Russell by-law spat sparks bilingual study

[CANADIEN]

[*]I am not an Islamaphobe. In fact, I have repeatedly referenced my sincere admiration for Islamic and Arab accomplishments in the educational sector and the development of models of government.

Like in...

I thin kthe idea of public support for a seditious religious course that undermines our civilization is questionable at best.

Mind you, this is not about your view of Islam as much as the fact you wonder about what i think about a certain issue, in a thread when I said exactly what I think about it about a dozen time.

[*]I am not going to hunt for your views of Quebec's Angophobic language laws. Want to give me a link?

What i said is in this very thread you just joined. If you won't at least browse it before joining it, don't expect me to do your homework for you.

Edited October 10, 2010 by CANADIEN

[jbg]

What i said is in this very thread you just joined. If you won't at least browse it before joining it, don't expect me to do your homework for you.

You didn't respond to Point 3 that I made.

[Leafless]

Never said it did. It was proof that you were wrong to call my claim about pre-Confederation bilingualism incorrect.

So what exactly does your 'pre-confederation claim' have to do with free flowing bilingualism?

Or is it, like Canadien you favour RACIST LANGUAGE POLICIES.

[Leafless]

I mean two NATIONAL LANGUAGES. Unlike you, I don't need to be reminded of what I wrote half of the time.

The fact that they are also official languages is simply a recognition of that reality.

If English and French were national languages, they would be made official and embraced by all Canadian provinces, which they are not.

[Leafless]

Including the type of one-language only government policies you are advocating. Thanks for admitting you want to oppress people

It is governments and their racist language policies that oppress.

[Leafless]

Don't forget his desire to force people into linguistic ghettoes:

People segregate themselves into language ghettos.

Check out Quebec and the multitude of foreign language ghettos scattered throughout cities in Canada.

[Leafless]

Nah. His real problem is that he NEEDS for non-Christian non-English-speaking non-white people to be treated like inferior beings.

Good God, you are really out to lunch.

[guyser]

People segregate themselves into language ghettos.

Check out Quebec and the multitude of foreign language ghettos scattered throughout cities in Canada.

You mean like Newfoundland? Who knows what they speak there.

[CANADIEN]

So what exactly does your 'pre-confederation claim' have to do with free flowing bilingualism?

You know, one of these days you will have to provide an ENGLISH translation to terms such as "free-flowing bilngualism".

That being said, the demonstration has been made that there are precedents to the current policy of official bilingualism.

Or is it, like Canadien you favour RACIST LANGUAGE POLICIES.

I thought that (according to you) pre-Confederation examples of an official status for the French languages were nothing more than cases of translation services being offered.

BTW, let's be confused here. YOU are the one who wants one, and only one language, to be made official, who wants that lnaguage to be the only one permitted on commercial signs, who has advocated that an English equivalent of Quebec's language laws be adopted in Ontario. To follow YOUR definition, YOU, and only YOU, advocates what YOU call racist language policies.

[CANADIEN]

If English and French were national languages, they would be made official and embraced by all Canadian provinces, which they are not.

By your own definition, then, english is not the, or an, national language of Canada.

[CANADIEN]

It is governments and their racist language policies that oppress.

And you simply want your municipal, provincial and federal governments to oppress French-speaking Canadians. I stand corrected... and you stand in support of oppression.

[CANADIEN]

Good God, you are really out to lunch.

I am not good, I am not God, and I already had lunch.

Now, in case you have forgotten (which is very likely) you advocate policies that would treat French-speaking Canadians as inferior by denying them equal rights. And your constant harping that WHITE, CHRISTIAN English-speakers (and "their" jobs) need to be protected against (non-existant) threats leaves little to the imagination as to what status you want for those who fall outside of these three groups.

Edited October 15, 2010 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

People segregate themselves into language ghettos.

I thought that (according to you) people had freely embraced the English language. make up your mind, will you?

[g_bambino]

So what exactly does your 'pre-confederation claim' have to do with free flowing bilingualism?

It was the proof that made false your claim about bilingualism being a social revolution initiated by Trudeau. Bilingualism has been a tradition and policy in Canada for centuries before Trudeau was even born.

[CANADIEN]

It was the proof that made false your claim about bilingualism being a social revolution initiated by Trudeau. Bilingualism has been a tradition and policy in Canada for centuries before Trudeau was even born.

That's what you think. Actually, Trudeau was a 456 year old extra-terrestrial time-traveller.

[Leafless]

You know, one of these days you will have to provide an ENGLISH translation to terms such as "free-flowing bilngualism".

Free flowing bilingualism means freely speaking the English and French language without being forced to by racist language policies.

That being said, the demonstration has been made that there are precedents to the current policy of official bilingualism.

There are no previous examples, prior to confederation, of racist language policies forcing the general population to commit themselves to those racist language policies.

BTW, let's be confused here. YOU are the one who wants one, and only one language, to be made official, who wants that lnaguage to be the only one permitted on commercial signs,

You are the one that is confused as I never claimed any objection pertaining to whatever language one wants to freely use on commercial signs.

who has advocated that an English equivalent of Quebec's language laws be adopted in Ontario. To follow YOUR definition,

Absolutely.

