Smallc Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 You seem to think that the constitution was handed down from Mount Sinai. Trudeau was no Moses. I see that you don't know your Canadian history. Trudeau didn't write the original constitution,and it isn't something to be taken lightly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 I see that you don't know your Canadian history. Trudeau didn't write the original constitution,and it isn't something to be taken lightly. Serious question. I know we have a BNA (British North America) Act. That was the basis of our rule of law for many years. We now also have our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, IIRC. But we do not have a constitution as such. Am I correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Serious question. I know we have a BNA (British North America) Act. That was the basis of our rule of law for many years. We now also have our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, IIRC. But we do not have a constitution as such. Am I correct? No we have a constitution but not like the US. Ours is a living breathing document which is not written on paper per say but changes as our country changes. It changes with high court rulings and so on. Our constitution is more of concept then a document as far as I understand it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 No we have a constitution but not like the US. Ours is a living breathing document which is not written on paper per say but changes as our country changes. It changes with high court rulings and so on. Our constitution is more of concept then a document as far as I understand it. Our constitution is a concept. How weak can you get. No wonder the Supreme Court of Canada feels free to be the champion of social engineering and we are all screwed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 As a non-citizen, Michael Ignatieff couldn't have legally registered or voted for dog catcher in the United States, let alone Senator John Kerry in 2004. He has a habit of being loose with the facts when it suits his need and audience. It's good for book sales I guess. Which makes you wonder why he said “I am an American Democrat. I will vote for Kerry in November.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Which makes you wonder why he said “I am an American Democrat. I will vote for Kerry in November.” Because he is a lair if you didn't get that from his magic red book already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 (edited) But we do not have a constitution as such. Am I correct? We do have a Constitution, some of it written, some of it not. It's far from weak. The Constitution that isn't written is based on convention that has been established over time. Our constitution is living and flexible. I don't see the problem with that. Edited April 11, 2011 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 We do have a Constitution, some of it written, some of it not. It's far from weak. The Constitution that isn't written is based on convention that has been established over time. Our constitution is living and flexible. I don't see the problem with that. But I seriously do. Any activist Supreme Court judge can just make up laws as he/she wishes that way. And to hell with the desires of the public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Any activist Supreme Court judge can just make up laws as he/she wishes that way. And to hell with the desires of the public. Supreme Court justices don't make up laws, and neither do the desires of the public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 But I seriously do. Any activist Supreme Court judge can just make up laws as he/she wishes that way. And to hell with the desires of the public. You really have a mis informed opinion of our justice system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 But I seriously do. Any activist Supreme Court judge can just make up laws as he/she wishes that way. No they can't. You really don't understand how our system works. The Supreme Court can interpret the constitution in order to determine the constitutionality of laws, but they don't make laws. They also can't make decisions that are outside of convention or the written components of the Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 But I seriously do. Any activist Supreme Court judge can just make up laws as he/she wishes that way. And to hell with the desires of the public. I'm assuming you can provide us some examples of the Supreme Court making up laws, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 I'm assuming you can provide us some examples of the Supreme Court making up laws, right? Yes, but I'm too lazy right now. I'll get back to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 Which makes you wonder why he said “I am an American Democrat. I will vote for Kerry in November.” It almost looks like he can't help himself. I guess it comes from seeing yourself as a citizen of the world or as some put it "cosmopolitan". We have a meaningless communications snafu at Liberal HQ and another one of Mr. Ignatieff’s weird attempts to insinuate himself upon the American body politic. It’s certainly more significant than the recent “revelation” that Mr. Ignatieff’s wife, Zsuzsanna Zsohar, isn’t a Canadian citizen. But judging by the look on his face when questioned about his voting history on Monday, Mr. Ignatieff is pretty sure right-thinking Canadians find this all tawdry, uninteresting or both. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/04/11/chris-selley-ignatieffs-time-outside-canada-a-problem/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 It almost looks like he can't help himself. I guess it comes from seeing yourself as a citizen of the world or as some put it "cosmopolitan". Or maybe because he is a F**king liar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 Or maybe because he is a F**king liar? like you are for saying the SC makes up laws? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 like you are for saying the SC makes up laws? As I said previously, I am sort of a drive-by shooter tonight, got family stuff happening, but yes, I think so but don't have the time to dig it up right now. I'll get back to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 (edited) http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/23382 Just a tidbit, people don't vote for president in the US.. and Kerry was running for president - the electoral college votes for president -- the laws of individual states determine how votes translate to electoral college votes (since 2000 atleast) People do however vote for their representatives in congress. Edited April 12, 2011 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted April 12, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 Trudeau didn't write the original constitution,and it isn't something to be taken lightly. The independent nation of Canada's legal constitution is the 1982 Act. Under BNA, we were still a British dominion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 No they can't. You really don't understand how our system works. The Supreme Court can interpret the constitution in order to determine the constitutionality of laws, but they don't make laws. They also can't make decisions that are outside of convention or the written components of the Constitution. We don't have a written constitution. We have the BNA Act and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But there is a whole hell of a lot that isn't covered, and that's where the SC has free reign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 (edited) The Supreme Court can interpret the constitution in order to determine the constitutionality of laws, but they don't make laws.There are 9 justices. Frequently a minority disagrees with an interpretation of the the majority. I would assume that both interpretations are valid under law and the majority ruling is actually a reflection of the biases/prejudices of the majority. It is simply wrong to claim that the law dictates how the SCC should rule in all cases. Yet once the SCC rules the majority interpretation becomes a precident so it is reasonable to claim that judges do make laws via their power to pick and choose between alternate interpretations of the laws passed by parliment. Edited April 12, 2011 by TimG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted April 12, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 like you are for saying the SC makes up laws? Are you claiming that the Supreme Court of Canada does NOT make new law? Its decisions are binding upon all lower courts of Canada. Making new law is what it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 And again, Canada does not have a constitution. A great weakness, IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 The independent nation of Canada's legal constitution is the 1982 Act. Under BNA, we were still a British dominion. That doesn't matter. Canada's Constitution is made up of documents that existed before Canada, as well as the Constitution Act, 1982, and the Constitution Act, 1867. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted April 12, 2011 Report Share Posted April 12, 2011 And again, Canada does not have a constitution. A great weakness, IMHO. Yes it does. Your lack of knowledge on this subject is weakness. 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.