-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Canada Poligaf - The Wrath of Harperland
- Thread starter DreamMachine
- Start date
- Status
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Wynne is threatening to sue Hudak
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...over-power-plant-allegations/article17729530/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...over-power-plant-allegations/article17729530/
Zombie James
Banned
Wynne is threatening to sue Hudak
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...over-power-plant-allegations/article17729530/
Ehh, I'm not really a Wynne fan, but accusing a Conservative of lying? Reality is on her side.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Sorry man, but there is no bigger liar in Canadian politics than McGuinty (except maaaaybe Ford), and IMO Wynne is more or less cut from the same cloth.
I hope Hudak calls her bluff and countersues. Ontario will get its judicial inquiry without paying for it
Sorry man, but there is no bigger liar in Canadian politics than McGuinty (except maaaaybe Ford), and IMO Wynne is more or less cut from the same cloth.
I hope Hudak calls her bluff and countersues. Ontario will get its judicial inquiry without paying for it
Libel is still libel even if you don't like her.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
It is not a question of like, people should be free to criticize public figures and institutions including the Premier and OLP, it is called free speech. Either way, I don't think it's libel because I don't buy her story.
Knowing it happened versus ordering it to happen are not the same thing. Hudak isn't claiming simply that she knew, but that it was all her doing.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
"She oversaw and possibly ordered the criminal destruction of documents to cover up the gas plant scandal.”
Those are his exact words, with my emphasis. I think he's covered. She was campaign co-chair that ordered the cancellation of the gas plants, her signature is on the contract that cancelled the Oakville gas plant, but she claims she didn't read what she was signing (lol). I don't really see anything libelous in that statement.
Ah, I was going on what I'd seen printed elsewhere. If that is his exact statement, this is just noise on her part
BigJonsson
Member
It's one thing saying it in the House, it's entirely different saying it at a news conference...as far as legalities go
You Are Viewtiful
Member
It looks like Hudak just called her bluff. He's not retracting what he said, and I'm sure he did that on legal advice. If Wynne doesn't take legal action in the following days I am going to assume it was a failed attempt to silence opposition/criticism, straight from the Ford handbook.
Just heard Bertrand's pool story... lmao wtf. Are you telling me 35% of Quebeckers not only want to give these people a province but a whole damn country xD Good luck
BigJonsson
Member
Janette Bertrand is an old bigot. I respect what she did for women rights and the education she gave Québécois on women, sexuality, relationships and homosexuality but she's still a paranoiac bigot.
I've lived in this province all of my life and my main hypothesis about my fellows citizens is that we are fearful people. We are afraid of so many things that we are manipulated by those fears by everyone. We were under the grasp of the catholic church for so long and the damage they did was so costly that once they were removed from power it created some kind of void and long term trauma. If you add to that the fact that we're some kind of cultural minority in a much bigger country and that throughout history we were always on the brink of assimilation it starts to paint a depressing picture.
People here are afraid of immigrants because they often refuse to speak the official language of the province. They're afraid we're slowly getting assimilated. The trauma from 1995 sure didn't help on that front. We're also fairly afraid of religions and there's probably a link to all the damage the catholic church did to us in there somewhere. Francophone are afraid of Anglophones and Anglophones are afraid of Francophone. Some are afraid that we are afraid of losing our culture by staying in Canada, other are afraid that some are going to make a country and make it worse for all of us.
Overall we sure have a strange relationship with money too. I guess this is also deeply rooted in our past. My grandparents used to tell me when they were alive that the church taught them being poor was the way to live according to the church as it made God love you even more or some nonsense. Freud would have a field day with that one. As such, being very rich is frowned upon. I guess all the corruption issues we had in the last 20-30 years or so contributed to that fear a lot too.
So politically wise I guess we're all morons. 35% of the population wants to vote for a party exploiting fear that we're going to lose our culture and that dangerous religious zealots are going to take control of our society and take away all of our rights. A party that came up with a ridiculously bigoted charter of values and falsely equating it with the concept of secularism while refusing to stop funding religious schools. A party that openly lied to the population about promises made (health tax, university fees, mining program, Anticosti's petroleum) not even 2 years ago. A party that was elected on a center-left program and that became center-right on both social and economic front.
