "paraded" around the courtroom leads me to believe that the Crown and police took this case very seriously, and as was acknowledged in the article, took unorthodox steps to prove its case. There was no connection between how the Crown proved its case to the dark days

Nationally, black girls are suspended six times more than white girls, according to the study, while black boys are suspended three times more than white boys.

I am an Aboriginal male. You white chicks only pay lip service to our women for the purpose of advancing your own careers. In the old days it as white males who came to our communities to "civilize us." Now that is no longer political correct, it is white women who come to our communities and act like the "great white

Firstly, boys cannot be virginity tested. That is a biological reality. It is not discrimination. If a boy knocks up a girl and it is proven, he is not exactly off the hook either. Under Customary Law, he can be forced to wed the girl, depending on jurisdiction. It can also result in compensation paid from the boy's

Well you tell me how to conduct a virginity test on a male and then we can talk discrimination lol

Virginity testing is obviously dumb public policy. However, the fact that boys cannot be tested is not discriminatory. The biological reality is that virginity testing is only possible on females. The same feminist reasoning in resisting discrimination claims lodged by males challenging the gender-specific wording of

Bear in mind the evidence which the jury saw was different from what was in the media. There were exclusion of evidence as a result of legal issues. Also the Crown did not lead sufficient evidence of causation and consent. The threshold is beyond a reasonable doubt, which is quite high.

Attitudes toward the "wage gap" in my generation will shift as it starts to favour women. It is very much like how in Sweden there was a requirement for "gender balance" in all post-secondary programs. In 2010, when this policy started preferring males in most university programs, feminists cried bloody murder, and

Yes, but that is besides the point. The same stats have been presented in TIME, Forbes, The Guardian and CBC. Those are media outlets which do not publish junk.

It depends on how the hypothetical challenge is framed. It is not out of the realm of possibility in that it would allow for face-saving by states' rights jurists; it would simply expand the 14th Amendment without unduly trampling on the 10th Amendment. The other side is the desire to not delve into unnecessary