In an incoherent essay, Janet Keeping, president of the Sheldon Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership criticizes Ezra Levant for "obnoxious" and "offensive" language in his disputes with Jennifer Lynch and the CHRC. But later, it turns out that Ms. Keeping recognizes that strong words are sometimes called for:
Here's another rule: It's not always possible to say what needs to be said without causing offence.One of my favourite American civil liberties cases, Cohen v. State of California, concerns a man ejected from a courtroom for wearing a "Fuck the draft" T-shirt. This occurred while the United States was still waging war in Vietnam. It was argued that, in order to claim freedom of expression, Cohen should have expressed himself more politely -- "Resist the Draft," perhaps. The Supreme Court disagreed and applied the U.S. Constitution to protect "the emotive function" of speech which "may often be the more important element of the overall message sought to be communicated."
So, if I'm following this, the phrase "Fuck Jennifer Lynch" is not necessarily objectionable if I'm merely demonstrating the "emotive function" of speech. That's good to know, because I'm otherwise inclined to shut down these corrupt and abusive agencies using automatic weapons fire and hand grenades. I suppose some would find that rude, too.
And let me forestall the inevitable complaint: "Fuck Jennifer Lynch" is in no way sexual. Students of the form will recognize that the correct rejoinder is "Not even with your dick, moosebreath."
Thus I pay respect to Ms. Lynch's sexual autonomy. Also that I find her somewhat less attractive than Yassir Arafat.
Via SDA