Kenney Pulls Gay Rights from Citizenship Guide

[blueblood]

Not really considering that those rights don't exist more places in the world.

And that's why the pamphlet says everybody gets the same rights with no fine print. None of this everybody is equal but some are more equal than others nonsense. Gay rights are implied. It's redundant, everybody gets the same rights. Should the pamphlet go through and list off every single ethnic/religious groups rights as well?

[Smallc]

And that's why the pamphlet says everybody gets the same rights with no fine print. None of this everybody is equal but some are more equal than others nonsense. Gay rights are implied. It's redundant, everybody gets the same rights. Should the pamphlet go through and list off every single ethnic/religious groups rights as well?

The department recommended that it be there, I'm guessing for a reason. There were some other specifics given. Seeing as the rights are rare around the worlds, it's probably important.

[ToadBrother]

And that's why the pamphlet says everybody gets the same rights with no fine print. None of this everybody is equal but some are more equal than others nonsense. Gay rights are implied. It's redundant, everybody gets the same rights. Should the pamphlet go through and list off every single ethnic/religious groups rights as well?

It's not enough and never has been. Blacks in the US lived for a century with theoretical liberties equal to whites, and yet in reality were disadvantaged in liberty at every step.

Sometimes it has to be clearly stated. Period. I'd do the same for women's rights and the whole gamut. I mean, why are you so opposed to the mention of homosexual rights in this country?

[BubberMiley]

Should the pamphlet go through and list off every single ethnic/religious groups rights as well?

It does.

[MontyBurns]

It's not enough and never has been. Blacks in the US lived for a century with theoretical liberties equal to whites, and yet in reality were disadvantaged in liberty at every step.

Sometimes it has to be clearly stated. Period. I'd do the same for women's rights and the whole gamut. I mean, why are you so opposed to the mention of homosexual rights in this country?

Should it be stated that Jewish transexuals have rights here?

[blueblood]

It does.

All of them? there are a lot of "groups" out there.

Edited March 2, 2010 by blueblood

[ToadBrother]

Should it be stated that Jewish transexuals have rights here?

I would think homosexuals make up a larger portion of the population than that. So why don't you want Canada's stance on homosexuals put in this publication? Do you have something against homosexuals?

[blueblood]

It's not enough and never has been. Blacks in the US lived for a century with theoretical liberties equal to whites, and yet in reality were disadvantaged in liberty at every step.

Sometimes it has to be clearly stated. Period. I'd do the same for women's rights and the whole gamut. I mean, why are you so opposed to the mention of homosexual rights in this country?

I'm opposed to roasting the tories over taking out something that's redundant. All that pamphlet has to say is "if your human, and not a criminal, welcome and enjoy equal rights that Canadians enjoy" Oh the horror of not listing groups!

[MontyBurns]

So why don't you want Canada's stance on homosexuals put in this publication?

Canada's stance is that everybody has rights. Your stance is that gays have special rights.

[ToadBrother]

Canada's stance is that everybody has rights. Your stance is that gays have special rights.

Do you always invent positions for other people? I suppose your intellectually incapable of defending your own, so it's a lot easier to create strawmen. Perhaps we should mention in this publication that even semi-literate morons have equal rights.

[MontyBurns]

Do you always invent positions for other people? I suppose your intellectually incapable of defending your own, so it's a lot easier to create strawmen. Perhaps we should mention in this publication that even semi-literate morons have equal rights.

What are you some intellectual elitist? I only said that everybody has rights in Canada. Nobody is special above anyone else (including gays).

[M.Dancer]

So let's get this straight. Removal of statements about gay rights from a citizenship guide is okay because?

from the sounds of it, they were not removed. The issue seems to be they weren't included.

Personally, if it is to attract immigrants, which would make a better marketing collateral, gay rights or Canada's banking regulations?

Now I don't know if they are mentioning the banking regs....but I for one would be outraged if they didn't...

[M.Dancer]

Everyone has seen the first draft. It was there, it's not in the second draft. Why?

I would be intereted in seeing ver 1.0 and ver 1.1 to see what other things were left on the edit room floor.

