Jun 18 2009
Silent sneer
Unsurprisingly, the Supreme Court of Canada rejected an appeal against bubble zones around abortion clinics. Of course, freedom of choice in this country means you are not allowed to disagree with that choice (and for the record, I don’t believe anyone has the right to interfere with other people’s legal activities – it’s just that standing on a sidewalk with a sign does not constitute undue interference). So the Court probably felt comfortable not explaining its decision to dismiss the case. The Court has every right to dismiss without comment. But it doesn’t look very smart doing so.
Related posts:
- Canadians for Care As you may or may not be aware, there is...
- That’s one brave woman Lubna Hussein faces up to 40 lashes for wearing pants...
- Who’s spreading misinformation now? A fetus becomes a baby at birth? Having an abortion...
- I think I’m supposed to be happy about this From the McGill Daily: The final motion, on banning discriminatory...
- Crazy lady, coming through And no, I’m not talking about Diane Francis. It’s me...
The Supreme Court is not obliged to state a reason for its decisions and, in fact, it usually does not. How smart does your ignorance of that make you look?