Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Benz

Elizabeth May wants to fight against Québec

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Bill 21 is one of the worst pieces of legislation in this country's modern history.

Really the piece of legislation which is your nemesis, is called; Section 33 The Notwithstanding Clause, which is by far and away the worst legislation in the history of Canada.

The Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms is Orwellian, it is full of poison pills which make it a weapon of repression rather than a shield against.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Bill 21 is one of the worst pieces of legislation in this country's modern history.

When you give the people a choice, they don't always make the right one, who knew? Democracy is not a panacea, it's merely a way to peacefully transfer power.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Really the piece of legislation which is your nemesis, is called; Section 33 The Notwithstanding Clause, which is by far and away the worst legislation in the history of Canada.

The Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms is Orwellian, it is full of poison pills which make it a weapon of repression rather than a shield against.

Thanks Trudeau.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

Thanks Trudeau.

Pierre Trudeau didn't want the Notwithstanding Clause.  

Alberta and Saskatchewan refused to sign without it. 

Quebec was already refusing to sign.

With three provinces out, the whole thing would have collapsed.

So he reluctantly agreed, to go forward without Quebec, but everybody else at least signed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Pierre Trudeau didn't want the Notwithstanding Clause.  

Alberta and Saskatchewan refused to sign without it. 

Quebec was already refusing to sign.

With three provinces out, the whole thing would have collapsed.

So he reluctantly agreed, to go forward without Quebec, but everybody else at least signed.

Thanks Alberta and Saskatchewan.

At least it will speed up the dissolution of Confederation, Accelerationism FTW. Vive le Quebec libre!

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Thanks Alberta and Saskatchewan. At least it will speed up the dissolution of Confederation, Accelerationism FTW.

Canada has had a constitutional convention in my lifetime and I watched it in real time.

Putting aside all the Liberal myth making, it did not actually go well.

The result is actually an abomination.

But the last time it went so badly, nobody has ever wanted to touch the constitution since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Canada has had a constitutional convention in my lifetime and I watched it in real time.

Putting aside all the Liberal myth making, it did not actually go well.

The result is actually an abomination.

But the last time it went so badly, nobody has ever wanted to touch the constitution since.

One of the best reasons for the End of Confederation is that if Canada isn't held together in a shotgun marriage, the Constitutions the Canada's will come up with won't contain so many poison pills to rope other provinces into signing. 

Thus superior constitutions will be in place, that actually will be a shield and not a weapon.

F*ck The Notwithstanding Clause and the horses it rode in on.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

One of the best reasons for the End of Confederation is that if Canada isn't held together in a shotgun marriage, the Constitutions the Canada's will come up with won't contain so many poison pills to rope other provinces into signing. 

Thus superior constitutions will be in place, that actually will be a shield and not a weapon.

F*ck The Notwithstanding Clause and the horses it rode in on.

The poison pills in the Charter are all the British Crown

Where your rights are at the arbitrary definition of "reasonable" with what is reasonable being constantly altered into a weapon against you? Speech banning?  Gun grabbing?

That's the Queen's Peace.

Where Section 33 overrules your rights on behalf of the Provinces?  

That's the Queen too.   Direct relationship to the Crown above and beyond Confederation.

This a classic case of half measures being the worst measures.

Because you have a written Charter,  with trap doors wherein you can fall into the Queen's dungeons with no legal recourse, that archaic once unwritten law is now codified and unassailable.

It's one or the other, if you're going to have an American style constitution, you have to go all the way.    If you leave the Queeny bits in there, you've made a monster.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

The poison pills in the Charter are all the British Crown

Where your rights are at the arbitrary definition of "reasonable" with what is reasonable being constantly altered into a weapon against you? Speech banning?  Gun grabbing?

That's the Queen's Peace.

Where Section 33 overrules your rights on behalf of the Provinces?  

That's the Queen too.   Direct relationship to the Crown above and beyond Confederation.

This a classic case of half measures being the worst measures.

Because you have a written Charter,  with trap doors wherein you can fall into the Queen's dungeons with no legal recourse, that archaic once unwritten law is now codified and unassailable.

Easier to get rid of the trap doors of "reasonable" after Confederation is thrown into the dust bin of history, where it belongs.

