http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...eleased-tuesday-morning-after-days-of-debate/
Does diversity unite us or divide us?
Does diversity unite us or divide us?
Quebec Charter of Values
- Thread starter Rockslinger
- Start date
Every family has its squabbles, this is not different. Quebec is the petulant teenager. It won't carry.
Shame on Marois. Pandering to bigots. And shame on the TERBites who think this is just fine, but especially shame on those who shit all over Francophone rights and sovereignty issues when it suits them but cheer on this bullshit charter. Fucking hypocrites.
Marois panders to those Quebecois with a huge ancient chip on their shoulders. Wolfe defeated Montcalm. Quebec should separate and make their own rules as a sovereign nation but follow the rules of the nation of Canada until such time. A weak pathetic show by la belle province, je me souviens, eh? Harper is not getting suckered into a fight with Marois as she is defeating herself at the moment.
Who's a fucking hypocrite? They're everywhere my friend. Everywhere!
(but no, I wasn't singling out anyone in particular. Sorry if it seemed like I was gonna point fingers and name names.)
You have to look back into Quebec history, English Quebecois with the tacit approval of the Catholic Church initiated soft apartheid during WW I. It remained in place until The Silent Revolution. However the plan backfired, it was put into place to check the rise of the Liberal Party, then went to become Canada's governing party.
Quebec is following the precedent set by France and Switzerland. France implemented their their laws in part to give police more power in the fight against honour killings. Switzerland's are a little more quirky limiting the height of minarets, they were blocking the scenery.
Whosyourdaddy take down your Hedgehog giff! I don't look like that and don't need to be reminded. Grazie in anticipo.
Quebec is following the precedent set by France and Switzerland. France implemented their their laws in part to give police more power in the fight against honour killings. Switzerland's are a little more quirky limiting the height of minarets, they were blocking the scenery.
Whosyourdaddy take down your Hedgehog giff! I don't look like that and don't need to be reminded. Grazie in anticipo.
This PoS has no chance at all to survive a constitutional challenge. And if Quebec wants to use the "notwithstanding clause" over this useless garbage, then we can all kiss good-bye our constitutional rights forever.
The notwithstanding clause has been vaguely threatened only once in the 31 years since the Charter of Rights has been enacted. The Tories threatened to over-turn a decision of the BC Court of Appeal to allow the "Artistic Value" defence for some kiddyporn accused, if the SCC upheld the BCCA. The SCC avoided the controversy and overturned the BCCA decision, thus avoiding the political issue of the notwithstanding clause.
In fact, there appears to be a "gentleman's unwritten agreement" for govts NOT to threaten to use the clause. Obviously routine use of the clause would completely destroy the Charter of Rights and turn us into virtually a police state. Not even the lowest creepiest politician wants this.
The notwithstanding clause has been vaguely threatened only once in the 31 years since the Charter of Rights has been enacted. The Tories threatened to over-turn a decision of the BC Court of Appeal to allow the "Artistic Value" defence for some kiddyporn accused, if the SCC upheld the BCCA. The SCC avoided the controversy and overturned the BCCA decision, thus avoiding the political issue of the notwithstanding clause.
In fact, there appears to be a "gentleman's unwritten agreement" for govts NOT to threaten to use the clause. Obviously routine use of the clause would completely destroy the Charter of Rights and turn us into virtually a police state. Not even the lowest creepiest politician wants this.
When Quebec comes out and says, "we will no longer have Christmas, Easter, and New Years as Statuatory holidays and all government workers will be required to work or use their vacation days", then I will take them seriously as truly wanting to be a secular society. (And take down the cross in the National Assembly).
Until then, it's just the usual Quebecois bigotry against anyone not just like them.
Until then, it's just the usual Quebecois bigotry against anyone not just like them.
According to the government, he cross is a piece of history and therefore excluded.
uh huh.
It may be a piece of history, but then, so what, take it out regardless as ultimately it is a religious symbol and was put there as exactly what it is - a cross, a Christian symbol, and a big one at that.
All of Quebec.
Quebec is THEE most racist and bigoted province in Canada, even North America. No doubt about that.
It's Franco Quebecers to the front of the line, every time, all the time and everyone else is pond scum.
Well, we've through this before and got nowhere then and won't now either, but you at least fine tuned your error to Franco Quebecers. My extended family has more than it's share of francophone and the few I might even begin to think as bigoted are so because of personal ignorance, but that is about two/three out of twenty, certainly not all, not even most. I haven't caught any of them spitting in my quart when they pass me one.
One might read your last point and think about tacking the bigot label on you.
I'm not saying I agree with them, just that is the explanation when it's brought up.
That's the problem with centralized planning - what one thinks is acceptable is not acceptable to others. In Canada, most think it is acceptable to control one's access to a doctor/hospital through the control and centralized planning of healthcare resources. But, they then get upset when government tries to control some other aspect of their life. That is the 'slippery slope' scenario that plays out. If you are okay with control that you agree with, dont be suprised when control develops regarding an area that you dont agree with. If you really want to live a free life, then let others be free to do what they want, even if you dont agree with their choices. Canadians who accept healthcare control or education control, cant proclaim outrage when the same central planners decide to control something else that they, themselves hold dear.
I dont belive in economic or social dictatorships. I think Muslims should be allowed to wear what they want, where they want, except of course when they have to identify themselves in a court proceeding or something similar. But, again, the right believes in social control, but not economic control. The left believes in economic control, but not social control. Well, they are both burned by their own misdoings. If one really believes in freedom, believe in it in terms of both economic and social interactions, not just one versus the other.
I dont belive in economic or social dictatorships. I think Muslims should be allowed to wear what they want, where they want, except of course when they have to identify themselves in a court proceeding or something similar. But, again, the right believes in social control, but not economic control. The left believes in economic control, but not social control. Well, they are both burned by their own misdoings. If one really believes in freedom, believe in it in terms of both economic and social interactions, not just one versus the other.
Exactly! Affirmative action was illegal, based upon the Charter at the time it was being discussed. The government then added the not withstanding clause - directly contradicting the fundamental principles protected by the charter - and the rest is history. So, live by the sword, die by the sword. If you support discrimination based on race or gender (as with the affirmative action clause), dont complain when others support discrimination based upon some other identifiable trait.