If it is the democratic right of Quebec to incorporate French racist language laws and polices,then should it not be the democratic right of English speaking provinces to do likewise?

You must remember we have a charter that not only itself contains racist language laws but a federal government that allows Quebec to break rights within that charter.

YOU, and only YOU, advocates what YOU call racist language policies.

There are many other Canadians that feel the same way and is an issue that has NEVER been resolved by a referendum.

I am in favour of scrapping racist parts of the charter along with all other racist language laws.

[Leafless]

By your own definition, then, english is not the, or an, national language of Canada.

I would say if the English language in Canada is currently the de facto language of Canada, then yes the English language is certainly the national language of Canada.

[Leafless]

And you simply want your municipal, provincial and federal governments to oppress French-speaking Canadians. I stand corrected... and you stand in support of oppression.

No language warrants racist language policies.

[Leafless]

Now, in case you have forgotten (which is very likely) you advocate policies that would treat French-speaking Canadians as inferior by denying them equal rights. And your constant harping that WHITE, CHRISTIAN English-speakers (and "their" jobs) need to be protected against (non-existant) threats leaves little to the imagination as to what status you want for those who fall outside of these three groups.

There is nothing in the BNA ACT advocating anti-English racist language policie for Canadian society.

Racist French language (bilingual policies) have been responsible for the demise of English only speaking jobs out of Quebec.

[CANADIEN]

Free flowing bilingualism means freely speaking the English and French language without being forced to by racist language policies.

It is already a known fact that nobody and no law in Ontario or at the federal level is lmiting your choice to use either English or French. Hence, both languages are free-flowing. YOU are in favour of laws that would limit what languages citizens can use and when and how they can use it.

There are no previous examples, prior to confederation, of racist language policies forcing the general population to commit themselves to those racist language policies.

Thanks for admitting that policies and practices that recognized an OFFICIAL status to French prior to Confederation were not racist. Of course, no body used to your writings will expect you to ever get a clue on the fact this undermines your claim that similar policies are racist today.

You are the one that is confused as I never claimed any objection pertaining to whatever language one wants to freely use on commercial signs.

The following exchange never took place?

Canadien: Or the contradiction between your cries of "language should be left to the business owner" and your often-made call for laws that would make English the official language of business in Ontario.

Leafless: Until that time comes it should be left up to the business owner to decide.

Emphasis on "until that time".

If it is the democratic right of Quebec to incorporate French racist language laws and polices,then should it not be the democratic right of English speaking provinces to do likewise?

Thanks for admitting that you want, to use your own words, racist language policies.

You must remember we have a charter that not only itself contains racist language laws

And from what alternate universe does that Charter come form? Not from this one, that's for sure.

I am in favour of scrapping racist parts of the charter along with all other racist language laws.

Me too. Just tell me when you actually find some parts of the Charter that are racist.

Edited October 17, 2010 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

.

I would say if the English language in Canada is currently the de facto language of Canada, then yes the English language is certainly the national language of Canada.

Typical Leafless. In one posting, official status in all province is needed as proof that a language is a national language. In the next posting, it is sufficient that you deem it to be the de facto language. Love the contradiction.

BTW, I .and over 22% of Canadians prove every day that English is not the de facto language of all of Canada.

Edited October 17, 2010 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

No language warrants racist language policies.

Indeed. Then, why do you clamour in favour of language policies that, by YOUR OWN definition, would be considered racist?

[Leafless]

It was the proof that made false your claim about bilingualism being a social revolution initiated by Trudeau. Bilingualism has been a tradition and policy in Canada for centuries before Trudeau was even born.

If what you say is factual, then why the need for Trudeau's racist language policies?

There are only 17% of all Canadians that are bilingual and most of those are French Canadians who are naturally bilingual.

[CANADIEN]

There is nothing in the BNA ACT advocating anti-English racist language policie for Canadian society.

(warning... I am clearly mocking Leafless' claim, and he will probably not get it)

Are you sure? After all, the BNA CLEARLY gave equal status to the english and french languages in the federal parliament and Courts. The Official Languages Act, the Constitutional Act of 1982 and policies that stem from them are nothing more (or less) than the logical extension of this into other aspects of the federal government`s activities and role.

So, either the clauses in the BNA about the status of English and French were not racist, which prooves that all your rambling about "racist policies" is non-sense, or there were racist dispositions in the BNA in regard to languages. In either case, you are (as usual) wrong.

Edited October 16, 2010 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

If what you say is factual, then why the need for Trudeau's racist language policies?

Not if, what he says is factual. .Aas for the return to institutional bingualism under Trudeau, not only it is NOT racist, but as has been demonstrated , it has its pre-Confederation precedents.

There are only 17% of all Canadians that are bilingual and most of those are French Canadians who are naturally bilingual.

The number of bilingual Canadians is not the issue here. It is the right of Canadians, which you oppose, to speak and use the Canadian language of their choice when communicating with their government.

Edited October 17, 2010 by CANADIEN