Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Come on Argus, really? A billion people to come to Canada? Let me correct it for you:

You don't think there are a billion people who would come to live in Canada if they could?

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

  • Replies 170
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

When they write things into the law that were never there then they are making new law. You can call it "enforcing" the Constitution if you like, but on many occasions they have written in things the Constitution clearly did not call for, and which the writers of the constitution did not want.

I'll trust their opinion on that more than those. I doubt you personally know what the Fathers of Confederation of Trudeau's Liberal government wanted.

Posted

You don't think there are a billion people who would come to live in Canada if they could?

No. Nor do I think there are a billion goat-herders in the world. It might be a popular occupation, but not that popular. And really, all you did with your previous comment was easily refute your own ridiculous premise.

Come on Argus, even I expect more from you that that.

Posted

Legitimate, genuine, refugee claimants have ample opportunity - in this 21st century world - to speak to a Canadian official abroad.

No one should get in a boat and travel for months to seek refugee status, not in 2010. There's no need for this, and we should not encourage it. Canada has an office in Sri Lanka where people can explain their case. Sri Lankan refugees can contact them through the Internet, or by cellphone.

----

There are six billion people in the world. If the Canadian government accepts these "Tamil boat refugees", it will just enourage more people to take the risk to travel by boat to Canada.

Some 500 may stay in Canada now but how many more thousand in the future will die in the Pacific Ocean trying to get to Canada?

What risk, this is not the boat people clinging to shitty water crafts trying to make it some where safe. This is a pipeline all set up, how does that many people in that type of ship, amke it all this way and the people are in fairly good shape,because they have relief ships in the ocean to resupply these boats. And out of the 500, 400 are men,more criminal and terrorists heading to toronto. Heard today that 25% of TO hospital beds are being used by immigrants that arrived in the last 2 years, so if you have a hard time trying to find a room for your grandfather who worked hard all his life , get in line ,behind the immigrants.

Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.

Posted

What risk, this is not the boat people clinging to shitty water crafts trying to make it some where safe. This is a pipeline all set up, how does that many people in that type of ship, amke it all this way and the people are in fairly good shape,because they have relief ships in the ocean to resupply these boats. And out of the 500, 400 are men,more criminal and terrorists heading to toronto.

I saw the migrants disembark and I couldn't believe how refreshed and well dressed they were. If you spent 3 months on a rather small ship with 489 other people, would you look that well? Reports are they were almost all in good health. Only a handful needed medical attention.

Is our security personnel hiding something from us? I'm not talking about government. I'm talking about the security forces who have been monitoring this boat over the last month or more.

Of course, these are just suspicions and the proof is not immediately apparent. But something just doesn't add up.

It will be almost impossible to separate the criminals and terrorists from ordinary Tamils. The process, as usual, will be a question of hit and miss.

"We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers

Posted (edited)
this stinks of racism...

Don,t you care at all about the plight of these people? Canada owes its country to immigrants... legal or illegal? those are just names... it important, what is important is that we let these people in and give them access to healthcare and jobs... thats our job as canadians...

Ratio, you are new here so I'll take the trouble to respond.

I am tired of Leftists who shut down discussion by accusing opponents of being racist/sexist.(e.g. Toronto Star.) It's like Godwin's Law. When you compare me to Hitler, you lose the debate. (As an aside, this ad hominem tactic is typical of the Left and tiresome.)

----

Ratio, there are some 6 billion people in the world, many billion in dire straits. We in Canada cannot solve all these injustices. We have to choose.

I would hate to think that our choices induce greater suffering, as people attempt to benefit from our goodwill.

Edited by August1991
Posted

When they write things into the law that were never there then they are making new law. You can call it "enforcing" the Constitution if you like, but on many occasions they have written in things the Constitution clearly did not call for, and which the writers of the constitution did not want.

When you get to be the interpreter of a complex legal document you get to make it read whatever you say it reads. That is why slavery was perfect legal under the US Constitution, until one day the courts decided it wasn't any longer. Same constitution, just a different interpretation. That is also why the born again types in the US keep trying to stack the courts with certain types of right wing judges in hopes it will reverse the roe v wade decision. And if they can,then it will. The Constitution won't have changed, but the SC will have changed its interpretation.

When they write things into the law that were never there then they are making new law. You can call it "enforcing" the Constitution if you like, but on many occasions they have written in things the Constitution clearly did not call for, and which the writers of the constitution did not want.

This is just the typical boiler plate rant by people who disagree with a decision. "Its judicial activism!!!"

If legislators dont like the interpretations they can change the laws.

I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger

Posted

This is just the typical boiler plate rant by people who disagree with a decision. "Its judicial activism!!!"

If legislators dont like the interpretations they can change the laws.

Concervatives blathering on about how law abiding they are then complaining about having to follow the laws of the land???

No way!!!!

The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!

Posted

Concervatives blathering on about how law abiding they are then complaining about having to follow the laws of the land???

No way!!!!

Yeah... its just not possible :P

I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger

Posted (edited)
Argus, it's quite clear that you don't understand the functions or working of the courts in Canada. Those are not examples of them making law, but rather enforcing laws and the constitution.
Argus is right, Smallc.

Ottawa federal government lawyers drafted the Charter and they included the "progressive" protection for, say, German tourists in Canada involved in a car accident who may face a civil suit - surely we should offer all foreigners "due process". (And why is a State charter involved in civil litigation anyway.)

