My hero is a guy called Richard Moon. Other people have their Sidney Crosbys or Beyoncés, but I want Richard Moon’s autograph. I’m thinking of mounting his picture on my office wall. He’s the man.

Who, you ask, is Richard Moon? Well, he’s a professor at the University of Windsor who has written a report, released this week, recommending that the Canadian Human Rights Commission no longer investigate complaints relating to hate speech.

Who cares about that, you snort? You should, as the Human Rights Commission and all its little provincial sprouts make it their business to monitor your every thought, word and deed and decide whether or not you’re playing by the rules.

The only problem is the commissions make the rules with zero input from me or you and they have a tendency to get zealous in their defence of the allegedly offended.

I’ve already written here about the sad case of Mark Steyn, the neo-conservative Maclean’s journalist who was dragged through an interminable investigation hosted by the B.C. Human Rights Commission for the crime of writing a peevish piece about Islam, only after the determined complainant was turned down by the Canadian and Ontario commissions.

But not before the heads of both the CHRC and its Ontario counterpart, Jennifer Lynch and Barbara Hall, respectively, took public shots at Steyn. Even if they reluctantly concluded that they had no jurisdiction in the matter, they couldn’t resist using their bully pulpits to bring him down a peg.

Who do they think they are, journalists?

Anyway, my new hero was commissioned to write a report in the wake of the Steyn furor, and I bet it spoiled more than one bureaucrat’s day as his principle recommendation is to repeal the section of the Canadian Human Rights Act, Section 13, dealing with hate speech.
He was quick to point out we already have plenty of protection against hate speech. It’s called the Criminal Code of Canada, which bans the willful promotion of hate. But that’s not enough for the thought police, who have duplicated these provisions ad nauseam across the country, just in case someone has an errant thought.

But in this social networking age, every errant thought is posted on the Internet and the thought police are wearing themselves ragged trying to stem the tide.

So instead of trying to shut down hate-filled stupidity wherever it rears its head, destroying free and honest expression in the process, Moon offers the following common sense approach: “Find ways other than censorship to respond to expression that stereotypes and defames.” Argument, debate, discussion, dialogue: Whatever you want to call it, it beats the kind of kangaroo court justice practised by human rights commissions.

Now, let’s just hope someone doesn’t complain to the human rights commission about Richard Moon.