Less Half Measures FTW

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Easier to get rid of the trap doors of "reasonable" after Confederation is thrown into the dust bin of history, where it belongs.

It's probably going to be messy,

First off, I think there will be a period of drift, after Quebec leaves, Canada will be stunned for awhile, it will try to just carry on as if nothing has happened no doubt.

Inexorably though, the ball of yarn will continue to unravel as other provinces come around again and realize that they want what Quebec took for itself too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

It's probably going to be messy,

First off, I think there will be a period of drift, after Quebec leaves, Canada will be stunned for awhile, it will try to just carry on as if nothing has happened no doubt.

Inexorably though, the ball of yarn will continue to unravel as other provinces come around again and realize that they want what Quebec took for itself too.

Rome wasn't built in a day, and I don't expect Confederation to completely fall apart overnight either.

Even if there is a little short term pain, the long term gain is worth that trade off by several orders of magnitude.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Rome wasn't built in a day, and I don't expect Confederation to completely fall apart overnight either.

Even if there is a little short term pain, the long term gain is worth that trade off by several orders of magnitude.

 Confederation is not going to come apart in some sort of revolutionary war.  

Nobody is going to overthrow Ottawa with a rebel army.

It will be just like what Quebec does; refusing to enforce federal law, declining to obey federal edicts, basically ignoring Ottawa.

Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia will simply adopt Quebec's ways, over time rendering Ottawa less relevant until it becomes irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

 Confederation is not going to come apart in some sort of revolutionary war.  

Nobody is going to overthrow Ottawa with a rebel army.

It will be just like what Quebec does; refusing to enforce federal law, declining to obey federal edicts, basically ignoring Ottawa.

Ontario, Alberta, and British Columbia will simply adopt Quebec's ways, over time rendering Ottawa less relevant until it becomes irrelevant.

Ignoring Irrelevant Ottawa FTW. 

No War Required, The Clarity Act Provides, The Queen Protects The Right.

Just sit back and watch the Liberal Party of Canada hang themselves, that's the ticket.

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Ignoring Irrelevant Ottawa FTW. 

No War Required, The Clarity Act Provides, The Queen Protects The Right.

Just sit back and watch the Liberal Party of Canada hang themselves, that's the ticket.

Before you even get to the Clarity Act, Section 33 provides.

The whole house of cards is reliant on none of the other provinces using Section 33 like Quebec does,

But there's nothing stopping them, just tradition basically.

When the other Provinces start to assert it like Quebec does in the face of an increasingly nonsensical and crazy Ottawa, then the house of cards shall fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Before you even get to the Clarity Act, Section 33 provides.

The whole house of cards is reliant on none of the other provinces using Section 33 like Quebec does,

But there's nothing stopping them, just tradition basically.

When the other Provinces start to assert it like Quebec does in the face of an increasingly nonsensical and crazy Ottawa, then the house of cards shall fall.

By getting Alberta and Saskatchewan on board to sign the Constitution, the Liberals sowed the seeds of Confederation's demise, and then doubled down with Clarity Act.

And we quick to say it's the game that's dealt,
That gave you that rope so you can hang yourself.

 

Edited by Yzermandius19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like, the changes the Ford government made to the Toronto city council were not that significant.

But that the Guardians of Confederation themselves would invoke Section 33 so promiscuously and without restraint?

That is a big deal.   Populist backlash against Ottawa,  Toronto was just the proxy.  Queen's Park was really invoking it in the face of Confederation.

That's Ontario acting like Quebec.

When Quebec is Quebec and Ontario is Quebec, the center cannot hold, because that's the center, nothing much PEI is going to be able to about it.

Edited by Dougie93

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except that the advantages of Confederation are too great to depose.   Confederation is an important protection against bad ethnonatiinalist impulses like Bill 21.  I think it’s also a protection against excesses of the hegemon, like the attempted executive order Muslim ban.  

It’s legitimate to ask whether Confederation has enough tools to be an effective bulwark of liberal democracy.  The court must uphold the Charter, which is undermined by the notwithstanding clause, but the Commons can enact laws that reinforce rights.  Confederation’s Parliament can do that.  This is where having a well educated electorate and decent political leadership comes in.   Hopefully we have enough of that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Except that the advantages of Confederation are too great to depose.   Confederation is an important protection against bad ethnonatiinalist impulses like Bill 21.  I think it’s also a protection against excesses of the hegemon, like the attempted executive order Muslim ban.  