I blame the incompetence of the lawyers who drafted our Charter of Rights. I am still amazed that Trudeau accepted the final version. Trudeau was not the kind of person to compromise but in this case, he did.

---

More broadly, we in the West are forced to rethink the basic principles of the Enlightenment.

Edited by August1991
Posted

Argus is right, Smallc.

Ottawa federal government lawyers drafted the Charter

And for the most part, they did an excellent job, no matter what Argus or August think.

Posted (edited)
And for the most part, they did an excellent job, no matter what Argus or August think.
Trudeau wanted, above all, a Charter that would protect the French minority against the English majority. Because of the Charter, English speaking Canadians cannot use the federal State to abuse their majority status against minority Francophones. To obtain this constitutional protection, I reckon Trudeau accepted many compromises. Edited by August1991
Posted (edited)

Trudeau wanted, above all, a Charter that would protect the French minority against the English majority. English speaking Canadians cannot use the federal State to abuse their majority status against minority Francophones. To obtain this constitutional protection, I reckon Trudeau accepted many compromises.

Yeah,but that does'nt mean Trudeau intended for the Charter to be used to protect potential Tamil terrorists.

In that sense,that inherent goodwill is being abused through potential misinterpretation...

Edited by Jack Weber

The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!

Posted

Yeah,but that does'nt mean Trudeau intended for the Charter to be used to protect potential Tamil terrorists.

It's to protect the potential for innocence that the Charter was and still is to be used for.

In that sense,that inherent goodwill is being abused through potential misinterpretation...

No it's not, it's being trashed because we have a bunch of crack-pot fundamentalist bullies running the goddamn country and an even bigger bunch of wusses who are afraid to stand up to them.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted

Probably true, but politics involves compromise, eh?

Absolutely...

Mr.Levesque's uncomprimising demands of that time being Exhibit A...

The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!

Posted (edited)
No it's not, it's being trashed because we have a bunch of crack-pot fundamentalist bullies running the goddamn country and an even bigger bunch of wusses who are afraid to stand up to them.
Eyeball, you make a good point.

The Leftist defenders of Political Correctness are the Bullies of our age. Modern Leftists are bullies.

Edited by August1991
Posted

Eyeball, you make a good point.

The Leftist defenders of Political Correctness are the Bullies of our age. Modern Leftists are bullies.

That's not what I said. It's not even close.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted (edited)

Absolutely...

Mr.Levesque's uncomprimising demands of that time being Exhibit A...

The Quebec National Assembly unanimously rejected the Federal Charter. Claude Ryan voted against it.

IMHO, a legitimate federal Canada deserves better.

PS Sorry for the thread drift. Let`s take this federalist debate elsewhere.

Edited by August1991
Posted

This is just the typical boiler plate rant by people who disagree with a decision. "Its judicial activism!!!"

If legislators dont like the interpretations they can change the laws.

No, in fact they can't. If the SC says its decision is Charter based than any new law will simply be ruled unconstitutional or "interpreted" in light of its previous decision.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

Yeah... its just not possible :P

I don't believe I've ever had any praise for law, mainly due to my contempt for those who write, interpret, and enforce laws. I have always been supportive of fundamental justice and rights, however - which often has me in opposition to written and interpreted laws.

In that sense, I have much more contempt for laws created by judicial activists who, let's face it, tend to be second rate lawyers of no real accomplishment who contributed sufficient funds or sucked up sufficiently to gain a black robe. If a law was never passed by the legislature it doesn't even deserve what respect I would normally give to law. It deserves, in fact, no respect whatever. Which, btw, is the amount of respect I generally accord the Canadian legal system and all those who work within it.

"A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley

Posted

No, in fact they can't. If the SC says its decision is Charter based than any new law will simply be ruled unconstitutional or "interpreted" in light of its previous decision.

Then you change the Constitution. But seriously, that's what courts are for. Part of their job is to enforce the Constitution.

Posted

There are at least a billion people in the world who have it as bad as or worse than the Tamils. Should we allow a billion unwashed, uneducated, illiterate third world goat herders to come to Canada? Then this country will be as bad as theirs is.

well in short...

absolutely! the objective should be to eliminate the disparity between rich and poor, what ever happened to caring about justice and your fellow human beings? Oh wait let me guess... to unwashed for you to consider them your equal right> right...

the unwarranted fear that bringing in millions of people from poor countries will somehow make our country poor is baseless and is mainly motivated by xenophobic racists. If we can accommodate 5 million, the huge size of our country can take in 100 times as much, and once we convert these people to our way of life, our economy and the economy of the world will be better off for it...

Posted

Can't tell if this is sarcasm or if someone actually thinks like this...

you cant understand why someone would want to spread the wealth around, get better standards of living for people all over the world... instead of just our pale hides... isnt that what matters?

theres no reason why everyone all over the world shouldnt have access to free healthcare, abundant food and just conditions. We can feed the entire world over, in fact we have enough food in north america to alleviate the hunger of africa entire... just think at all the good that would do...

but no, the people we'd be helping are black... much better to keep them suffering and force them to starve.

Posted

theres no reason why everyone all over the world shouldnt have access to free healthcare, abundant food and just conditions. We can feed the entire world over, in fact we have enough food in north america to alleviate the hunger of africa entire... just think at all the good that would do...

What do you think would happen if we brought a billion people into Canada ? How about even a million ?

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,896
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    postuploader
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dave L went up a rank
      Contributor
    • dekker99 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Dave L went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Dave L went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Dave L earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...