• Soup@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    So should a bigoted transphobe mail carrier be allowed to deny mail from a source depicting trans rights as a positive thing?

    Does this work both ways?

    Or is it only that the law should be broken because you disagree with it. You don’t get to cherry pick federal laws bud. That’s not how it works.

    • Krzd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      What? The flyers promote the discrimination and criminalisation of a minority group, versus your example which would be promoting minority rights.
      Those aren’t comparable.

      • Soup@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        They’re 100% comparable when you understand how federal law works. Learn it- then come back here and we can discuss whether or not a mail carrier has the right to decide what mail you get.

        Until then, I don’t think you can carry your side in this discussion.

        • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Well I’m not too well versed on Canadian federal laws as I’m a bit further south. So I looked into discrimination laws in New Brunswick, Canada and found this Human Rights Act

          Some parts that could be relevant;

          The New Brunswick Human Rights Act is the provincial law that prohibits discrimination and harassment based on 16 protected grounds of discrimination.

          The Act prohibits discrimination in the following five areas under the provincial jurisdiction: Employment (includes job ads and interviews, working conditions, and dismissals); Housing (e.g. rent and sale of property); Accommodations, services, and facilities (e.g. hotels, schools, restaurants, government services, libraries, stores, etc.); Publicity; and, Professional, business or trade associations (e.g. Nurses Association of New Brunswick, New Brunswick Teachers’ Association, New Brunswick College of Physicians, etc.).

          Publicity includes any publications, displays, notices, signs, symbols, emblems that show discrimination or an intention to discriminate against any person or class of persons

          Not a lawyer or expert, but that seems to apply at least superficially. Maybe a bit of a stretch. But it helps that the fliers were full of factually wrong and hateful anti-trans myths. And freedom of speech has limits, even federally.

          ETA: However, mail carriers are probably exclusively covered by federal law, and the federal Canadian Human Rights Act only seems to specify discrimination and not harassment. I do think it’s too much of a stretch to say this would be covered by any federal laws

          Final edit: ok I read more. This is the closest thing I could find from the federal Human Rights Act

          12 It is a discriminatory practice to publish or display before the public or to cause to be published or displayed before the public any notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation that (a) expresses or implies discrimination or an intention to discriminate, or (b) incites or is calculated to incite others to discriminate

          If I am misinterpreting it, please let me know. I think it could be used as an argument tho

          • Soup@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            Now look up wether or not mail carriers get to decide what mail you get-

            • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              I understand that. I’m reading way too many laws already lol

              If the letter is determined to be unlawful, there’s a provision that allows Canadian Post to not deliver the letter. It’s a whole process that the mail carriers did not follow. Maybe if they had tried, and used the argument that it was unlawful discrimination or harassment to deliver the fliers, they would have had a leg to stand on. It seems that they didn’t, they took matters into their own hands, and they were punished accordingly.

              To be more clear, I’m not arguing against the punishment. Just the fliers and if they could be considered unlawful

              • Soup@lemmy.cafe
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                So, if I order a product, and the carrier doesn’t like the product- they can deny me my mail? Hmmm…

                I’m nearly certain that’s not how it works.

                • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  What do you mean “doesn’t like”? The federal government “doesn’t like” citizens sending bombs in the mail, and they would deny you that, yes. I’m not sure what the point of your reply was, it doesn’t argue against anything I’ve said. Sounds like a straw man.

                  There’s a difference between individual mail carriers and the organization USPS or Canadian Post. And there’s a difference between dislike and illegal. I thought we already established that, is that something you disagree on??

                  • Soup@lemmy.cafe
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    I love how you have to go to ridiculous comparisons to make a point. It shows you have none.

                    • A bomb and a flyer you don’t like- AREN’T the same thing.

                    Now try again with this newly learned fact.