The revamped citizenship booklet

[wyly]

The Mohawk, the Sioux are two large ones. The Sioux have more than a dozen reserves in Canada. Look it up yourself.

I should look up your claims? I grew up near a Sioux reserve one of the 8 reserves in Canada in 1971 they had a combined population of 2,500 hardly the many of today's nearly 800,000 aboriginals...plus the southern parts of the prairies are part of their normal range so they can legitimately claim a natural residency...

Mohawks as members of the Iroquois confederacy had already taken over southern Ontario and Quebec by the mid 1600s, they were there long before Canada was a Nation...

[eyeball]

It has also added much on Canada's history - including some controversial topics like Louis Riel and the Quiet Revolution - and ups the content about Canada's military past and constitutional structure, thereby replacing many of the pages on recycling and rainbows-and-gumdrops Canada in the old version put out by the Liberals. Veeerrry interesting...

I think leaving out a citizen's duty to our nation's environment is anything but interesting. I think this silly booklet amounts to nothing more than a handbook on how to be a proper little toady for the state.

In the meantime, I have a 45 gallon drum of oily contaminated bilgewater on the deck of my boat that I'm going to spend $185 to have recycled. I'm ashamed to say a good number of my peers, my fellow citizens that is, told me I should have just gone for a little boat ride and pumped it over the side when no one was looking.

Speaking of rainbows, bilgewater adds a nice rainbow-like colour to the surface of the water.

[g_bambino]

I think leaving out a citizen's duty to our nation's environment is anything but interesting.

Well, firstly, the section on environmentalism has apparently been cut down, not left out. Secondly, you wouldn't find it interesting if the section had been left out? I thought such an act would have the uber-leftists swooning in their Birkenstocks.

It's a booklet to prepare people for Canadian citizenship, not a guide on recycling. So, a page or two on the topic of environmental responsibility is sufficient; the subject certainly shouldn't trump Canadian history or civics.

[DogOnPorch]

I should look up your claims? I grew up near a Sioux reserve one of the 8 reserves in Canada in 1971 they had a combined population of 2,500 hardly the many of today's nearly 800,000 aboriginals...plus the southern parts of the prairies are part of their normal range so they can legitimately claim a natural residency...

Mohawks as members of the Iroquois confederacy had already taken over southern Ontario and Quebec by the mid 1600s, they were there long before Canada was a Nation...

You can spin your version of history any way you'd like.

[M.Dancer]

I'm ashamed to say a good number of my peers, my fellow citizens that is, told me I should have just gone for a little boat ride and pumped it over the side when no one was looking.

Yep, those are the People you want to replace the State with...

[Melanie_]

Wow you're a classic example of how the education system has failed you miserably. I haven't checked out this booklet yet, but my guess is that it's like all others--propaganda crap

Maybe you should check it out before commenting. Otherwise, you are just spamming the thread.

[eyeball]

Yep, those are the People you want to replace the State with...

No these are people the State is unable to do anything about. Its probably too busy issuing permits to pollute to oil sands developers...your sort of people I suppose.

Edited November 18, 2009 by eyeball

[d4dev]

Not that I support any of those barbaric cultural practices listed as unwelcome in Canada including female genital mutilation, but I wonder why male genital mutilation is acceptable? Isn't it ironic that the sentence says that any forms of "gender violence" is unacceptable, but lists only the violence against women? Time to outlaw circumcision too?

Edited November 21, 2009 by d4dev

[g_bambino]

Not that I support any of those barbaric cultural practices listed as unwelcome in Canada including female genital mutilation, but I wonder why male genital mutilation is acceptable? Isn't it ironic that the sentence says that any forms of "gender violence" is unacceptable, but lists only the violence against women?

Yet, that in itself speaks a truth about the society into which these immigrants are wanting to immerse themselves; it professes on the face of things to be equal but in reality is not. In certain areas, women are favoured over men, and vice versa, I'm sure. And, favouring women is more culturally acceptable than favouring men. The sentence, therefore, leaves little in doubt about modern Canadian culture.