Machjo
-
Posts
4,271 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Machjo
-
-
5 hours ago, GostHacked said:
The party cannot exist in government because of the notion of the separation between church (any church) and state. That does not mean the party cannot exist, but they are not going to hold any power in parliament unless you get a large number voting for them. But the real problem would be politicians and current government bending to the will of Muslims to allow this kind of religious political party. That would mean changing the rules of our government.
Hold on.... I am checking some items out and apparently there is no clear definition or notion of complete separation of church and state in Canada. That's troubling.
The separation of Church and state in Canada is hogwash. The reigning monarch must profess the Anglican Faith and cannot be married to a Catholic and the Constitution itself entrenches the separate denominational school system and the government imposes Christian holidays onto the private sector. Even Quebec has a crucifix on the wall of its National Assembly.
Separation of Church and State you say? And what about the Christian Heritage Party? I say eliminate all official recognition of political parties and have them all run as independents like they do in Nunavut.
-
8 hours ago, turningrite said:
The Charter exemption relating to Ontario's separate school system originates in a long-standing constitutional arrangement dating back to 1867. The situation significantly predates modern international human rights covenants and the 1999 UN Human Rights Commission's ruling has no legal applicability in Canada, unlike decisions made under the Charter. I believe the UN Human Rights Committee has also come out against the death penalty as well as blasphemy laws, none of which are applicable to Canada. If Canada's only sin is Ontario's separate school system, that's pretty small potatoes. Nobody loses their life over it nor is any child of any religion actually denied a publicly funded basic education. Personally, I'd get rid of all religious education and I believe the Waldman decision notes that the Covenant doesn't require any state to fund religious schools. My guess is that any Islamic Party that might emerge in Ontario or Canada would instead seek to obtain public funding for religious schools for members of the community they represent, just as Waldman presumably sought public funding for Jewish schooling.
The point still stands that the Charter violates the Covenant.
-
1 minute ago, bcsapper said:
I think there's something wrong with your keyboard.
Thanks. I fixed it.
-
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:
I would just tell the government the bank had blasphemed. It's tough to hold someone to a contract if you don't have a head.
Now there's one problem with that party. A Canadian who professes Islam probably does so sincerely. In Iran, there's no way of knowing who's a real Muslim. For all we know, maybe more than one in ten professes Islam just to keep his head, so in Iran, it's meaningless. Is that really what that party wants to bring to Canada?
-
1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:
Liquor, drugs, adultery and gambling should be banned? Count me out.
Those are precicely the parts that attract me the most.
-
5 minutes ago, turningrite said:
Of course they are. The Canadian Charter is consistent with the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights although most Muslim-majority countries have opted to back an alternative to the U.N. Declaration called the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which is an interesting read. It begins with the following premise: "All human beings form one family whose members are united by their subordination to Allah and descent from Adam." Well, you get the picture. It's a counterpoint to the Western understanding of human rights as enunciated in the U.N. Declaration. Unfortunately, mainly due to the emergence of open-ended Western multiculturalism, most in the West probably don't realize the extent of philosophical divergence between the Western and Islamic belief structures.
We're told by self-styled "progressives" including politicians that these are minor differences that will work themselves out over time. Really? A 2017 article by a Muslim writer in the NY Times (link below) explains the problem with assuming that Muslims will simply adapt to Western values. The author notes that "[o]ften Muslims support liberalism when it serves them and reject it when it does not." So, it's not at all surprising that the Charter is being used to argue the cause of an Islamic party program in this country.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/27/opinion/is-free-speech-good-for-muslims.html
Actually, the religious-school provisions of the Charter violate the International Covenant in Civil and Political Rights. Just read Waldman vs. Canada.
-
19 minutes ago, bcsapper said:
I would have wanted them to come in to power a week after I got my mortgage. I might have even refrained from blaspheming until I paid it off, interest free. Then, of course, they could sod off back in to the hole they came out of.
I'm a bit mercenary like that.
Your voting style exhumes so much patriotism there.
