[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[viper37]

I am sure they will be happy to know that their majority is assured. 

It is not assured, but they don't need Quebec.  And they won't make much gains in Quebec anyway, it they truly wanted to, they would/should have started 4 years ago

[garbon]

Wow, it seems really antiquated that people can do what they want as long as they keep it in their homes, their bedrooms.

There are places for practicing your religion, you know.  For Christians, we call them Church.  How you want to shape your life according to your religion is yours to decide.  Otherwise, you get yourself in a situation where creationism is taught as science in publicly funded schools and that is unaceptable.

What's next? You can be gay but don't be like obvious about it in public.

[garbon]

Well it sounds like a great political move. Get the populace all riled up about a non-issue so as to distract from other, actually important, failures in governance.

there are no failure in this government.  They are deeply religious people, and as we all know, religious people have the highest standards of morality we can expect.  As such, we should strive to accomodate any & all religious practices of people, no matter how offensive or silly they may be, in any kind of situation that may arise now and for the foreseeable future.

There are no failings of the Quebec government?

[crazy canuck]

Well it sounds like a great political move. Get the populace all riled up about a non-issue so as to distract from other, actually important, failures in governance.

Thing is this strategy would probably have backfired badly if it could be seen as an attempt to distract from other issues.  But there are a few reasons why it doesn't play that way.  First and foremost no political party wants to offend the particular sensitivities of Quebec voters and so no political party is particularly vocal in opposition to the government on this issue.  Second, while people in the rest of the country don't particularly support the government position, they also don't particular care either.  Third, there really isn't anything in the way of a "failure" which requires people to be distracted from.

This is simply an appeal for the vote in Quebec.  The government made their announcement that they would appeal in Quebec.  They only really talk about it in Quebec.  And the people of Quebec seem to think this is a good thing to do. 

[Valmy]

What's next? You can be gay but don't be like obvious about it in public.

Don't act all gay when you swear allegiance to the Queen.

[Malthus]

What's next? You can be gay but don't be like obvious about it in public.

Don't act all gay when you swear allegiance to the Queen.

Come to think about it, a man making formal submission to a queen is kinda gay. 

[Valmy]

Come to think about it, a man making formal submission to a queen is kinda gay. 

But seriously, the strict secular ideology only has a problem with public displays of religion.  You can bang three dudes at the same time on Stephen Harper's desk for all they care.

[viper37]

What's next? You can be gay but don't be like obvious about it in public.

do you have the right to perform sexual acts in public where you live?  New York is much, much more open minded thant I thought, then.

[viper37]

no political party is particularly vocal in opposition to the government on this issue. 

You new found idol, Justin Trudeau, was very vocal about it.

Who would have thought seeing CC and JT fighting side by side against the intolereance of intolerant people?

[crazy canuck]

no political party is particularly vocal in opposition to the government on this issue. 

You new found idol, Justin Trudeau, was very vocal about it.

This is what passes for being "very vocal"?   This is the kind of language a politician uses when he doesn't want to offend Quebec but realizes that his base in the ROC would find any support for the government position to be absurd.

"Any time a government or a leader is in a position to choose to limit minority rights of any type, there has to be a very good justification — a clear and compelling reason to do so," Trudeau said.

"The reason the prime minister gave last week for appealing the court's decision around the niqab was, to my mind, not at all justifying the prime minister's decision."

[dps]

Well I guess there isn't much to discuss there. I guess good luck with continue culture wars with your immigrants? You hardly are going to get them to join in happily with your society if you insist on alienating them.

Oh?  We are alienating them?  Funny, I thought some insisted on being alienated

All muslims are welcome.  All Americans too.  And French, and British.  I don't think we refuse immigrants from any country, but it's obvious it's easier for some to enter here than others.  I don't see a problem with that.
The goal of immigration is to enrich our society with new talent.  We do not willingly accept criminals, on a general basis, though there are exceptions, and the nature of the crime obviously counts a lot.

