this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2023
30 points (100.0% liked)
Canada
7230 readers
806 users here now
What's going on Canada?
Related Communities
π Meta
πΊοΈ Provinces / Territories
- Alberta
- British Columbia
- Manitoba
- New Brunswick
- Newfoundland and Labrador
- Northwest Territories
- Nova Scotia
- Nunavut
- Ontario
- Prince Edward Island
- Quebec
- Saskatchewan
- Yukon
ποΈ Cities / Local Communities
- Calgary (AB)
- Edmonton (AB)
- Greater Sudbury (ON)
- Guelph (ON)
- Halifax (NS)
- Hamilton (ON)
- Kootenays (BC)
- London (ON)
- Mississauga (ON)
- Montreal (QC)
- Nanaimo (BC)
- Oceanside (BC)
- Ottawa (ON)
- Port Alberni (BC)
- Regina (SK)
- Saskatoon (SK)
- Thunder Bay (ON)
- Toronto (ON)
- Vancouver (BC)
- Vancouver Island (BC)
- Victoria (BC)
- Waterloo (ON)
- Winnipeg (MB)
Sorted alphabetically by city name.
π Sports
Hockey
- Main: c/Hockey
- Calgary Flames
- Edmonton Oilers
- MontrΓ©al Canadiens
- Ottawa Senators
- Toronto Maple Leafs
- Vancouver Canucks
- Winnipeg Jets
Football (NFL): incomplete
Football (CFL): incomplete
Baseball
Basketball
Soccer
- Main: /c/CanadaSoccer
- Toronto FC
π» Schools / Universities
- BC | UBC (U of British Columbia)
- BC | SFU (Simon Fraser U)
- BC | VIU (Vancouver Island U)
- BC | TWU (Trinity Western U)
- ON | UofT (U of Toronto)
- ON | UWO (U of Western Ontario)
- ON | UWaterloo (U of Waterloo)
- ON | UofG (U of Guelph)
- ON | OTU (Ontario Tech U)
- QC | McGill (McGill U)
Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.
π΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales
- Personal Finance Canada
- BAPCSalesCanada
- Canadian Investor
- Buy Canadian
- Quebec Finance
- Churning Canada
π£οΈ Politics
- General:
- Federal Parties (alphabetical):
- By Province (alphabetical):
π Social / Culture
Rules
Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Having to explicitly define every protected category in law seems ridiculous. Surely a description of what a protected category looks like would be more consistent and future proof.
If "don't be an asshole" worked, we wouldn't need most of the rest of the laws. Sadly it doesn't. I don't quite understand why.
Because there is no consensus on what an "asshole" is.
"I'm not an asshole; I just tell it like it is." β some asshole somewhere every five minutes
Yeah. You're absolutely right. But it's fun to pretend we could all be reasonable together.
They're created this way on purpose, to leave room for hating people in the future we might not know we hate yet. That's the type of "future proof" we're after, right?
Stupid rules are created because of stupid people.
If I'm not mistaken, there are general descriptions too, so I don't think the list is exclusive. I think it's a good idea to specify what categories you can so that in future human rights challenges, you don't have various interested groups trying to argue differing interpretations. Interpretations of vague language can vary and this can tend to lead us away from the spirit of an otherwise good law.