Machjo Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 (edited) In 1999, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) officiallycondemned Canada for violating international law by granting special prigivleges to members of one religious community over others in its education system: http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/b3bfc54...d6?Opendocument The federal government chose not to intervene on the grounds that education is a provincial matter. The Province of Ontario, however, refused to conform to the exigencies of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on the gounds that it would have to make amendments to the Constitution in order to conform to the UNHCHR's request. The section being referred to here is as follows (bold type added by me): EDUCATION Legislation respecting Education 93. In and for each Province the Legislature may exclusively make Laws in relation to Education, subject and according to the following Provisions: (1) Nothing in any such Law shall prejudicially affect any Right or Privilege with respect to Denominational Schools which any Class of Persons have by Law in the Province at the Union: (2) All the Powers, Privileges, and Duties at the Union by Law conferred and imposed in Upper Canada on the Separate Schools and School Trustees of the Queen's Roman Catholic Subjects shall be and the same are hereby extended to the Dissentient Schools of the Queen's Protestant and Roman Catholic Subjects in Quebec: (3) Where in any Province a System of Separate or Dissentient Schools exists by Law at the Union or is thereafter established by the Legislature of the Province, an Appeal shall lie to the Governor General in Council from any Act or Decision of any Provincial Authority affecting any Right or Privilege of the Protestant or Roman Catholic Minority of the Queen's Subjects in relation to Education: (4) In case any such Provincial Law as from Time to Time seems to the Governor General in Council requisite for the due Execution of the Provisions of this Section is not made, or in case any Decision of the Governor General in Council on any Appeal under this Section is not duly executed by the proper Provincial Authority in that Behalf, then and in every such Case, and as far only as the Circumstances of each Case require, the Parliament of Canada may make remedial Laws for the due Execution of the Provisions of this Section and of any Decision of the Governor General in Council under this Section. (50) You can read it here too: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/const/c1867_e.html#legislative In your opinion, whould the Canadian Constitution be amended to conform to the exigencies of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, or do you opine, rather, that tradition is more important. Edited April 15, 2009 by Machjo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 (edited) Dichotomy again? How about 'No' and 'No'. It is my heartfelt hope that tax funding of religious education end entirely and soon, but I believe that the provinces can do that administratively, without touching the national constitution. That segregation of people is wholly unhealthy, and so is state involvement in religious instruction funding. I'd also like to see state disengagement from religion-sponsored hospitals. No church should have any say in the availability of health care services, but at present, they do. Edited April 15, 2009 by Molly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
85RZ500 Posted April 15, 2009 Report Share Posted April 15, 2009 Molly, in the town I come from, St Joeseph's Hospial no longer exists. Other than that I agree with you, one school system for everyone. One central language spoken with courses available in 2nd languages for those who want to take them. Religion should not be in the curriculum, than again nor should social engineering, ie 2 mommys, 2 daddys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Anytime the UN condemns Canada it ignores the true problems of the world. United Nations - Immoral, corupt and not worth worrying about - a now worthless organization Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Anytime the UN condemns Canada it ignores the true problems of the world.United Nations - Immoral, corupt and not worth worrying about - a now worthless organization the OP's original "condemnation" reference... and your continued use of it... is unnecessarily flagrant. There was no so-called "condemnation"; rather, there was a communication advising of a violation of article 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Specifically, within the Covenant: All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. specifically, within the UNHRC communication, a discriminatory violation is highlighted... with an obligation for remediation noted: 11. The Human Rights Committee, acting under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is of the view that the facts before it disclose a violation of article 26 of the Covenant. 12. Under article 2, paragraph 3(a), of the Covenant, the State party is under the obligation to provide an effective remedy, that will eliminate this discrimination. whether directly influenced by the UNHRC proceeding - or not - the former Mike Harris government brought forward legislation to "administratively" affect a closing of the funding gap via private school tuition fee credits... closed the gap, but didn't eliminate it. And... of course... subsequent/different government education policy/funding has ensued. so, the feds constitutionally defer to the provinces on education... and Ontario defers to section 93 of the Constitution in regards maintaining the status quo, vis-a-vis funding for Separate (Catholic) schools..... allowing a complainant to argue before the UNHRC on behalf of "non-secular" education rights (i.e. non-discriminatory education funding practices). the Canadian Constitution should be amended to eliminate direct reference to non-secular education provisions... not necessarily because the UNHRC