But occasionally, some people seek to abuse of our asylum.  Some come here to get a Canadian passport hoping it will be a get out of jail and out of the country free card in case of problems.  Some come here to seek refuge for serious crimes they commited under a previous administration in their country. Some come here to find better work opportunities.  Some others because the social net is attractive.  Lots of frauds too on this count.  Nevertheless, I never felt that immigration was a revolving, unlocked door, where everyone can come here, no questions asked.  It's a social contract between the newly arrived and the host country.  We do our part, you do yours.  You have 5 years to adopt the way of the land into your cultural traditions.  If you can't do it, you don't belong here.  If you're unwilling to participate in the society, you don't belong here, there are many other countries in the world.  Immigration in a country is not an inalienable human right, you know.
We don't have to grant citizenship to everyone who wants to.

Looking for better work opportunities is an abuse?  I thought that it's one of the main reasons for immigration.

[viper37]

no political party is particularly vocal in opposition to the government on this issue. 

You new found idol, Justin Trudeau, was very vocal about it.

This is what passes for being "very vocal"?   This is the kind of language a politician uses when he doesn't want to offend Quebec but realizes that his base in the ROC would find any support for the government position to be absurd.

"Any time a government or a leader is in a position to choose to limit minority rights of any type, there has to be a very good justification — a clear and compelling reason to do so," Trudeau said.

"The reason the prime minister gave last week for appealing the court's decision around the niqab was, to my mind, not at all justifying the prime minister's decision."

for Trudeau to even speak clearly about this demonstrate it's a serious issue to him
I only skimmed through the article, it made it appear a stronger opposition than his real words.

[viper37]

Well I guess there isn't much to discuss there. I guess good luck with continue culture wars with your immigrants? You hardly are going to get them to join in happily with your society if you insist on alienating them.

Oh?  We are alienating them?  Funny, I thought some insisted on being alienated

All muslims are welcome.  All Americans too.  And French, and British.  I don't think we refuse immigrants from any country, but it's obvious it's easier for some to enter here than others.  I don't see a problem with that.
The goal of immigration is to enrich our society with new talent.  We do not willingly accept criminals, on a general basis, though there are exceptions, and the nature of the crime obviously counts a lot.

But occasionally, some people seek to abuse of our asylum.  Some come here to get a Canadian passport hoping it will be a get out of jail and out of the country free card in case of problems.  Some come here to seek refuge for serious crimes they commited under a previous administration in their country. Some come here to find better work opportunities.  Some others because the social net is attractive.  Lots of frauds too on this count.  Nevertheless, I never felt that immigration was a revolving, unlocked door, where everyone can come here, no questions asked.  It's a social contract between the newly arrived and the host country.  We do our part, you do yours.  You have 5 years to adopt the way of the land into your cultural traditions.  If you can't do it, you don't belong here.  If you're unwilling to participate in the society, you don't belong here, there are many other countries in the world.  Immigration in a country is not an inalienable human right, you know.
We don't have to grant citizenship to everyone who wants to.

Looking for better work opportunities is an abuse?  I thought that it's one of the main reasons for immigration.

that was poorly phrased, I see.  I wanted to make an iteration of various reasons to emigrate but I mixed it up with abuse of asylum.

No it is certainly not an abuse and these people are obviously welcomed here. 

[Jacob]

Then their religious beliefs will have to change, or they will have to seek an alternate country where this is a welcome practice.  We do not have to adapt to strange&fringe religious customs, it knows no end.

But Viper, it is a welcome practice here according to the Charter, and according to a whole lot of people.

Seperation of State and Church means that religion has no place in the government.  Any religion.  I know it's a difficult concept to understand in a country where 95% of the population are believers.

French style Laicite is not Canadian. Wearing a kippah, turban, or other religious head-covering is widely acceptable, in spite of the sputtering and fuming of a handful of cranks.

[Barrister]

Seperation of State and Church means that religion has no place in the government.  Any religion.  I know it's a difficult concept to understand in a country where 95% of the population are believers.

French style Laicite is not Canadian. Wearing a kippah, turban, or other religious head-covering is widely acceptable, in spite of the sputtering and fuming of a handful of cranks.

Indeed.  I always like to quote the Preamble to the Charter in moments like this:

Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law;

We recognize the freedom of belief.  We do not recognize state secularism.