[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Malthus]

The niqab is imposed by the religious authorities, by social pressure, let's not kid ourselves about that.

This is the crux of the disagreement right here. You think you know better than the the people who are actually affected by this, and you want to use the law to enforce it on the people who actually live with this against their wishes.

A woman does not wake up one day and tell herself "oh, I'm gonna cut myself entirely from society to be closer to God"

Yet the woman who took her citizenship oath says that she chose to wear the niqab of her own volition, over the protests of her male relatives. Perhaps she doesn't see it the way you do.

I remember when this used to be an argument I had with left-wing folks - in particular, about "Sharia law" arbitration in Ontario (my aunt, for example, was dead against it, and no-one ever accused her of being right wing).  Now, it's migrated over to become a right wing talking point. 

[Berkut]

I think that is rather judgmental.

Sure it is.  I have a strong opinion about people who advocate for cultural differences to be outlawed.

Well I think it is misguided but the intentions are not necessarily nefarious. They are trying to preserve something they think is on the path to extinction.

Many people consider one of the primary roles of government is to advocate for, preserve, and protect the local culture.

I don't ascribe nefarious intention to Viper either.  But I also do not think that trying to preserve something is a good excuse for persecuting the vulnerable in our society either.

so, by your definition, if you were Americans, you would be against forcefully removing symbols such as the Confederate flag,

Forcefully removing? From where?

The confederate flag is not illegal in the US or anything, and I don't think there is any credible discussion even about making it illegal to display.

it's been removed from some public places and some stores stopped selling it.

But that is not what you said. Stores are not restricted from selling it, nor are they restricted from NOT selling it. Like everything else...everywhere.

  Lots of people were against the move, I remember someone saying "that flag never hurt anyone" or something like that.

Holy shit, people have opinions? Shocking news!

Where is the "forceful removal" you are using to create the analogy to these laws about dress?

Should it be restored?

Since the "forceful removal" never happened, asking if it should be restored is rather meaningless, isn't it?

Should someone wearing a Confederate cap be allowed to swear his oath of citizenship in the US?

Of course.

  Could you visit the White House arriving in your General Lee, wearing a Confederate flag on your cap and t-shirt?

Lets me relieve you of them - yes, you certainly can.

I have doubts...

You should not, since there is zero doubt that you can in fact visit the White House wearing a confederate flag shirt. At least, you can under any circumstances someone NOT wearing such a shirt could do that same.

Not that it is forbidden or anything, but I'm guessing, that currently, it wouldn't feel appropriate.

I think how it would feel would depend on the person wearing it, but I don't think how someone might feel really has any bearing on your claim that there is some analogy here to banning the wearing of Islamic clothing.

And in a way, the South Carolina Congress did forcefully remove the Confederate flag.

No, not in any way. They took it down. There was nothing particularly forceful about it, nor does it have anything to do with individuals rights to wear/display it.

Now, if you want to argue that the Canadian Parliament should not show up to work wearing head scarves, then I guess this bizarro analogy might make some shred of sense.

[crazy canuck]

C'mon.  Ever since the campaign started, you're searched for a reason to vote Liberal.

I think the folks here who know me, especially socially, had a good laugh at that one. 

[crazy canuck]

So the Globe just endorsed the Conservatives---without Harper . Wishy washy.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/editorials/the-tories-deserve-another-mandate-stephen-harper-doesnt/article26842506/

Interesting, it parallels the discussion I had with CC upthread.

Yeah, there are some paragraphs there that look like they lifted it directly from our discussion. 

To the point that this is not the party I once supported I strongly endorse the last bit. "The Conservatives have been a big tent party in the past, and they must be once again. Fiscally prudent, economically liberal and socially progressive – the party could be all of those things, and it once was."

But I don't see how that can happen unless they get a timeout from government. 

[Jacob]

C'mon.  Ever since the campaign started, you're searched for a reason to vote Liberal.

I think the folks here who know me, especially socially, had a good laugh at that one. 