A few catches though. Islam tends to respect contracts, so if they voided the contract, you'd be giving everything back or they would have had a grandfather clause to exempt you.
Also, if banks don't want to give mortgages anymore, house prices would plumet.
-
20 minutes ago, bcsapper said:
Really? That's utter insanity, as far as I'm concerned, but I suppose it takes all sorts.
The opposition benches have no real power anyway.
-
11 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said:
They're still promising the 72 virgins though...
What are they going to do with 72 virgins? Think about it. If they're virgins, they.re not easy.
-
7 minutes ago, bcsapper said:
I would vote against them because I've paid my mortgage off. Where were they twenty years ago? Tossers.
If they banned interest, you might never have gotten a mortgage in the first place. Why would a bank agree ti an interest-free mortgage?
The NDP proposed a cap on credit-card interest rates a while back. I actually liked the idea but probably not for the same reason the NDP did. The obvious effect would be banks to refuse credit cards to any high-risk applicant. I doubt that's what the NDP had in mind though.
-
1 hour ago, Argus said:
An Islamic party can't be divorced from Islam and the current, mainstream teachings of Islam. If you don't profess Islam that means you're an unbeliever. It is not coincidental that of the 57 Muslim majority states not one gives equal treatment to non-Muslims. An Islamic party will ultimately never represent your best interests unless you're a conservative Muslim.
But what do we do when there is no other real conservative voice? I agreed that I would never want to see that party form government, but I could certainly support it in the opposition benches as a kind of protest vote to signal ti secular conservative parties that they want to become a little more conservative in their own right to win back some of those votes.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Argus said:
Don't kid yourself. They're largely a one-trick-pony, but there are a lot of people (you won't see this in the mainstream media) who have major issues with abortion. it might be absolutely setttled among the mainstream elites, but anywhere from 10-25% of the population are anti-abortion. They mostly don't pay much attention to CH because they know they can't get any seats anyway. But give them proportionate rep and the ability to really influence the national political scene and they'd get a lot more votes.
Yes, and if there was proportionate rep they'd be able to elect candidates. But there are no ridings with a high enough percentage of Muslims at the moment, to elect someone from a party which could expect no votes from the rest of the community.
How do you know they would get no non-Muslim votes? I don't profess Islam and I actually agree with many Muslim ideas nonetheless.
-
Just now, Argus said:
These parties have no future unless we switch to a proportional rep system.
I prefer first-past-the-post, thank you very much.
-
1
-
-
On 1/10/2019 at 1:53 PM, QuebecOverCanada said:
Hey, I just registered to this forum. I'm obviously a Quebecer and a francophone with that, but I respect Canadians a lot and my family voted No for the 1995 Referendum.
How do Ontarians react to the news of the new Ontarian Islamic Party?
In Quebec, there was a big buzz about the news coming from your province, but I would like to know your opinion on that matter. Are Ontarians really that pro multiculturalism or is it a myth?
I don't profess Islam and from what I've read on its website, some of it does worry me. That said, I also agree with many of its proposals at least in principle especially when it comes to regulating addictive products and services like alcohol and gambling.
That said, a candidate should be able to promote similar ideas without joining an Islamic Party. I think Ontario should cease to give any offiical recognition to any political party. Ballots should show only the names of the candidates and the members of parliament can vote for the premiere.
-
12 hours ago, turningrite said:
Well, perhaps. Immigration-based societies, like the U.S., Canada and Australia, comprised of peoples of diverse ethnicities, were a rather novel concept in the the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The Americans experienced spasms of insecurity about the impacts of immigration, particularly from non-Anglo and, particularly, non-Western societies, as exemplified by the Chinese Exclusion Act, which was enacted by Congress in 1882. Canada followed suit much later, in 1923, by implementing similar legislation. Australia's Parliament passed an Immigration Restriction Act, which formed the genesis of its 'White Australia Policy', in 1901, the year the country became an independent dominion. Interestingly, labour unions were among the strongest supporters of restrictive immigration policies.
