Quote:
Originally Posted by elcreative
I am just going by YOUR own words... "but it certainly seems like an overreach for the government to start engaging in censorship."
YOU said GOVERNMENT censorship and I pointed out that it wasn't the government but the result of a judicial process... I DIDN'T say it wasn't censorship anywhere, I said it wasn't GOVERNMENT censorship... I don't know about your country (I did think that Canada was a democracy) but in the UK the Government and Judiciary are separate things and, in fact, can act as checks on the other's power... sorry you thought that my response was glib but I can only think that is because you didn't understand my point. 
It is a major difference between government and judicial action especially in a democracy where these are separate arms of the overall body politic specifically designed to be able to act as controls on each others actions... |
In Canada, the judiciary is one of three branches of government, although it is given independence from the other two branches by Canada's constitution. This is not different than the UK system for obvious historical reasons. If the interpretation by the judiciary of laws passed by the legislative branch of government results in censorship in-fact, I don't see how the distinction you're trying to make is relevant; the result is the same in any event.
Also, just for your own information (should it come up in trivia), Canada's form of government is actually a constitutional monarchy.