The story as covered by Breitbart.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022 ... -argument/

And the Judgment itself from the ONSC website.
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2 ... c1198.html

I had a quick scan-read to check certain points raised in the Breitbart story and am now about to read the entire thing again.

The judge in the case raises some really good points and his observations of current societal trends is spot on.

From the judgement.

[17] The mother’s evidence focused entirely on the medical and scientific issues.

[18] In contrast, the father focussed extensively on labelling and discrediting the mother as a person, in a dismissive attempt to argue that her views aren’t worthy of consideration.

a. This odious trend is rapidly corrupting modern social discourse: Ridicule and stigmatize your opponent as a person, rather than dealing with the ideas they want to talk about.
b. It seems to be working for politicians.
c. But is this really something we want to tolerate in a court system where parental conduct and beliefs are irrelevant except as they impact on a parent’s ability to meet the needs of a child?

This is something we see a lot of on this forum. A person will make a statement and rather than debate that statement posters will just go with labelling and discrediting the Persons statement. Ad Hominem and Strawman arguments (disguised as jest) abound as posters sidestep the argument as they attempt to delegitimise the poster instead of the statement.

Either way, maybe the judicial system in Canada is not lost if people, such as this judge, are producing judgements like this.

One of my side interests is the psychological differences between Left-wing and Right-wing adherents. A general pattern I see is the Rightist makes an affirmative statement and then provides supporting data. The Leftist then responds with personal insults, nitpicking, projection of evil intentions and sometimes cheap psychoanalysis through the internet. Occasionally, advocation of violence.

(I spent 2016-2018 on Facebook being accused of being a Russian bot. Several times people advocated violence to be done to me. On the internet, mind you. )

Misinformation just means misleading information or lies, it's not that complicated.

John Bingham wrote: ↑Sat Feb 26, 2022 4:10 pm Misinformation just means misleading information or lies, it's not that complicated.

Clearly the judge thought differently.
From point 5

And is “misinformation” even a real word? Or has it become a crass, self-serving tool to pre-empt scrutiny and discredit your opponent? To de-legitimize questions and strategically avoid giving answers. Blanket denials are almost never acceptable in our adversarial system. Each party always has the onus to prove their case and yet “misinformation” has crept into the court lexicon. A childish – but sinister – way of saying “You’re so wrong, I don’t even have to explain why you’re wrong.”

John Bingham wrote: ↑Sat Feb 26, 2022 4:10 pm Misinformation just means misleading information or lies, it's not that complicated.

"Anything I don't like is misinformation."

Granted, this is 90% of internet discourse.

IraHayes wrote: ↑Sat Feb 26, 2022 4:35 pm

John Bingham wrote: ↑Sat Feb 26, 2022 4:10 pm Misinformation just means misleading information or lies, it's not that complicated.

Clearly the judge thought differently.
From point 5

And is “misinformation” even a real word? Or has it become a crass, self-serving tool to pre-empt scrutiny and discredit your opponent? To de-legitimize questions and strategically avoid giving answers. Blanket denials are almost never acceptable in our adversarial system. Each party always has the onus to prove their case and yet “misinformation” has crept into the court lexicon. A childish – but sinister – way of saying “You’re so wrong, I don’t even have to explain why you’re wrong.”

I read that before I posted. I don't see why anyone wouldn't be able to explain why it was misinformation just because a few people throw the phrase around at whim. Is there some reason why people shouldn't question any given information/ opinion?