[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

One note, the legislation does not affect judges.

But it is an interesting thought to explore.  In this province, and I assume across the country, counsel are not permitted to wear anything that indicates an affiliation with any cause group.  So, for example,  justice of the Supreme Court of BC, once admonished counsel for wearing a poppy to court in early November.

That's outrageous.   Wearing a poppy memorializes those who died in war - nothing more.

It is a symbol, and from your reaction, a powerful one.  Therefore, by definition, not appropriate.

[Barrister]

One note, the legislation does not affect judges.

But it is an interesting thought to explore.  In this province, and I assume across the country, counsel are not permitted to wear anything that indicates an affiliation with any cause group.  So, for example,  justice of the Supreme Court of BC, once admonished counsel for wearing a poppy to court in early November.

That's outrageous.   Wearing a poppy memorializes those who died in war - nothing more.

It is a symbol, and from your reaction, a powerful one.  Therefore, by definition, not appropriate.

But it's a universal symbol.  It doesn't memorialize the dead of any particular war, or from any particular side.  It certainly doesn't glamourize or promote war.

I always wear a poppy to court in early November, as do many other lawyers.  I've never heard that commented on.

In fact as I think about it I've never heard of a rule prohibiting counsel from showing any affiliation with any cause group.  Much less common than poppies, but I've seen lawyers wearing ribbons to honour police casualties, or sex assault victims, etc.

[crazy canuck]

One note, the legislation does not affect judges.

But it is an interesting thought to explore.  In this province, and I assume across the country, counsel are not permitted to wear anything that indicates an affiliation with any cause group.  So, for example,  justice of the Supreme Court of BC, once admonished counsel for wearing a poppy to court in early November.

That's outrageous.   Wearing a poppy memorializes those who died in war - nothing more.

It is a symbol, and from your reaction, a powerful one.  Therefore, by definition, not appropriate.

But it's a universal symbol. 

Universal to whom?

edit: I guess I should have anticipated Alberta would be different.  I suppose it is part of the cultural divide our friends in Quebec are trying to explain.

[Malthus]

One note, the legislation does not affect judges.

There are special provisions for judges - see section 5 of the Bill.

[Malthus]

One note, the legislation does not affect judges.

But it is an interesting thought to explore.  In this province, and I assume across the country, counsel are not permitted to wear anything that indicates an affiliation with any cause group.  So, for example,  justice of the Supreme Court of BC, once admonished counsel for wearing a poppy to court in early November.  Judges themselves also do not where anything that indicates any affiliation with anything other than their judicial role.

The reason for all of this formality - justice is supposed to be blind and the judges only decide a case based on the evidence and applicable legal principles.

Religious symbols are an exception to this principle.  They are a clear identification of belonging to a particular group and adhering to a particular view but we look past that.

That happened in Ontario too - but it sparked a blistering public rebuke to the judge from the press.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/a-judge-spouts-poppycock-about-wearing-a-poppy-in-court/article726775/

[Razgovory]

Solve problems before they appear.  Avoid any and all possible conflict of interests.

The State must appear to be neutral in every possible ways.

I agree that forcing a Sikh to remove his turban while in office is excessive.  But in the courtroom, he should apply by all the standards others are expected to follow.  You can't have a crown prosecutor with a maga cap, or any kind of hat while in court.  Religion is a choice, adhering to all tenets of one's religion is also a choice.

If a Sikh, or a muslim woman, or anyone else is unable to set aside his/her religion for a few hours a day, then that means that person is not neutral.

If a judge has a Ten Commandment plate in his courtroom, and I refuse to swear on the Bible because I am an atheist, how am I supposed to believe this judge will be impartial toward me?

The State is and should be neutral toward everyone.  A society should not bend over to accomodate "new" arrivals, those who come here should respect our values.  They can dress all they want in most circumstances, but sometimes, there is a compromise to be made.

A state that enforces religion or non-religion is not a neutral state.

[crazy canuck]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/a-judge-spouts-poppycock-about-wearing-a-poppy-in-court/article726775/

Or perhaps just an easy target for Ms. Blatchford.  Columnists love to tee off on the judiciary all the while knowing the judiciary cannot comment back.

[Malthus]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/a-judge-spouts-poppycock-about-wearing-a-poppy-in-court/article726775/

Or perhaps just an easy target for Ms. Blatchford.  Columnists love to tee off on the judiciary all the while knowing the judiciary cannot comment back.