has highlighted a discriminatory violation to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights... rather, because it is the correct thing to do. Ultimately, the provinces would, in turn, fund private versus public education based on budgets and lobby interests - the "good old fashioned way". (as an aside, to beak-off about the "immorality, corruption and worth" of an organization, without offering foundation or qualification, is nothing more than a...... beak-off) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 the OP's original "condemnation" reference... and your continued use of it... is unnecessarily flagrant. There was no so-called "condemnation"; rather, there was a communication advising of a violation of article 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Specifically, within the Covenant: All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. specifically, within the UNHRC communication, a discriminatory violation is highlighted... with an obligation for remediation noted: 11. The Human Rights Committee, acting under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is of the view that the facts before it disclose a violation of article 26 of the Covenant. 12. Under article 2, paragraph 3(a), of the Covenant, the State party is under the obligation to provide an effective remedy, that will eliminate this discrimination. whether directly influenced by the UNHRC proceeding - or not - the former Mike Harris government brought forward legislation to "administratively" affect a closing of the funding gap via private school tuition fee credits... closed the gap, but didn't eliminate it. And... of course... subsequent/different government education policy/funding has ensued. so, the feds constitutionally defer to the provinces on education... and Ontario defers to section 93 of the Constitution in regards maintaining the status quo, vis-a-vis funding for Separate (Catholic) schools..... allowing a complainant to argue before the UNHRC on behalf of "non-secular" education rights (i.e. non-discriminatory education funding practices). the Canadian Constitution should be amended to eliminate direct reference to non-secular education provisions... not necessarily because the UNHRC has highlighted a discriminatory violation to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights... rather, because it is the correct thing to do. Ultimately, the provinces would, in turn, fund private versus public education based on budgets and lobby interests - the "good old fashioned way". (as an aside, to beak-off about the "immorality, corruption and worth" of an organization, without offering foundation or qualification, is nothing more than a...... beak-off) Actually WALDO! The UN likes to swing at Canada on a regular basis - perhaps you could spend some valuable time on that rather than showing us you are nothing more than a word doctor? Perhaps you are on the side of that useless org - the UN? Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tango Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 (edited) Molly, in the town I come from, St Joeseph's Hospial no longer exists.Other than that I agree with you, one school system for everyone. One central language spoken with courses available in 2nd languages for those who want to take them. Religion should not be in the curriculum, than again nor should social engineering, ie 2 mommys, 2 daddys. 2 mommys, 2 daddys. isn't socially engineered. It is just a fact of human life, 'God's engineering'. Deal with it. Religious education in the curriculum, however, is social engineering, imo. Edited April 20, 2009 by tango Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 2 mommys, 2 daddys. isn't socially engineered. It is just a fact of human life, 'God's engineering'. Deal with it. Er, it may not be social engineering, per se, but the last time I checked, the fact of life was that neither two women nor two men alone make a baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted April 20, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Anytime the UN condemns Canada it ignores the true problems of the world.United Nations - Immoral, corupt and not worth worrying about - a now worthless organization Borg So I take it you defend special privileges based on religious affiliation in the Canadian Constitution? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machjo Posted April 20, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Waldo, Sorry if 'condemnation' was too harsh. Thanks for clarifying. But it's still suggestion that Canada is still in violation as you pointed out. I also agree that whether the UN had commented on it or not, it would still be the right thing to do; but since people have continued to defend it, I figured this still adds at least a little more weight to it. After all, how can Canada be defending international law and justice abroad when Canada itself ignores it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Actually WALDO!The UN likes to swing at Canada on a regular basis - perhaps you could spend some valuable time on that rather than showing us you are nothing more than a word doctor? Perhaps you are on the side of that useless org - the UN? Borg more beak-off, with nothing offered to substantiate your... beak-off thanks for your concern for my valuable time... here's a thought - perhaps you could spend some of your valuable time by starting a new thread advising of all the, as you state, "immorality, corruption and uselessness" of the UN. Even if you're not a "word doctor" you should be able to cut/paste enough of the UN gutter sniping that's out there. I'm sure it could be very cathartic for you - good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tango Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 (edited) Er, it may not be social engineering, per se, but the last time I checked, the fact of life was that neither two women nor two men alone make a baby. Irelevant. Edited April 20, 2009 by tango Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.