Canada pulls back from the brink
Common Sense 1 -- Suckass Political Correctness 0...
Canadian Blood Services had sued Kyle Freeman, a gay man who lied when giving blood, and the court has now found him liable for $10,000 for negligent misrepresentation.Yeah... the right to infect people with syphilis.
Mr. Freeman, who had syphilis when he donated blood, had argued he lied because the policy wasn't scientifically justified and violated his rights.
We needed a court to render a decision here?
Seriously?
'Cos I'm thinking King Solomon's pet monkey could have sussed this one out.
**********
RELATED: Running the numbers
"HIV transmission disproportionately affects certain risk groups and seems to be out of control in the MSM population," he said, using an acronym for men who have sex with men.
7 comments:
Why is it that Canadians thing the 'Charter' applies to EVERYTHING?:
"In dismissing a constitutional challenge, an Ontario Superior Court judge ruled that Canadian Blood Services is not a government entity, so the charter does not apply to its policies."
It was claimed by counter-claim so pretty much a 'hail mary' but even his lawyer must have advised this was not going to happen. Bars, homes, private employers... none of them are subject to the charter.
Period.
I wonder if Canadian Blood Services tried to have the counter-claim dismissed on a motion prior to the trial. That would have taken care of it too.
*
"chris says... the counter-claim dismissed on a motion"
this loon tried to donate blood knowing he has a venereal disease?
how about a charge of "assault with a friendly weapon"?
*
Wow amazing, the rights of the people receiving blood actually trumped the claim that it is a charter right to donate blood.
Strangely enough we don't see people who are turned down from making a blood donation after having a tattoo or piercing running to the courts because their so called rights were violated.
"assault with a friendly weapon"
I think there was a guy who was charged by local police for knowingly infecting 'partners'.
It would be interesting in this case. Was the blood circulated? (for lack of a better term) Did anyone get infected by it? If so, and he knew that he was infected, then yes, I think you could charge him.
@ Rural
Not sure that you are reading it right. The assertion that his charter rights were violated was dismissed because the charter did not apply. There was no 'trumping' of one right over the other. His counter-claim was simply thrown out.
*
i wonder what all this publicity is gonna do for this retard's (fuck political correctness) love life.
or heck... maybe that's just an occupational hazard within "the community?"
easy come, easy, well... uneasy flow.
*
There was a lot more human tolerance before the fliikling Charter was subsumed into our Constitution.
Neo..look up 'bug chasers'..
Post a Comment