The Violation Of The Charter

One of the most misinterpreted aspects of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the freedom of expression. Group organizations have misused this much too often. In the past, many extremist groups have misused this right to protect themselves. A great example is the Westboro Baptist Church. This church is one of the many groups across North America that uses the Charter to protect themselves. The Charter protects them even though their actions and messages are harmful and not beneficial to society. If the Charter was to recognize these groups as dangerous, they wouldn’t have the chance to misuse these freedoms. Also, the fact that if a Canadian citizen were to use the excuse of the freedom of expression to defend their actions, they wouldn’t

The necessity to limit the rights and freedoms of Canadians is illustrated and reinforced through the governments use of reasonable limits, ‘notwithstanding clause’ to limit individual rights and freedoms, and the occasional need for the government to have power extended above and beyond the limits prescribed in the Charter.

Freedom of expression, set under section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is one of Canada’s most valued rights in the bill of rights of the Constitution. It has paved the way for the society in which thirty-five million people reside today. With this level of influence and admiration, it is truly a fundamental right. However, many ground-breaking cases have illustrated the need to limit freedom of expression. A prime example is the landmark case that took place in 1990 surrounding high school teacher, James Keegstra. This Supreme Court case touched mainly upon two sections of the Charter, and one section of the Criminal Code of Canada. These two sections in the Charter included section 1 (reasonable limits), and

The notwithstanding clause written in article 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has been an extremely contentious topic since its introduction at a November 1981 Federal-Provincial Conference of First Ministers of Canada. As said by Jean Chretien, Minister of Justice The objective “of an override [notwithstanding] clause is to provide the flexibility that is required to ensure that legislatures rather than judges have the final say on important matters of public policy” (Grover, 2005, p. [Page 479]). The clause allows Parliament or provincial governments to override the following sections; 2, containing the fundamental rights and freedoms of Canadians and sections 7-15 providing the right to life, liberty, security of person, the right to equality and a number of other legal rights. One’s guarantee of total equality in all things can also be suspended. However, the clause cannot be applied to any issues that relate to the democratic governmental system of Canada, our language rights and the ability of our

Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, everyone is guaranteed certain rights. One that stands out and is essential to our society is the fundamental freedom of expression. Anyone can speak their opinion in public. However, the government can in some instances limit these freedoms. The question that causes a lot of debate is in what instances can the government genuinely limit people’s rights while being justified in doing so. I believe the restrictions on speech in Canada are appropriate. I believe that the government was correct in not intervening with the debate between Mark Steyn and the Muslim petitioners because his article did not warrant enough to risk the safety of Muslims, and by coercing Maclean’s to post an opposing viewpoint would be a violation of their fundamental freedom of expression.

Our social world is becoming increasingly sexualised as pornographic references and imagery are progressively more intertwined with mainstream media, social media, advertising, and pop culture. According to Tyler (2011), this intertwinement of pornography and pop culture consists of five fragments; the beginning of the pornographic boom, the

Art and pornography’s aims involve reaching different receptions. Although, the aims involve different receptions, the conflict between art and pornography is not necessarily on their receptions but rather what each aim requires to reach its reception. He argues that the two aims are conflicting aims because of the different ways the images required to complete the aims are treated. Art involves aims that require images to be treated as opaque because the involve attention to form, vehicle, medium, and manner; formal elements. While pornography involves aims that require for images be treated as transparent and therefore there is no attention to formal elements. Levinson uses erotic art as a form of art as an example to demonstrate the difference between pornography and art because their differences will not come from explicitness, or moral status but rather that can be one can be considered art and the other cannot. He distinguishes the aims between erotica, arotic art and pornography. Erotica has the aim of sexual stimulation, erotic art aims as artistic interest and sexual stimulation and/arousal, and pornography aims at sexual arousal and release. Although, both erotic art and pornography can have sexual arousal as an aim, erotic art aims at sexual arousal by primarily aiming at artistic interest, while pornography only aims at sexual arousal so

Ethics Pornography is a social problem and is a commodity brought into existence by certain characteristics of a highly developed civilization. The problem with pornography is that any form of censorship or downplay cannot solve it. It is difficult to draw the line between ones right to express their ideas and or opinions or sexuality

Thesis – Multiple outlooks have been taken on the ethics of pornography, and the means by which it may either negatively influence power in sexuality, or actually provide some sort of social value and worth. These different ethical perspectives display the flaws in the industry and what it represents; yet they also end up proving the fact that it can be modified with positive influence and that pornography is not something to be deemed utterly unethical.

The issue of pornography has long been the source of controversy for many Western societies, particularly with respect to its implications for gender roles and sexuality (Lofgren-Martenson & Mansson, 2010). For instance, according to Griffith and Adams (2012), "Issues regarding the production and consumption of pornographic materials continue to be an intensely debated social topic" (p. 245). The social context surrounding the debate over whether pornography should be legal or not includes various principles concerning the importance of gender equality and compulsory sex educational courses that place a high priority on unrestricted rights to sexuality for both men and women

The word Pornography is defined as "writings, photographs, movies, etc., intended to arouse sexual excitement". With each year that passes pornography has been more and more accepted, it can be seen in books, magazines, cable television and most of all through the internet. Many religions go against it, but at the same time people know that there is a reason why people go into the business and accepted it an other people just like it. In this paper I will talk about pornography and how it is viewed by the four ethical standards (Utilitarian, Kant, Human Rights and Justice is Fairness).

One of the most prominent and detrimental forms of sexual objectification is in pornography, where it defines a woman’s role as a sexual object for men to use freely (Insert Plato Citation). It was concluded that 88% of the scenes on porn contain acts of physical aggression, which can overexpose men into thinking that this sort of aggression is normal and raise their tolerance of violence (Insert PornStats Citation). It can further warp the minds of the watchers into thinking that this is what relationships and sex are truly like, when in reality many women are forced into the industry or are overly intoxicated to keep the entire experience feeling numb (Insert ThePinkCross Citation). Pornography also touches in on an even darker subject

Moreover, the way media’s depicts sexual content and aspects of sex, one could say it is very unrealistic. Think about it, from our celebrities to the crazy cartoons, it seems to be all glamorized. When I think of the way media portrays sex, it seems to make our adolescents believe that sex is always casual and consequence-free. Of all problems with sexual content in the media, this is only one. Considering media covers everything from print magazines, to films and photography too. The large amounts of sexual content in the media effects our young ones greatly. In order to get a completely better understanding of sexual content in the media, one must understand what sexual content is defined as, also what media refer to as I’ve stated before. Typically, sexual content can refer to many things from making out, or other physical actions that may lead to sex.

I’m going to talk about the UN Charter. I think that some legal flaws of the UN Charter inevitably encourage the civil wars.

People like pornography, regardless of whether or not it is moral. Pornography, more commonly referred to as porn, is the depiction of sexually explicit material intended to sexually arouse. Pornography is essentially ubiquitous; it is just one Google search away, and much of it is free. The Internet provides the accessibility, affordability, and anonymity that makes pornography a more immediate, vivid, and personal experience. With pornography’s easy accessibility arises questions about the benefits and harms of viewing pornography. Although pornography is legal, it yields detrimental effects on individual and societal levels because it degrades women, leads to increased violence, such as rape, against women, and…[OTHER REASONS BACKING UP CLAIM].