So in other words, English domiinance in this country is far more recent than we like to admit to, so let's stop revising our history. Anglo dominance reached its peak only in the 1960s and then plateaued as the Indian Residential School system started to wind down and the Government reformed its immigration policy to give preference to the English and French languages over British nationality.
In other words, up until the 1960s, the Government was not just trying to maintain the gains of English but was in fact trying to spread it to where it was not yet even establish. It was't about preserving English identity but rather about promoting, spreading, and building it through a process of nation building. It was trying to build something that was never there initially, not to preserve something that was already there.
Since the 1960's, the political clamour to protect English really comes down to trying to maintain the gains that were so cruelly acquired until the 1960s. When we consider the extreme measures that the state had to implement to spread English, are we really prepared to go back to those measures today? English is now experiencing some rollback even in Nunavut (hardly an immigrant enclave). We spread English there through the residential school system, so it should come as no surprise that it would retreat with the abrogation of that system. How far are we prepared to go to reclaim the gains made up to the 1960s?
-
12 hours ago, turningrite said:
My point is that these groups would have been assimilated in any case, as was the case for most minority communities in Canada until the modern era. Usually, the children of immigrants quickly learned English and after a couple generations immigrant languages often faded into insignificance. In addition to Irish and French ancestry in my family's background, there is also Portuguese ancestry. French has survived in some branches of the family, mainly in Quebec and due to immersion programs has recently re-emerged in Ontario, where when my paternal grandfather was raising his children it was banned in the school system. But I can't think of a single relative who speaks or understands Portuguese.
The simple fact that the Government of Canada took such fanatical steps suggests that even it believed that it needed to implement such cruel measures to ensure the spread of English and French because these languages were not yet fully established across Canada at the time. Consider the German schools in Berlin Ontario and the Ukrainian prairie communities.
-
On 1/4/2019 at 2:15 PM, turningrite said:
Oh, come on. What what happened to German in Toronto and indigenous languages in B.C.? That's really the salient issue. Those who spoke such minority languages integrated into an English-dominated milieu, and probably pretty quickly, as was entirely predictable. I grew up and went to school in an area featuring multiple ethnicities and languages other than English, including French (my paternal grandfather's language), Polish, German, Dutch and Russian. Whatever the languages spoken at home, everybody spoke English in public and at school. Outside of Quebec and a few isolated pockets elsewhere in Canada, where French and perhaps in some cases indigenous languages prevail, English is the overwhelmingly the dominant language of general discourse in Canada, as it is in the United States. It is also, clearly, the dominant language of popular culture and integration. And it's not like, say, Swedish, Finnish or many other languages that are spoken by relatively few people around the globe. In addition to being the most widely spoken European "mother" tongue, English is the most widely taught and learned second language on the planet. So, it's hardly an unreasonable expectation that immigrants who move here should know or learn it, just as Quebec quite fairly expects its immigrants to learn French. Acquiring and maintaining locally dominant language skills is, as I said earlier, a matter of both functional (i.e. economic) integration and respect. And, as English is the interlocutory language that promotes social cohesion among people from multiple linguistic and cultural backgrounds in most of Canada outside of Quebec, it's not a 'nice to have' but instead is a necessity. It discredits Canada's form of open-ended multiculturalism that we've lost sight of this.
The Government of Canada reneged on its promise to give land to those Germans after their work, so they perished. As for Chinook Wawa, it remained the dominant language for a time after the establishment of the residential school system and the Chinese Exclusion Act but Wawa did begin its slow decline after that.
-
6 hours ago, turningrite said:
I believe that 92 percent of China's population is ethnically Han. That's actually not reflective of much diversity. And it's also my understanding that minorities are expected to conform to majority customs, laws and expectations. Witness the treatment of its Tibetan and Muslim Uyghur minorities, as illustrated in the links below. My strong suspicion is that China has few lessons to teach the West about either diversity or multiculturalism.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/world/asia/china-tibet-language-education.html
China is also a one-party state, so it doesn't necessarily reflect the will of the Chinese people, but of the CCP.
