Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION <\/p>\n
Posted: 03\/16\/2014 1:00 AM | Comments: <\/p>\n
When the Canadian Museum for Human Rights deleted a blog post it had commissioned because it didn't find the content acceptable, many of our readers made sure they tracked down and read that post. Here's what they thought. <\/p>\n
I read the blog and the PDF referenced in the footnote. Basically, her point is the Harper government is \"anti-women\" because they scrapped Paul Martin's national daycare plan and replaced it with $100\/month cheques. No wonder the article was rejected. It's nothing more than partisan drivel. <\/p>\n
-- bek816 <\/p>\n
A human rights museum that lets itself become an organ of partisan commentary will not likely retain its government funding. <\/p>\n
A human rights museum that restricts debate about rights so as to rule out criticism of the sitting government will not maintain intellectual credibility. <\/p>\n
This is a tension inherent in the idea of a human rights museum. If the museum continues to resolve the tension by restricting content, it won't be respected. <\/p>\n
-- Spence Furby <\/p>\n
The truth hurts I guess. Ironically, her blog will get far more attention now. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
See more here: Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION Posted: 03\/16\/2014 1:00 AM | Comments: When the Canadian Museum for Human Rights deleted a blog post it had commissioned because it didn't find the content acceptable, many of our readers made sure they tracked down and read that post. Here's what they thought. I read the blog and the PDF referenced in the footnote. Continue reading
\nValid position... or partisan drivel? Your Opinion<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"