Jordan Peterson responds to court’s dismissal of his appeal for mandated social media training, stating that the battle has just begun
An Ontario Court Dismisses Dr. Jordan B. Peterson’s Appeal, Upholding Social Media Training Mandate
In a blow to renowned psychologist Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, an Ontario, Canada, court has dismissed his appeal against the College of Psychologists of Ontario’s requirement for him to undergo social media training. The mandate was issued after Peterson voiced criticism of transgender ideology, climate alarmism, and the Canadian government. The College, which has embraced radical gender theory, threatened to revoke Peterson’s clinical psychology license if he did not comply with the training.
Expressing his frustration, Peterson took to social media, stating, “A higher court in Canada has ruled that the Ontario College of Psychologists indeed has the right to sentence me to re-education camp. There are no other legal avenues open to me now. It’s capitulate to the petty bureaucrats and the addle-pated woke mob or lose my professional license.”
A higher court in Canada has ruled that the Ontario College of Psychologists indeed has the right to sentence me to re-education camp. There are no other legal avenues open to me now.
It’s capitulate to the petty bureaucrats and the addle-pated woke mob or lose my professional…
— Dr Jordan B Peterson (@jordanbpeterson) January 17, 2024
Undeterred by the court’s decision, Peterson added, “Congratulations, @CPOntario! You won this round. Mark my words, however: the war has barely started. There is nothing you can take from me that I’m unwilling to lose. So watch out. Seriously. You’ve been warned.”
Legal Battle Continues
Peterson’s motion for leave to appeal was dismissed by a panel of three judges on the Ontario Court of Appeal. This comes after the Ontario Divisional Court ruled in August that the College of Psychologists could enforce the social media training. The psychologist organization has also demanded Peterson pay $25,000 in damages, as ordered by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
Defiant in the face of these setbacks, Peterson declared, “If you think that you have a right to free speech in Canada, you’re delusional. I will make every aspect of this public. And we will see what happens when utter transparency is the rule. Bring it on.”
Furthermore, Peterson vowed to publicly broadcast the mandated social media training, determined to expose the College of Psychologists’ actions.
It is important to note that the College of Psychologists is punishing Peterson not for any misconduct with patients, but for his public comments, including those made on social media and during podcast appearances.
Supposed Offenses
According to the College of Psychologists, some of Peterson’s alleged offenses include retweeting criticism of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, expressing opposition to the Ottawa police taking custody of the children of Trucker Convoy protesters, and criticizing Sports Illustrated for featuring a plus-sized swimsuit model on their cover. Other offenses involve Peterson’s views on radical gender theory, climate change models, and more.
Leif Le Mahieu contributed to this report.
How does the dismissal of Peterson’s appeal raise questions about the limits of free speech and the power of professional governing bodies
Rted. I will continue to speak the truth, advocate for free speech, and stand against the encroachment of ideological conformity.”
The controversial training, which Peterson refers to as “re-education camp,” aims to mold psychologists into adherents of the College’s social justice agenda, which includes promoting gender identity theory and silencing dissenting voices. Critics argue that such mandates undermine academic freedom and violate the principles of free speech.
Dr. Jordan B. Peterson rose to international prominence in 2016 when he publicly opposed a bill in Canada that compelled the use of preferred gender pronouns. Peterson argued that the legislation infringed upon his right to freedom of speech and his opposition sparked a heated debate on the balance between individual rights and protections for marginalized communities. Since then, Peterson has become a controversial figure, attracting both a large following and fierce opposition.
Peterson’s case against the College of Psychologists of Ontario centers around the violation of his rights to freedom of thought and expression. His supporters argue that the College’s requirement for social media training is a thinly veiled attempt to censor and punish him for his views. They contend that the mandate has nothing to do with the quality of Peterson’s clinical practice but is rather a targeted response to his dissenting opinions.
The court’s dismissal of Peterson’s appeal has ignited further debate on the limits of free speech and the role of professional governing bodies in regulating the opinions and beliefs of their members. Critics of the court’s decision argue that it sets a dangerous precedent, allowing institutions to dictate what individuals can and cannot say.
Supporters of the College’s mandate argue that it is necessary to ensure that psychologists uphold inclusive and culturally sensitive practices. They maintain that Peterson’s public statements have the potential to harm marginalized groups and that the social media training is a step towards fostering a more inclusive and tolerant environment within the profession.
The outcome of Peterson’s case has broader implications for the future of free speech in Canada and beyond. As society becomes increasingly polarized, the tension between protecting individual rights and safeguarding marginalized communities grows. The question remains: where should the line be drawn? Should individuals be able to express their opinions freely, even if those opinions are controversial or potentially harmful? Or should professional bodies have the authority to dictate acceptable speech among their members?
As the legal battle moves forward, Dr. Jordan B. Peterson and the College of Psychologists of Ontario continue to be at the forefront of this contentious issue. Their clash represents a larger conflict over the limits of free speech and the role of professional bodies in shaping public discourse. The outcome of this battle will undoubtedly have a lasting impact on the rights and responsibilities of individuals within the field of psychology and the wider society as a whole.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...