[M.Dancer]

Oh I don't know, probably because gay people enjoy the same rights as everybody else. It would be redundant to print it.

That is actually my thought. It's not like it is unique in western society. Now if gays were oppressed, now that would really be worth a mention.

[capricorn]

Listing specific groups who have rights in a citizenship guide will only lead to complaints from omitted groups. In addition, there's the matter of keeping the guide as compact as possible. The guide is intended for prospective citizens, after they have decided to come here. Illustrating our society to immigrants has to take place before actual immigration. That's the stage at which we should advertise the specific groups that enjoy rights not enjoyed in other countries. That should be done through a film they can view in our immigration offices abroad. Examples: two men kissing in public, two women kissing in public, topless women on beaches, nude men, women and children on nude beaches, women clad in a burqa or shorts and halter top walking freely on city streets, you get the drift. If they don't like what they see they can stay put or check out other destinations more to their liking.

[Smallc]

It has a list of protections, it would have taken two words for it to be included. We managed to include genital mutilation somehow.

Edited March 3, 2010 by Smallc

[M.Dancer]

It has a list of protections, it would have taken two words for it to be included. We managed to include genital mutilation somehow.

I should hope. There are at least 6 shops on Yonge that will pierce your what nots for you.

[M.Dancer]

The publication does include a picture of Olympic gold medal swimmer Mark Tewksbury, however, with a caption saying he is a "prominent activist for gay and lesbian Canadians."

Calls to kd lang's management to ask if she was miffed by her omission in the guide went undialed

[msdogfood]

1995 was a very, very long time ago. The rest of the world has progressed. The conservatives are obviously still caught up in their ancient prejudices.

Oh well. It will only hurt them in the end.

very true!!

[msdogfood]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/immigration-minister-pulled-gay-rights-from-citizenship-guide-documents-show/article1486935/

NOT Good!

[bjre]

Well you know, Gays cannot reproduce so the only way to increase their numbers is through immigration....

*ducks*

Or teach your children through media that they have the "right" to be gays (like use this incident) and set large number of examples for this kind of behaviors.

And the funny is that this kind of legislation can take a large sum of time in parliament while have no time to discuss really important issues such as have the Ontario Ombudsman oversee the Children's Aid Society, the private corporation that about 100 kids died in its "care" each year in Ontario (Or one child in each 300 kids they "care" each year).

This is the real face of democracy and human right in Canada. It is only a lie with useless images on its cover and inside countless bad situations to be said as individual incidents to be ignored.

Edited March 3, 2010 by bjre

[Bonam]

What is the reason to specifically include homosexuality in a "citizenship guide"?

[bloodyminded]

Or teach your children through media that they have the "right" to be gays (like use this incident) and set large number of examples for this kind of behaviors.

I'm trying to decipher whether or not this post is homophobic.

[Smallc]

What is the reason to specifically include homosexuality in a "citizenship guide"?

The guide includes a section on rights and responsibilities.

[waldo]

Canada's stance is that everybody has rights. Your stance is that gays have special rights.

somehow Kenney felt it was significant to include separate highlighted sections on the abolition of slavery... and voting rights for women. However, even though Canada is but one of a dozen countries in the world to sanction same-sex marriage, Kenney felt that wasn't... significant... enough!

the 'saving space/need for concise treatment' argument seems to fall apart when one actually reviews the guide. Numerous areas of unused white space exist throughout the guide... the guide includes a disproportionate emphasis on photos that, if nothing else, would lend themselves to elements of outright cropping, scaling or removal in order to free up space for text. Notwithstanding the wasted space at the end of the report to include multiple page citation references, per photo, advising a 'stock photo' association.

=>

Canadian Citizenship Study Guide

(Conservative Morality & Ideologically Checked and Approved)

most assuredly, the Jason Kenney who steadfastly opposed same-sex marriage since his time as an opposition MP in the House of Commons..... who spoke against the Civil Marriage Act - Bill C-38... purposely directed that the guide not include any direct reference to GLT - or same-sex marriage.

Gays have every right to marry — as long as it's not with someone of the same sex