35% of the population vote for a party exploiting the fear that the other party will hold a referendum to make the province into a country. A party that has been showed to be corrupted for the all past 9 years it was in power. UPAC made so many raids to the PLQ (over 20 so far and more are to come) that they should have an office in their HQ. A party that let one of the biggest protestation movement turns for the worst with riots and wounded in the street for months. A party that call itself the champions of the economy while making our debt explode in the 9 years they were there (1/3 of our debt came from those 9 years).
No hope left, eh. My dad always refused to vote. Now I'm starting to understand why. I taught he was dumb for doing so but now I see he was actually quite smart to do so.
gutter_trash
Banned
all my family members voted early yesterday, 4 different ridings.
My riding is the most lefty-left riding of all of Quebec; I only counted one person leaving and two people arriving (this is one of the two seats where QS holds it). I voted Liberal.
My brother now lives in a 100% guaranteed Liberal stronghold downtown, he decided to vote (he is not a believer of the Westminster system). Voter turnout there is usually low because it is always a guaranteed win.
My sister lives in a dark blue PQ stronghold (suburbs), she voted too. She said there were 10 white stereotypical suburban francohpones there.
My parents live an different suburb riding that is diverse with lots of immigrants; my dad said the place was packed with visible minorities going to vote. He said there were way more people this time than usual.
The take away is that minorities are more scared of a PQ majority and are going out to vote in huger numbers than white francophones who are going meh. That is what I take away from yesterday's early voting
My riding is the most lefty-left riding of all of Quebec; I only counted one person leaving and two people arriving (this is one of the two seats where QS holds it). I voted Liberal.
My brother now lives in a 100% guaranteed Liberal stronghold downtown, he decided to vote (he is not a believer of the Westminster system). Voter turnout there is usually low because it is always a guaranteed win.
My sister lives in a dark blue PQ stronghold (suburbs), she voted too. She said there were 10 white stereotypical suburban francohpones there.
My parents live an different suburb riding that is diverse with lots of immigrants; my dad said the place was packed with visible minorities going to vote. He said there were way more people this time than usual.
The take away is that minorities are more scared of a PQ majority and are going out to vote in huger numbers than white francophones who are going meh. That is what I take away from yesterday's early voting
matthewwhatever
Member
It's easier to clean up the bus he was thrown under that way
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Which province has the highest chance of defaulting on their debt?
http://bit.ly/ViKpMv
http://bit.ly/TxRtxC
And an ETF tracking the growth of companies headquartered in Quebec: 200% growth in 5 years https://www.google.com/finance?q=MUTF_CA:NBC460&ei=_Dk8U9iJD-XisQfOOA
http://bit.ly/ViKpMv
http://bit.ly/TxRtxC
And an ETF tracking the growth of companies headquartered in Quebec: 200% growth in 5 years https://www.google.com/finance?q=MUTF_CA:NBC460&ei=_Dk8U9iJD-XisQfOOA
firehawk12
Subete no aware
The Eve Adams thing is getting silly now. Now Harper has to get involved. lol
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Is this what Journal de Montréal feeds Quebeckers? That Alberta has an 84% chance of defaulting?
Your report says Alberta has a high chance of defaulting because of its deficit but it has the largest surplus in Canada.
Your report is outdated and its predictions already proven wrong.
Your report says Alberta has a high chance of defaulting because of its deficit but it has the largest surplus in Canada.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Is this what Journal de Montréal feeds Quebeckers? That Alberta has an 84% chance of defaulting?
Your report says Alberta has a high chance of defaulting because of its deficit but it has the largest surplus in Canada.Your report is outdated and its predictions already proven wrong.
Journal de Montréal? It was reported by Macleans and the report was made for the RBC by the MacDonald-Laurier Institute. Of course you must know better, but you have nothing to back up your claims.
gutter_trash
Banned
Ether, I can't wait to see the look on your face Monday night.
usual PQ voters are not turning up to vote, not motivated to go out to vote. Most will stay home.
usual Liberal voters are highly more motivated in greater numbers for early voting. The uptick of higher numbers of early voting are from Liberals ridings, proving that there is more movement there to stop Pauline
usual PQ voters are not turning up to vote, not motivated to go out to vote. Most will stay home.
usual Liberal voters are highly more motivated in greater numbers for early voting. The uptick of higher numbers of early voting are from Liberals ridings, proving that there is more movement there to stop Pauline
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Your report published: 2012 October
Today: 2014 April
Alberta has $2.6 billion surplus for 2014-15.