Who knew this issue had such interest? Ive never even heard of it before ... here's another example.

https://www.thestar.com/life/2016/11/05/judges-wearing-poppies-in-court-these-days-is-okay-ethically-speaking.html

[crazy canuck]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/a-judge-spouts-poppycock-about-wearing-a-poppy-in-court/article726775/

Or perhaps just an easy target for Ms. Blatchford.  Columnists love to tee off on the judiciary all the while knowing the judiciary cannot comment back.

Who knew this issue had such interest? Ive never even heard of it before ... here's another example.

https://www.thestar.com/life/2016/11/05/judges-wearing-poppies-in-court-these-days-is-okay-ethically-speaking.html

And provides a good example of why it is not a "universal" symbol as BB asserted.

[Barrister]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/a-judge-spouts-poppycock-about-wearing-a-poppy-in-court/article726775/

Or perhaps just an easy target for Ms. Blatchford.  Columnists love to tee off on the judiciary all the while knowing the judiciary cannot comment back.

Who knew this issue had such interest? Ive never even heard of it before ... here's another example.

https://www.thestar.com/life/2016/11/05/judges-wearing-poppies-in-court-these-days-is-okay-ethically-speaking.html

And provides a good example of why it is not a "universal" symbol as BB asserted.

Did you actually read the article?

In contemporary Canada, we've come to understand that the evil encountered in the Great Wars is, by no means, the particular possession of any one nation or race. It's over 70 years since the end of the Second World War, and those years have seen so many eruptions of fascism, racism and religious hatred, in so many places, that no serious person today accepts the "Allies=good, Axis=bad" formula. And, as if we hadn't seen enough already, this year's American political imbroglio is sufficient reminder that the "isms" which led to Hitler, Mussolini and the rest have, by no means, been put to rest. Resentment, racism, religious bigotry and cultural superiority are, sadly and incontrovertibly, alive and well.

[crazy canuck]

Oh, BB - before you make that kind of allegation, make sure you actually read it yourself.

I am a second generation Canadian of Japanese heritage. Last year, in the week before Remembrance Day, I had to appear in court, charged with a minor provincial offence. I was surprised, and a bit uncomfortable, to see the Justice wearing a poppy on her robe. I wondered, with my Japanese appearance, whether I would get a fair hearing. I was found "not guilty," so all is good. And I feel petty even raising this question. But ethically, is it OK for judges, justices and other court officers to wear a poppy, in a multicultural country where so many people come from countries that were adversaries?

[Barrister]

Oh, BB - before you make that kind of allegation, make sure you actually read it yourself.

I am a second generation Canadian of Japanese heritage. Last year, in the week before Remembrance Day, I had to appear in court, charged with a minor provincial offence. I was surprised, and a bit uncomfortable, to see the Justice wearing a poppy on her robe. I wondered, with my Japanese appearance, whether I would get a fair hearing. I was found "not guilty," so all is good. And I feel petty even raising this question. But ethically, is it OK for judges, justices and other court officers to wear a poppy, in a multicultural country where so many people come from countries that were adversaries?

Yes, that was the question.

And here's the answer given:

Your concern, however, is misplaced.

[crazy canuck]

Really, you are going to discount the concern because somebody said their concern was not valid?

Ok, so universal, with a huge caveat. 

[dps]

\Religious zeal&fanatism needs to be curbed.  Otherwise, we end up like the US, with religion creeping into politics.  Just like the 50s here.

.

Yeah, it's a good thing religion never creeped into politics here before about 1980.  Why, if it had, we might have had Negro ministers pushing for civil rights in the 50s and 60s!  Outrageous!  We should never let religion affect our laws like that!

[Zoupa]

\Religious zeal&fanatism needs to be curbed.  Otherwise, we end up like the US, with religion creeping into politics.  Just like the 50s here.

.

Yeah, it's a good thing religion never creeped into politics here before about 1980.  Why, if it had, we might have had Negro ministers pushing for civil rights in the 50s and 60s!  Outrageous!  We should never let religion affect our laws like that!

The separation of church and state is written in your goddamn constitution. Stop being stupid. Those black ministers weren't pushing for more religious influence on politics, they were pushing for civil rights.