It’s legitimate to ask whether Confederation has enough tools to be an effective bulwark of liberal democracy.  The court must uphold the Charter, which is undermined by the notwithstanding clause, but the Commons can enact laws that reinforce rights.  Confederation’s Parliament can do that.  This is where having a well educated electorate and decent political leadership comes in.   Hopefully we have enough of that.  

Although I strongly desagree, I respect the opinion of people that think the religious symbols should be allowed to people in a position of authority. I can fight for them to have the right to express that opinion, even if I desagree.

What I do not respect, is the people who has a fallacy reasonning that without justifications, convert the secularism rule into any sort of phobia (such as "ethnonatiinalist"), even if nothing in the bill itself or in the historic behavior of those who passes it can demonstrate that assertion. One should at least have the decency to at least explain itself instead of just a lazy intellectual free accusation.

In another thread, I have exposed the different opinions, visions and understanding of the religion between Quebec and Canada. I beleive I did it in all respect of the people who think different than me without sinking into foolish denigration of the counterpart and I expect no less in return.

Tweaking the federation to bulldoze your narrowed mind is not what I call "well educated electorate".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I think Bill 21 can be challenged and defeated.  New legislation can be tabled to make it illegal.    This should absolutely be an election issue.  Scheer will look the other way to keep enough of the alt-right crowd as supporters.  On that I disagree with him.  If Trudeau is as progressive as he claims to be, he should go after Bill 21 once re-elected.   May has guts on this issue.  Mind you, she’s not worried about winning an election.  

Apparently she's not worried about reigniting separatism in Quebec either. Which just demonstrates how unfit she is for the job of PM. Quebecers want this bill, and if Ottawa overrules it there'll be hell to pay. For that matter, substantial numbers of Canadians would like the same bill. Your belief this is only the 'alt-right' is ludicrous given the polls which show two thirds of Canadians don't think immigrants are assimilating fast enough, and two thirds, when polled on an earlier version of this bill said they wanted the same bill in their province.

The majority of Canadians outside of Quebec would support having a similar ban on face-coverings in their province, a new survey has found.

The survey, conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs for Global News, found that 68 per cent of Canadian adults would either strongly or somewhat back the religious neutrality law in their part of the country.

https://globalnews.ca/news/3828752/quebec-face-covering-ban-support-canada-poll/

 
 
A new wide-scale survey published by The Environics Institute shows that 65% of Canadians believe that too many immigrants are not adopting Canadian values.

All the provinces, except Nova Scotia (49%), showed results where a majority of residents agreed that new immigrants were not doing enough to adapt to Canadian values, with Quebec leading the way at 72%.

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/large-survey-shows-two-thirds-of-canadians-unhappy-with-how-immigrants-are-adopting-canadian-values/

In a national polling partnership between CBC and the Angus Reid Institute, 68 per cent of Canadian respondents said minorities should be doing more to fit in with mainstream society instead of keeping their own customs and languages.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/poll-canadians-multiculturalism-immigrants-1.3784194

 

 

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Bill 21 is one of the worst pieces of legislation in this country's modern history.

According to a small minority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Argus said:

According to a small minority.

If you think wearing a hijab or turban to work is bad for society, you're a nut.  Much nuttier than wearing a turban or yarmulke to work.  Some nativism is fine, but you're an extreme nativist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Elizabeth May has promised to ban any new pipelines and not dig for any new oil so essentially decimating and alienating Alberta, wants to pick a fight with Quebec on Bill 21, yet wants to get all the provinces in on her plans for national pharmacare and dental care.  Good luck with that! :lol:

This woman is a moronic fool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Benz said:

Tweaking the federation to bulldoze your narrowed mind is not what I call "well educated electorate".

The Anglos have been reeducated by the Cultural Marxists in the academic Ivory Towers down in Progressive Toronto.

They don't tweak the Confederation, they simply pretend that the Confederation is a People's Republic and so Quebec must conform to the will of the Eskimo Communist dogma.

Direct democracy, no Confederation, just the Anglos demanding that Quebec drink the Kool Aid of the Post National State Jonestown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...