I'm not sure which report they are referring to, they didn't reference it inline and there's no reference section.
This is what I've got http://population-pyramid.herokuapp.com/#/Quebec/Alberta
As you can see, Alberta has a much younger population and flat age pyramid, unlike Quebec where everyone is going to retire soon. Going by the data we currently have, the statement is false, I can't find this Statscan report though.
gutter_trash
Banned
latest Ipsos poll:
http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/exclusive-ctv-poll-liberals-lead-grows-1.1757927
Forcast: a slim majority for the Liberals.
*special note. Many francophone Liberal voters in nationalistic areas don't publicly state who they vote for. So always count on +++ silent types to boost the Liberal numbers
http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/exclusive-ctv-poll-liberals-lead-grows-1.1757927
Forcast: a slim majority for the Liberals.
*special note. Many francophone Liberal voters in nationalistic areas don't publicly state who they vote for. So always count on +++ silent types to boost the Liberal numbers
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
gutter_trash
Banned
Ether, we are in 2014, the 21st century. Stop playing the victim card, you weren`t the only ones who had a bum ride in the early-mid 20th Century.
Italian-Canadians were sent to enterment camps on Ste-Helenes Islands.
Japanese-Canadians were sent to enterment camps in BC.
Duplessis displaced First Nations children and the Church abused tons of kids.
Now what do you wanna do in 2014? Fire people in the public sector for wearing religious headgear?
Italian-Canadians were sent to enterment camps on Ste-Helenes Islands.
Japanese-Canadians were sent to enterment camps in BC.
Duplessis displaced First Nations children and the Church abused tons of kids.
Now what do you wanna do in 2014? Fire people in the public sector for wearing religious headgear?
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Who said anything about language? That PQ Charter is offensive and down right wrong. Whether I read La Presse and G&M, PQ and their supporters sound hysterical., like Bertrand and Drainville. Marois is a joke in herself. There is no place for ethnic nationalism in North America. I literally facepalmed when Legault said in the last debate "I'm not a sovereigntist, I'm a nationalist!" like it was something to be proud of and shout to the world. Also, what is this about non-pure laine university students not being allowed to vote? That is institutional racism by any definition.
It's not even about Anglos anymore, the pequistes are after "money and the ethnic vote".
It's not even about Anglos anymore, the pequistes are after "money and the ethnic vote".
gutter_trash
Banned
The Charter is an electoral ploy and a strategy to give back the identity issue back to the PQ that they lost to the ADQ in 2007
In 2007, the PQ was at it's most progressive while the ADQ ran with the identity ball during the Religious Accomdations commision.
the PQ was sent to 2nd opposition status in 2007's election (Liberal won a minority and the ADQ became official opposition)
The PQ has decided to verr FAR RIGHT on identity politics (a la Europeenne) and have Pierre-Karl Peladeau's Quebecor Media running Journal de Montreal with bloggers, commentators opion editorials and think tanks like:
Richard Martineau (right wing separatist and clown)
Gilles Proulx (long time separatst radio show host)
Mathieu Boc-Cote (far right identiy blogger)
Josepha Facal (former PQ MNA and intelectual)
Jacques Parizeau (former PQ Premier ''money and the ethnic vote'')
Gilles Duceppe (former Bloc Leader)
Josee Legault (eternel opiniator since the 80s)
... and many more
This whole Charter things is bogus and is just a tool to go to war against OTTAWA to have big bad Ottawa strike down a Quebec Charter of Values TO FUEL REASON TO MAKE A REFERENDUM
And you got MNA Jean-Francois Lisee with his fake numbers, fake stats and continuous condescension behind the scenes
BUT
They have failed because they will lose on Monday
In 2007, the PQ was at it's most progressive while the ADQ ran with the identity ball during the Religious Accomdations commision.