-
1 hour ago, taxme said:
Canada is fast becoming a less western looking country these days. Have you been to a mall in Toronto or Vancouver or Montreal lately? One would think that they were visiting some mall in some non western country. There are many cities in Canada today where the British/European founders of Canada are now in the minority. Do I need to say more? Do you not think that with all of this massive non western immigration going on into Canada every year that Canada will remain a western looking country for much longer? C'mon, give your head a shake.
So if I understand you correctly, you equate Canadian with Victorian British? How would an indigenous Canadian ever fit that mold? So if I understand you correctly, unless a person is ethnically British, you will refuse to recognize him as Canadian. So, how is he supposed to become more Canadian? Whiten his face, wear khakis, and drink Earl Grey and play cricket?
-
22 minutes ago, taxme said:
It's funny how your sister noticed this right away and yet not too many Canadians do when it is so bloody obvious to her. Canada is not a melting pot anymore but is fast becoming more like non Canada these days. O, the joys of diversity and multiculturalism.
In what way is Canada becoming 'less Canadian?'
-
27 minutes ago, taxme said:
I did marry within my own race in order to help keep my race from going minority in my own homeland.
So where's the problem?
-
50 minutes ago, turningrite said:
Are there foreign-language ethnoburbs in China? Just wondering? People do move for all sorts of reasons, of course, and obviously you didn't intend to remain in China permanently and no doubt had no access to government funded benefits nor to government-sponsored integration programs. In fact, as a good friend of mine who is Chinese tells me with a chuckle, the Chinese don't believe in diversity and certainly not in multiculturalism, at least not for China.
China does have ethno-burbs, and huge ones at that. The largest one is the Han one, but there are also Tibetan, Uighur, Zhuang, Korean, Kazakh, Russian, and many other ones too. Most are huge, covering entire prefectures or even provinces, but small ones exist too. I remember how in Hefei (predominantly Han Chinese and surrounded by predomiantly Han cities and even provinces), there was a small Muslim quarter that was mostly Uighur though it contained Hui too.
-
Erroneous post. Please ignore.
-
2 hours ago, turningrite said:
You're clearly not familiar with the emerging sociology of 'ethnoburbs', are you? It's becoming increasingly clear that the emergence of this model of linguistic, cultural and religious segregation is impeding the integration of immigrants into Canadian society. A fairly recent federal government study, reported on in the media after it was obtained via an access to information request, confirmed as much. (Link below.) Shockingly, the report indicates that close to a third of students requiring ESL training in one Toronto area school board were born in Canada, suggesting that such children are afforded little or no contact with or exposure to children outside of their own cultural communities. There's a lot of criticism of the host society in Canada on grounds that it's supposedly xenophobic and impedes the social and economic integration of newcomers. But I think much of this criticism is artificial as Canadian multicultural itself increasingly promotes segregation and therefore impedes integration. Perhaps English is difficult to learn, however, it is the most widely taught and learned second (and probably third and fourth as well) language on the planet. If people don't know it or don't want to learn it, or French if moving to Quebec, perhaps immigrating to Canada isn't a good plan for them. If I were to move to Germany only to find out that I couldn't learn German, which according to friends who've studied that language is also difficult to learn, I think I'd leave even though English is widely spoken in Germany.
People move abroad for all kinds of reasons. I first moved to China for work before knowing a word of Chinese and initially, I gravitated towards people who shared a common language with me. I learnt Chinese over time and the more I learnt it, the more I integrated into the more general community. Some move abroad or to Canada for marriage. Sometimes a person meets another through a friend or family member, or on holiday, online, etc. a relationship ensues, they realize they're compatible for one another, and then as they start to consider marriage, realize that while they may share a common language with one another, it might not be a language of one's country. In that case, they'll likely move into an 'ethno-burb.'
Now I will say though that a person should not travel abroad to collect social assistance, but as long as they are supporting themselves and paying their taxes, then let them be.
Liberal Candidate uses Race to appeal to voters
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
What about Harper's 'Old Stock Canadians' comment?