Yeah, we all know you were looking for an excuse to vote NDP... it's just that you couldn't find one

[Malthus]

So the Globe just endorsed the Conservatives---without Harper . Wishy washy.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/editorials/the-tories-deserve-another-mandate-stephen-harper-doesnt/article26842506/

Interesting, it parallels the discussion I had with CC upthread.

Yeah, there are some paragraphs there that look like they lifted it directly from our discussion. 

To the point that this is not the party I once supported I strongly endorse the last bit. "The Conservatives have been a big tent party in the past, and they must be once again. Fiscally prudent, economically liberal and socially progressive – the party could be all of those things, and it once was."

But I don't see how that can happen unless they get a timeout from government.

The Globe editors should really stop lurking and plagerizing Languish. Or at least, pay us some royalties.   

But yeah, sadly I am forced to agree. The Cons need some time in the wilderness. I do fear that the Libs suffer from a deficiency of leadership, though they have run an expert campaign. Once they are actually in office, the fact that the PM is "not Harper" will cease to matter, and the fact that he "is Trudeau" will become rather more important ... 

[Malthus]

C'mon.  Ever since the campaign started, you're searched for a reason to vote Liberal.

I think the folks here who know me, especially socially, had a good laugh at that one. 

Yeah, we all know you were looking for an excuse to vote NDP... it's just that you couldn't find one

The problem in this campaign has been that the NDP saw their chance to actually take power - but to do so, they had to move more into the centre. If they could displace the Libs, they could carry it off.

Only thing is, the Libs are used to squatting in the centre. It's their default state. The Libs are better at being the Libs than the NDP is. 

[crazy canuck]

C'mon.  Ever since the campaign started, you're searched for a reason to vote Liberal.

I think the folks here who know me, especially socially, had a good laugh at that one. 

Yeah, we all know you were looking for an excuse to vote NDP... it's just that you couldn't find one

[crazy canuck]

Here is the last projection update before the weekend.  The liberals have continued their surge in support.  They are now up to a 74% chance of getting the most seats and there is now an 11% chance of obtaining a majority.   

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/globe-election-forecast-2015/article25377958/

[Valmy]

They are now up to a 74% chance of getting the most seats and there is now an 11% chance of obtaining a majority.   

[Josephus]

C'mon.  Ever since the campaign started, you're searched for a reason to vote Liberal.

I think the folks here who know me, especially socially, had a good laugh at that one. 

Yeah, we all know you were looking for an excuse to vote NDP... it's just that you couldn't find one

The problem in this campaign has been that the NDP saw their chance to actually take power - but to do so, they had to move more into the centre. If they could displace the Libs, they could carry it off.

Only thing is, the Libs are used to squatting in the centre. It's their default state. The Libs are better at being the Libs than the NDP is. 

Actually, I also think they saw that  vacuum in the left, and took it.As I've said before, what made my move to Trudeau certain was his anti balanced-budget all the time stance. He took an unpopular idea that there's nothing wrong with borrowing when interest rates are so low and ran with it

[Barrister]

Here is the last projection update before the weekend.  The liberals have continued their surge in support.  They are now up to a 74% chance of getting the most seats and there is now an 11% chance of obtaining a majority.   

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/globe-election-forecast-2015/article25377958/

I still have some hope.  NUmbers are still tight, the particular scandal with campaign officials advising oil companies how to negotiate with a new gov, may create a drag on the Liberals.  Plus I'm still hoping/counting on Conservative voters being a bit more dedicated at turn out.

[crazy canuck]

But what the Conservatives really need is a majority.  Even if they get the most seats in a minority Parliament they are not going to be able to form government.

[Barrister]

But what the Conservatives really need is a majority.  Even if they get the most seats in a minority Parliament they are not going to be able to form government.

I don't think it's as cut and dried as all that.  If it's only a handful of seats between the Libs and Conservatives, maybe, but if there is a noticeable Conservative win (though not a majority) I think there's an onus on defence to give the Conservatives a chance to pass a budget.

[crazy canuck]

The first test is whether he can obtain the confidence of Parliament.