the PQ was sent to 2nd opposition status in 2007's election (Liberal won a minority and the ADQ became official opposition)
The PQ has decided to verr FAR RIGHT on identity politics (a la Europeenne) and have Pierre-Karl Peladeau's Quebecor Media running Journal de Montreal with bloggers, commentators opion editorials and think tanks like:
Richard Martineau (right wing separatist and clown)
Gilles Proulx (long time separatst radio show host)
Mathieu Boc-Cote (far right identiy blogger)
Josepha Facal (former PQ MNA and intelectual)
Jacques Parizeau (former PQ Premier ''money and the ethnic vote'')
Gilles Duceppe (former Bloc Leader)
Josee Legault (eternel opiniator since the 80s)
... and many more
This whole Charter things is bogus and is just a tool to go to war against OTTAWA to have big bad Ottawa strike down a Quebec Charter of Values TO FUEL REASON TO MAKE A REFERENDUM
And you got MNA Jean-Francois Lisee with his fake numbers, fake stats and continuous condescension behind the scenes
BUT
They have failed because they will lose on Monday
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
So what about QS?
gutter_trash
Banned
QS??? They have nothing to do with the PQ think tank group.
QS is actually playing spoiler and are actually taking away the urban left wing separatist vote away from the PQ making it impossible for the PQ to win a majority due to vote splitting.
QS is actually playing spoiler and are actually taking away the urban left wing separatist vote away from the PQ making it impossible for the PQ to win a majority due to vote splitting.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
What about how QS wants to ban religious icons from being worn by state employees who hold a coercive power, is that wrong?
And what is vote splitting? People aren't allowed to vote for who they want without being said to be taking votes from the bigger parties?
gutter_trash
Banned
Oh my GOD!!! the BAN on religious gear is JUST A PLOY!!
A gimiick, a parlour trick!
All of us falling into THIS MADE UP debate about the charter is the PQ's game to sucker the opposition parties into it
the Charter of Values is 101% electoral to win votes, to take over the identity issue, and to provoke a fight against Ottawa.
QS and CAQ's stances on the subject don't matter. The PQ didn't make a consensus with the CAQ or QS during minority goverment because the PQ NEVER WANTED to have concesus with the other parties.
The PQ wanted to drage the Charter and make it the main election issue.
Wake UP! You got played
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Why not answer my question? We can walk and chew bubble gum at the same, why can't you speak about that particular issue?
You Are Viewtiful
Member
As an outsider I would say yes. There is nothing scary or "coercive" about a police woman or judge wearing hijab. The charter and its various spinoffs are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Just how many police men wearing turbans are there? They can be count on your hands.
Effectively the charter, it can be thought of as a law targeting immigrants and making employment more difficult. Nothing more, nothing less. You'd think a social democratic party would be more concerned about the plight of poor, working-class, high-unemployment immigrant communities.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
So can a police officer hang a Habs logo on the rear-view mirror of the police car?
gutter_trash
Banned
because you are talking about the charter as if it ever was an important issue.
IT IS MADE UP!! An invention!
Before 2012, nobody gave a crap about it. There was no problems in the public sector concerning 0.8% of the population in that sector
It is a PLOY to win back identity voters lost in 2007.
*edit. That statistic magician Jean-Francois Lisée is on CBC right now LOL
IF the PQ was SERIOUS and HONNEST, they would have made CONSENSUS during their minority goverment with the CAQ and QS. But that was never their intention. The PQ wanted a fight, the PQ wanted a crisis but now they have egg on their face
gutter_trash
Banned
because the THINK TANKS and using it to manipulate the nationalists in thinking that it is
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Why not lol
I disagree with your previous point about not deciding what counts as a religion, on a case by case basis. I am pretty sure we've got 99.9% of (serious) religions covered under the current system. If a person believes he is being discriminated against, he can take it to the Human Rights Council. I'm pretty sure if you take it that far then people will start to believe you are serious about your religion (or mentally ill).
The charter isn't serious in the sense that it's actually going to do anything important or improve the lives of people. But the PQ/CAQ/QS are advertising it like it is something that must be done.
The only reason it is important in the sense that it will make the lives of a certain few a living hell. That's the reason any rational person should be concerned, especially against PQ's selectively racist version of the bill.
There's no trick here. If people support it (which they do in a significant majority as confirmed by several polls), if people care enough to talk about it, then it's a meaningful issue.
There's a reason all parties, Libs aside, agree at least in part on the charter.
The same could be said of Couillard. One could say he "tricked" electors into fearing a referendum that would not happen either way.
Does that mean it isn't an important issue? Clearly not, because voting intentions have changed significantly in response to that scarecrow. People care, therefore it is an issue. Simple as that.
gutter_trash
Banned
Already did previously, and I don't see how it applies to my point (in fact, that's further proving my point because you went straight to an opinion piece)
My whole point is, important issues vary from one person to another, from one party to another, from one gender to another, from one generation to another, and so on.
