Sadly, that's true.
You and Peterson and your lot really are trying very hard to silence anyone who hurts your fee fees.
Jordan Peterson says Ontario psychologist licence may be suspended over public statements
- Thread starter Knuckle Ball
- Start date
You and Peterson and your lot really are trying very hard to silence anyone who hurts your fee fees.
Then that's a stupid policy by Rogers without any additional explanation.
My work has an option where people can put them in and I would say about 1/3-1/2 the company does it, others don't, and no one complains.
Bad arguments aren't crazy to me.
You push the law and argue to try and get the interpretation you want.
It's when you get into flat out making shit up or arguments that are self-contradictory or fly in the face of logic that I will drop him down a notch.
All I've seen right now is a letter or two, and he hasn't hit that point yet.
You're probably right and he will end up being a crackpot, but I'm willing to wait until he actually shows us that.
Peterson is the guy who tried to put together a list of teachers who thought the wrong thing so people could try to cancel them, didn't he?OMG…Don’t tell me JP is trying to “cancel” woke companies’ right to free speech!
It's pretty much his style.
Yes.
Absolutely and unequivocally.
Do you hold a belief simply because some government bodies and large corporations say so, is that how you process your value system?
Do you really believe any corporation would support this based on a "moral" principal, pandering to an insignificant consumer demographic
that most consumers don't agree with, because it's just? Is that what's driving this?
Evidently the irony is not that apparent to you, it never is to people who argue your postion.
Can you give an example of a "heavily religious pseudo legal argument" that he's made.
I don't mean an opinion, but an actual legal argument.
I like Peterson but I'm not religious.
Is it possible that I can agree with something he says because it's rational, even if it might be religiously motivated
while I am an atheist?
I don't think it's an "insignificant consumer demographic". I think that most people at least tolerate it and many - especially younger people - probably welcome it. It's now majoritarian and is unlikely to be reversed.
Lawyers have to attend mandatory seminars on trans and native Canadian inclusivity. I think it's a bit overblown. OTOH, I wouldn't exclude a practitioner because they are trans or trans-allied. They are entitled to be accepted regardless of their sexuality or gender identity. And getting annoyed at "pronouns" says more about you and your buddies than the person with the pronouns.
Many lawyers now choose to add pronouns after their names. Again it seems a little overblown, but I'm more interested in whether the person is reasonable, smart, ethical and cooperative professionally than whether they use pronouns. Their private life and choices is none of my concern - nor yours.
Peterson should learn to keep his nose out of other people's business. But of course, he makes a shitload of $$$$$ from meddling and judging.
I would have to go look up his cases and comment on them and that's just too much work.
Again, why do you attack Trudeau when Duggo is the guy who's attacking Peterson?
Is there a special needs school that would work for him?
Like say, a Catholic school?
Evidently facts are not apparent to you but that is ok, Just keep on absorbing the grifts from your idols
Cool story bro......But it never happened.
The difference is I do not fall for bullshit politics and spin regardless of which camp it is coming from. The Repugs and Conservative mantras are all about anger, rage on the nonsense spin in hopes of votes.
