I’ve watched the human rights debate on Michael Coren Show, posted by My Blahg. It featured Noa Mendelsohn Aviv from Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Mike Brock, Bernie Farber from Canadian Jewish Congress and Warren Kinsella.

I was surprised to see how weak the argument against Human Rights Commissions really was. No matter how eloquent and intelligent the speaker may be, its impossible to turn this grey issue into black & white without breaking laws of physics. Looking at this from a non-partisan perspective, it seems to me that both camps are a lot closer to agreement then they let on. Here is the basic summary of what I didn’t see any major disagreement on:

- There must be limits on expression.

- Human Right Commissions serve an important purpose in protecting human rights.

- Changes need to be made to improve the process. These include, introducing natural justice with respect to legal costs and speeding up dismissal of frivolous complaints. 

Call me a naive pragmatist but this doesn’t have to be a polarizing issue.