It's obvious that a significant majority of voters care about the charter as an issue (some polls even show majority support, not even counting its detractors which do care about it not passing). Who are you, then, to tell them they're wrong?
What's an issue and what isn't, isn't up for debate; it's personal.
We're influenced by all parties on what we feel is important, no doubt about that. But everyone is free to make their own opinion on what's important regardless.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
If we go further, can the police officer wear a Habs' cap? Is that also "Why not lol"?
Imagine a tourist from Boston coming to Montreal to see a Bruins VS Habs game. Outside the Bell center a few police officiers are wearing Habs caps, and arrest the man. He believes the arrest is unwarranted. Would he not be justified in believing that he may have received unfair treatment? Is it really necessary to let a police officer show who his favorite hockey team is? Would we not be better off with forbidding state employees from displaying an image which does not fit with their expected neutrality in their duties?
So already you are "pretty sure" that we have have some arbitrary definition of 99.9% of (serious) religions, covered under the current system (what system? the constitution? it's quite vague). I wonder where they are cataloged, and by who, under what system. What are the requirements to be a (serious) religion? Ultimately you are saying that the state must categorize (serious) religions. That seems discriminatory and outright excessive lawmaking.
Let's see: You are claiming that the state employees can hold a non-neutral image in relation to their expected duties (wear whatever they want, be it political messages, favorite sport team, religious affiliation). But the fact is right now a police officer CANNOT wear a Habs cap, nor can a Revenue Québec employee wear a PQ shirt. So why can a religious police officer wear a religious hat? Why is he given a privilege? Because his motivation to wear the hat is claimed to be religious, when this is something which is impossible to prove, because one's belief in religion can always be questioned; some claim to be religious out of fear of repercussion from their social circle. To fix this contradiction you have to go back to cataloging religions otherwise the Revenue Québec employee could claim to be wearing a PQ shirt out of religious beliefs, which means the state has to establish which religions exist and which don't, and even go deeper and establish what doctrine is specifically recognized by the state for each of those religions. Again, it is extremely illogical for the state to do this and highly discriminatory; the state is not supposed to write excessive amounts of legislation to cover bad legislation otherwise we end up clogging the judicial system.
Even if the limit was only applied to state employees who hold a coercive power, which state employees really hold a coercive power? Does the tax agency's employees hold coercive power? Because ultimately no one can be found guilty but by a judge, yet police officers are considered to be employees who hold coercive power, so clearly it has nothing to do with the resulting ability to cast a sentence. In mental institutions, the employees hold obvious coercive power, but various other institutions hold less obvious coercive power; teachers and principals can prevent your kid from coming to school. It's quite a blurry line to try and define where projecting an image that isn't neutral isn't a going to have negative implications in the application of the state employees' duties.
As things are, the Canadian constitution is discriminatory since it grants privilege to those who claim to hold religious beliefs, unsurprisingly since it is an old and outdated constitution which Quebec has not ratified for good reasons and which is based on older British constitutions from the time Britain was a god-fearing empire.
Why not instead do as you claim?
No cataloging of beliefs to establish a list of state-recognized religions, no excessive legislation, no privilege, same rules for everyone, no discrimination, and then if you then feel discriminated against, take it to the court. Because at end of the day, in this manner, we are all on the same footing.
This is directly in continuity with the progress we have made in this nation (Quebec) over the past decades; we are going to eventually fix a Canadian constitutional contradiction, and one that is extremely easy to fix by removing discrimination and making all equal, rather than the extremely ambiguous scenario we are in now, which you perfectly summed up:
Like you and gutter_trash said, it is indeed a very minor issue, in the sense that the problem is obvious and the solution simple and easy to apply, but the PLQ has raised hell trying to make a tempest in a teacup rather than sit and talk about the issue. At least QS and CAQ have contributed constructively.
gutter_trash
Banned
how can someone who lives in the boonies hundred of miles away from Montreal ever conceive of the thought of laying eyes on a visible minority or a religious minority who happens to wear headgear in the public sector?
who made them care about this topic?
I will tell you who:
an invented issue
who made them care about this topic?
