Act like complete antisocial asses, deserving to be removed by police for disorderly conduct. Be as offensive and disruptive as one can, literally preventing people from doing their jobs. Engage in debasing public behavior.
Thus irritating those one has offended.
The offended party then says offensive stuff in response.
Who gets hauled before the Kangaroo Kourt?
The originally offended party. The party who was provoked by the rude, antisocial extremists imposing their specialness onto others in an uncomfortably extreme manner.
As for the article's presumptiveness in deeming the offended party's retaliatory verbal offensiveness as "discriminatory", well, I'd suggest that the word's meaning has been so expanded and become so ambiguous as to be effectively worthless as a valid adjective.
Many folks are unaware that gay folks utter hateful slurs with respect to other groups and NEVER get hauled before the Kangaroo Kourt. What's up with that? Are the "human rights" tribunals only there for gays and other selected special groups, but not for others not favored by the "Progressive" Intelligentsiya?
As a rule of thumb, if one treats others badly, then one doesn't complain if the others respond in kind, equally badly and oppositely. One has deliberately brought it upon oneself and has no right whatsoever to be protected from an equal amount of rudeness. Notwithstanding however "special" one might be, relating to one's "group membership".
One cannot hide behind one's "group membership" and go around treating people badly and then getting mad when their victims get mad. Like, come on!
The two women, they're aggressive, militantly antisocial assholes whose behavior at the comedy club was boorish and imposing at best and criminal at worst.
I hope they fail. If they win, I hope that their victim takes the whole thing to the Supreme Court, so as to force the Kangaroo Kourt to account for its violation of his Charter rights in the way it treats him, as it treats all of its victims.
I'd also love to see all non-"special" folks, such as Christians and conservatives, who are "discriminated against" (ie. called nasty names by) such lovely folks as the two women in question... haul their offendors before the Kangaroo Kourts, too! Funny how this hasn't happened before, isn't it? Whazzup with that?
Does being "gay" mean that one can do anything they want to others and get away with it? No!
I'd dismiss the complaint, period.
The two women deliberately, willingly, knowingly provoked the reaction they got. It's insane to think otherwise. It doesn't matter to whatever groups one belongs. If one is going to rudely impose stuff onto others, especially in a manner than prevents people from doing their job, one is therefore a criminal and should be the one subject to punishment!
That said, if I were the comedian, I'd simply have called for security or the police and had the disruptive boors removed from the premises.
But I don't blame the guy, given the circumstances, for losing his temper and letting the verbal diarrhea fly. People do that sometimes. Sure, they sometimes go too far. Who doesn't?
After all, the two women were so offensive themselves, that it's astonishing that they're offended by the reaction they deliberately provoked!
Besides, the "human rights" commissions/tribunals have exactly ZERO business hearing this case. Their only legal mandate is to deal with issues of real and alleged discrimination in housing and employment. They have ZERO business dealing with cases like this, ie. offensive speech.
Think I'm mistaken? Prove it. Do your homework and show me where, in the enacting legislation, it says that the "human rights" commissions/tribunals are allowed to deal with respect to offensive speech, thus dangerously threatening the Charter's guarantee of freedom of expression. If speech becomes such that it literally incites violence against anyone, then that's a matter for the criminal justice system, not the Kangaroo Kourts.
Also, the comedian didn't incite anything against the two women, which, if he had, would certainly have been a criminal act requiring the real courts to act. All he did was say offensive stuff in response to their offensiveness. They were assholes, he was an asshole. But they started it. They have no business using our tax dollars to bash him for standing up for himself and the other comedy-club workers whom they deliberately prevented from doing their jobs!
SEE ALSO (National Post, a more complete, fair-and-balanced, more-real-critical-thinking piece than the other article).