I will tell you who:
an invented issue
See post above. It doesn't matter why they care, but they do, therefore it's important just like the many other issues all parties involved want us to care about.how can someone who lives in the boonies hundred of miles away from Montreal ever conceive of the thought of laying eyes on a visible minority or a religious minority who happens to wear headgear in the public sector?
who made them care about this topic?
I will tell you who:
an invented issue
ALL issues are invented by someone, it's just a matter of who's better at pushing their agenda.
gutter_trash
Banned
Ether, you babble on and on on HYPOTHETICALs
but where are the documents that lists the complaints?
Drainville doesn`t`want to show publicly the messages and mail he received about this
It's a Seinfeld episode, a Law about Nothing
you are being boring with your Devil's Advocate. Bring forth proofs about there ever being a problem in the public sector.
We can say the same about White people in the American South during the 1960s being scared of North-East Liberals trying to give Blacks the right to vote during the Civil Rights movement
but where are the documents that lists the complaints?
Drainville doesn`t`want to show publicly the messages and mail he received about this
It's a Seinfeld episode, a Law about Nothing
you are being boring with your Devil's Advocate. Bring forth proofs about there ever being a problem in the public sector.
We can say the same about White people in the American South during the 1960s being scared of North-East Liberals trying to give Blacks the right to vote during the Civil Rights movement
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Every day everywhere around you are state employees who are forbidden from wearing non-religious symbols, or symbols they claim are religious but which are not recognized as such. That's a daily proof you can be reminded of every time you see a state employee following the rules while privileges are granted to those who break the rules thanks to the Canadian constitution because they claim to hold religious views which are privileged against other non-religious or non-religiously-recognized beliefs.
We don't have to wait for a Sunni doctor to be brought to court by the family of a Shiite doctor, accused of having purposely killed the patient, and we don't have to tell someone we don't recognize the symbol they wear to be religious. There is a blatant contradiction in the Canadian constitution and the solution is the same rules for all, not privileges for some which undermine the neutrality of all state employees and establishments.
gutter_trash
Banned
so what would you do about the Jewish doctor who wears a skull cap?
what will you do to him? Fire him?
The only place in North-America that would do so?
We are not in Europe, we are North-Americans
what will you do to him? Fire him?
The only place in North-America that would do so?
We are not in Europe, we are North-Americans
A majority of the population might be in favor of the charter, but I'm not sure they care all that much. Afterall, the charter wouldn't affect the life of 99% of the population. Most would agree that health and education are much more important issues. It's actually both sad and hilarious that after the printemps érable, education has barely been brought up this time around.
But despite the charter and the referendum not being pressing issues, they are still the key for the PQ and the PLQ to win these elections. And when you have their cheerleaders Québécor and Gesca controlling most the medias in Québec, it's no surprise that it's everything everybody talk about.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
My why not was a joke.
The problem with your logic is that makes perfect sense in theory but is horrible in practicality, just like the Charter. Your Habs in the back of the car or policemen wearing Habs hat scenario is just not going to happen in real life. It just isn't. Do you see people putting the Star of David on the back of their police car? It's silly to get into these non-existent hypotheticals.
All religions in Canada receive various tax exemptions, ability to solemnize marriages, recognized religious holidays etc. I'm sure Quebec or Ontario wherever you are it is the same thing. There is no "excessive lawmaking" in the current situation.
Again about the Habs fans - I believe a law should have practical uses because it will have real-life effects. I am more willing to discriminate against these 0.00000001% super-religious Habs fans than I am about the real people who are Muslims, Jews, Sikhs etc. that constituted a much more significant percentage of the population. Your logic is if one person must drink poison then everyone must drink poison, it's only fair.
To top it all off, even your own personal take on the Charter will have dire negative consequences. You are seeing everything in a vacuum. Unemployment rates among immigrant communities are already sky high in Quebec (10%+). Your laws will make it worse and make integrating into mainstream society more difficult. Is this what you envision as an inclusive Quebec?
I agree with you about coercive power. In fact, I don't believe any of the ones that CAQ/QS listed are "coercive".
Not too sound overtly patriotic, but the Canadian constitution is the best damn thing ever (in terms of human rights). Unless I see something better from Quebec, I am going to assume an independent Quebec would give us things like the PQ's take on the Charter of Values. That would be a discriminatory constitution, I can almost compare to Egypt's. An independent Quebec would not have the Canadian constitution to protect ethnic and religious minorities from government tyranny.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked