"the english are waking up!"

[Signals.Cpl]

They do not take a dime from other provinces. They are part of confederation and our federal government spends money there. It has nothing to do with other provinces. Provincial income taxes are raised and spent by the provinces themselves. Federal income taxes are raised and spent by the federal government where they see fit to spend it in Canada. Québec is still in Canada, right?

You can blow that trumpet all you want but that don't make it true. People living in other provinces as well as businesses pay taxes, thus when the government gives money to Quebec in equalization payments they take money that came from the people of another province. The Government of Canada did not print out a few billion dollars out of nowhere just to give to quebec, they had to get it from somewhere.

They don't get anything. They send billions of dollars more to the federal government than they receive back in transfer payments.

Gee now prove it. Prove to me how all the provinces get more from the federal government than they give to the federal government while Alberta is the only province that gives more to the Federal government than it receives while Quebec gives more to the federal government than it receives. You really can't keep it straight can you?

If you're pedantic enough to consider every last time of federal spending (ie, military bases, aboriginal monies, postal services, money, border services, shipping, etc.) then every single province in the country receives more money than the federal government receives from them, except Alberta.

You put money as part of the deal gee I wonder what its for? Social benefits no other province enjoys?

That's because the federal government spends more money than it has and has nothing to do with Québec as a province.

Yes. and at the same time they receive more in transfer payments no matter how much you try to muddy the water.

It has to do with the federal government's responsibilities and what it costs to fulfill them across the country. It is not an envelope full of cash that Québec gets to spend as it pleases.

You are right, billions of our dollars won't fit in one envelope, but they do spend it as they please, getting better services than the rest of the country

[g_bambino]

You can blow that trumpet all you want but that don't make it true. People living in other provinces as well as businesses pay taxes, thus when the government gives money to Quebec in equalization payments they take money that came from the people of another province.

What he says is true. Tax dollars used for equalisation payments are paid by the taxpayer directly to the federal coffers, not by way of the provincial government. The provinces do not pay towards equalisation.

[Signals.Cpl]

What he says is true. Tax dollars used for equalisation payments are paid by the taxpayer directly to the federal coffers, not by way of the provincial government. The provinces do not pay towards equalisation.

Yeah, but those people live in a province, therefore they are donating their hard earned money for the betterment of Quebec's social services wether or not that money went from the people living in the province to Quebec by way of the federal government or the provincial government is irrelevant because at the end of the day Albertans are supporting services in Quebec that they themselves don't enjoy in their province. Tax payers pay my salary even though they have no direct contact with my pay check and the federal government is paying out the actual funds.

[Benz]

Most of Quebec today is First Nations territory, meaning it is Canadian Crown land.

I do not recognise the authorities of your crown onto the natives' land. They are nations and if I have a concern with them, I'll deal with them. Not you.

Did nobody see this disturbing piece of propaganda? "Le People Québécois" are apparently all white, all Christian, all Francophone.

You missed the part where we eat babies.

You are so sick.

------------

So you want to FORCE your beliefs on the majority? Im not entirely sure you understand the concept of democracy...

I don't want your democracy, I want THE democracy. It is NOT democratic for a nation to force their choices on another nation. You understand democracy like if we were all one monolitic block, one culture. NO! We are one union of more than one nation. If you don't respect that, then there are no room for us into your Canada. Québec will leave. Then you will free to apply your democracy inside your single nation federalism.

so please enlighten me as to the "betrayal" in question

In 1981, 7 out of 9 provinces were teaming up with Québec against Trudeau and the 2 other provinces. The Trudeau's side, wanted a very centralised federal gov't and a referendum on his bill of rights. The Québec's side wanted a less decentralised federal gov't, they wanted the possibility for any province to opt out from a federal program with full compensations. Quebec wanted a veto, the 7 others wanted no referendum. The group of 8 were united for months and out of the sudden, they betray Québec in one night. What happened is, Trudeau came to Lévesques and asked him, would you accept to give up the veto if I grant to all provinces an opt out with full compensation and do a referendum on my bill of rights. Lévesque said this looks promising, I agree and will try to convince my partners tomorrow. So they signed an agreement on the principle. Lévesque went to his room thinking that he could discuss about it the next day with the other pals. His missions was to convince them to accept the referendums and in return, they would gain the Opt Out with full compensation. But during the night, Trudeau-Chretien-Romanow, managed to convince the pms to betray the Québec. Not only they gave up the Opt Out, but they gave up everything. They even accepted the bill of rights as is, no referendum, nothing. Just like that, Québec is left alone again, is losing powers, the federal government is gaining power at the expense of the provinces, with the agreement of the provinces... but Québec. Not just an agreement on principle. The final thing. F-- off Québec, we don't care about you, we are doing this against you.

This is today, the number one reason why we want sovereignty. This is why even the liberals of Québec do not want to sign that crap. The opt out was very important, even more than the veto.

Now you'll see how gambino rewrites history and will rather trust Trudeau's version than all respectable historians. According to guys like him, it is ok to betray the people of Québec no matter what.

[g_bambino]

I do not recognise the authorities of your crown onto the natives' land.

Good for you.

You missed the part where we eat babies.

Apparently the PQ propaganda machine missed that part.

I don't want your democracy, I want THE democracy.

You want your "democracy": the votes of people of one ethnicity are of more value than those of everyone else.

[ed.: +]

Edited September 7, 2012 by g_bambino

[g_bambino]

Yeah, but those people live in a province, therefore they are donating their hard earned money for the betterment of Quebec's social services...

Which is not the same thing as the provinces "giving money to Quebec". Everyone in Canada contributes the same amount to the equalisation programme; social programmes are supported by equalisation payments in all provinces that receive them. True, Quebec has some very generous social programmes for a have-not province. But, then, it is also the one most mired in debt.

[Rocky Road]

... the Europeans are progressing, we are going backward.

Europe is in shambles, my friend.

And the Us and the Uk are sinking ships.

Canada is an island of hope in a very stormy world. Soon to get much worse.

Nice of you to post here Benz, we need more dialogue between Quebec and the Roc.

My question is we are all related? Why choose to seperate? We are all family.

Many of us all are distant cousins.

Bonne journee.

[CPCFTW]

No, just their right to run for public office.

Did nobody see this disturbing piece of propaganda? "Le People Québécois" are apparently all white, all Christian, all Francophone.

haha they stole the nodding old woman from the much better cpc "our country" ad:

See 0:37 in PQ ad and 0:29 in CPC ad. Who is she nodding for?!

[TheNewTeddy]

A few things...

1 - Quebec is divisible.

Proof?

Ontario was split from Quebec in the 1700s

Everything north of Chibougabmou was added in the 1900s

2 - Canada is divisible.

Proof?

The US was going to annex it but was unable

Canada created from multiple parts: "Canada", NB, NS, PE, NL, BC, and Ruperts Land.

3 - Neither Canada nor Quebec "deserves" to be a country.

Proof?

Just about the only thing that unites us as Canadians is that we are "not american" - yet some wish we weew

Just about the only thing that unities Quebeckers is they speak French - yet many do not.

[Signals.Cpl]

I don't want your democracy, I want THE democracy. It is NOT democratic for a nation to force their choices on another nation. You understand democracy like if we were all one monolitic block, one culture. NO! We are one union of more than one nation. If you don't respect that, then there are no room for us into your Canada. Québec will leave. Then you will free to apply your democracy inside your single nation federalism.

So majority rule is BAAAAAAAAD as long as the majority is anglophone, when 75% of the population votes against your cause and 25% of the population votes for your cause it is really bad and disgusting... but when it is 51% separatists vs. the other 49% then majority rules? You have a twisted view on democracy...that is if you even know the meaning of democracy which it seems you do not.

In 1981, 7 out of 9 provinces were teaming up with Québec against Trudeau and the 2 other provinces. The Trudeau's side, wanted a very centralised federal gov't and a referendum on his bill of rights. The Québec's side wanted a less decentralised federal gov't, they wanted the possibility for any province to opt out from a federal program with full compensations. Quebec wanted a veto, the 7 others wanted no referendum. The group of 8 were united for months and out of the sudden, they betray Québec in one night. What happened is, Trudeau came to Lévesques and asked him, would you accept to give up the veto if I grant to all provinces an opt out with full compensation and do a referendum on my bill of rights. Lévesque said this looks promising, I agree and will try to convince my partners tomorrow. So they signed an agreement on the principle. Lévesque went to his room thinking that he could discuss about it the next day with the other pals. His missions was to convince them to accept the referendums and in return, they would gain the Opt Out with full compensation. But during the night, Trudeau-Chretien-Romanow, managed to convince the pms to betray the Québec. Not only they gave up the Opt Out, but they gave up everything. They even accepted the bill of rights as is, no referendum, nothing. Just like that, Québec is left alone again, is losing powers, the federal government is gaining power at the expense of the provinces, with the agreement of the provinces... but Québec. Not just an agreement on principle. The final thing. F-- off Québec, we don't care about you, we are doing this against you.

DEMOCRACY!!! The Premiers of the provinces are not have to look out for Quebec's interests, but they have to look out for the interests of their people. This is not a betrayal, this is the provinces reaching an agreement in a way they considered best. when negotiating Quebec does not look out for anyone else's interests but their own so why should any other province?

This is today, the number one reason why we want sovereignty. This is why even the liberals of Québec do not want to sign that crap. The opt out was very important, even more than the veto.

Convince enough of your fellow Quebecers and the problem will be solved albeit in a much smaller Quebec.

Now you'll see how gambino rewrites history and will rather trust Trudeau's version than all respectable historians. According to guys like him, it is ok to betray the people of Québec no matter what.

No, see it is ok to look out for the people that elected you, if you are the premier of Quebec you look out for Quebec its not the duty of Ontario to go against their best interests just to appease Quebec. Keep throwing the tantrum... it just shows that you and your arguments are not attached to reality.

[Rocky Road]

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=hV772JjrKOA&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DhV772JjrKOA&gl=CA

Unrest in Greece.

[g_bambino]

haha they stole the nodding old woman from the much better cpc "our country" ad:

So they did.

Further, the CPC ad at least, unlike the PQ video, shows people of descent other than European and doesn't show any Christian cross at the same time the party leader says the words "our values".

[CANADIEN]

You obviously need to learn some history, Signal Cpl

There have been attempts at assimilation of the French-speaking population in what is now Quebec. And the horse man*re known as Quebec language laws are well matched by some of the stuff that has occured over the years in other provinces.

Let,s start with...

In 1801, the first law governing education in Lower Canada attempted to implement a system of "public schols" dominated by the Anglican herarchy, aimed at making the population protestant and English speaking.

In 1841, the Act of Union clearly stated that English would be the only language of the laws snd the Legislative Assembly. Thankfully, it didn't work.

Assimilation was tried. It didn't work, but it was tried.

AS for after Confederation...

A few examples:

In 1891, the Legislature of Manitoba passed an Official Language Act (name sou nds familiar) banning the French language from the Legislature, the laws and the Court of the Province - in direct contravention of the Manitoba Act of 1870, which is part of the Constitution. In the same decade, legislation was passed effectively forbidding instruction in French in the public schools of the Province. (You know of course, that, despite the violation of the right of Quebecers to choose French or English as their language of instruction, English schools have never been outlawed in Quebec).

In Ontario, instruction in French was forbidden in public schools under Regulation 17, from 1912 to the late 1920's (was still in the books to the 1940's).

One of the first acts of the Legislature of Alberta and Saskatchewan after 1905 was to nullify the clauses of the North-West Territories Act that gave equal status to English and French.

Except for criminal procedures, most provinces still only recognize a limited (to non-existent) right to the use of the French language in provincial court proceedings (you know of course, that section 133 of the Constution Act, 1867, guarantees the right to use either English or french in any Quebec court).

Thankfully, this is 2012 and the good old days when French-speaking Canadians had no right outside of Quebec are that, old days. And my use of the words horse and man*re to describe Quebec language laws should not lead to any ambiguity about what I think of them. But let,s not pretend that things that have happened didn't happen, shall we?

[CANADIEN]

Benz, Benz, Benz...

I was tempted to respond to your diatribes in French, but I want other readers to understand my point... and share in the fun.

WE want to be our own country. Noever mind that a majority of US don't even want a referendum on it.

WE are all Quebecers... the We excluding anybody who is not French-speaking, pure-laine or is not Catholic, according to you and the PQ propaganda.

The Constitution Act of 1982, that gave Quebecers (yes Quebecers... interesting we often hear about Quebec rights, but not that often about the rights of Quebecers) as well as other Canadians more rights that was ever recognized to them, that enshrined the equality of status of the French and English languages at the federal, and acknowledged a right to education in French to virtually all French-speaking Canadians, and that won the approval of all QUEBEC members of the House of Commons, elected by Quebecers, except one, that Constitution is a betrayal.

Freedom of religion is not to be respected.

WE are a Nation, so we can do anything we want with our land. First Nations are nations, so they cannot do what they want with their land.

The Anglos have equal rights... in French.

DIEU MERCI JE SUIS FRANCO-ONTARIEN.

[g_bambino]

DEMOCRACY!!! The Premiers of the provinces are not have to look out for Quebec's interests, but they have to look out for the interests of their people. This is not a betrayal, this is the provinces reaching an agreement in a way they considered best. when negotiating Quebec does not look out for anyone else's interests but their own so why should any other province?

There's a difference between democracy and tyranny of the majority; by saying what you do above, you're giving credence to the myths on which Benz has built his complaints.

All parties in Confederation should have an interest in all the others, otherwise Canada ceases to exist. That's why the constitution makes it so that all eleven parties have equal rights and their powers are set as last agreed by all and one party or multiple parties cannot diminish the powers or affect the government of another without the other's agreement. Such was so even before 1982; contrary to Benz's assertions, patriation did not take any powers away from Quebec, or any other province, for that matter. Quebec never had the veto power Lesveque then claimed it did. In fact, patriation entrenched the province's pre-existing powers and protections: the amending formula cemented the need for a province's approval to any amendment affecting its governance, powers, and boundaries; it maintained provincial sovereignty by including the notwithstanding clause (essentially the "opt out" clause Lesveque and some other premiers wanted). The demands of the Gang of Eight (of which Lesveque was a part) were therefore mostly met; Lesveque had months before abandoned his demands for a special veto and distinct society status for Quebec when he joined that group, since the agreement he signed with those other premiers didn't include either criteria, meaning he let go of the veto demand before September 1981, not, as Benz claims, when Trudeau approached him on 4 November. What Lesveque did on 4 November was abandon the Group of Eight, when he alone agreed to Trudeau's offer to patriate the constitution with Trudeau's proposed amendments and put those amendments to a referendum or referedna. Feeling betrayed, the other premiers negotiated and reached a decision without Lesveque, though, as already said, the results diminished in no way whatsoever the provincial powers that had existed since the end of the 19th century. The frequency with which the legislature of Quebec has employed the notwithstanding clause, especially when the PQ has been in power, only serves to illustrate.

[Benz]

Europe is in shambles, my friend.

And the Us and the Uk are sinking ships.

Canada is an island of hope in a very stormy world. Soon to get much worse.

Nice of you to post here Benz, we need more dialogue between Quebec and the Roc.

My question is we are all related? Why choose to seperate? We are all family.

Many of us all are distant cousins.

Bonne journee.

Why the only thing that you hold from what I say is seperate? Among all the open doors I give to you, you look at the last option.

I have analysed alot of union in the world and compare them with Canada. From my standing point, Canada has a great potential. But the current situation for Québec is totally unacceptable. I'd rather seperate than continu like this. What I would like, is kill once and for all that british imperialism attitude so we can stop being opposed one another and go foward together for change.

Even if Québec seperates, I beleive we (all the people in world) are all endangered because of the hungry multinationales that want to break all sovereignties of the world and improve their power over us, at our expense, for their profits. I beleive it's in our best interest for both Québec and English Canada to unite our forces... as long as it's not for the supremacy of either one of us.

I look at the big picture and the endless federal-provincials fights are very annoying. This must ends.

[Benz]

A few things...

1 - Quebec is divisible.

Proof?

Ontario was split from Quebec in the 1700s

Everything north of Chibougabmou was added in the 1900s

It's not a proof, it's poof.

[Benz]

So majority rule is BAAAAAAAAD as long as the majority is anglophone, when 75% of the population votes against your cause and 25% of the population votes for your cause it is really bad and disgusting...

What vote? There are no votes. The people of Canada did not vote regarding the constitution.

Are you talking about the House of Common? I never mentionned that. If Québec represents only 23% of the people, then it deserves 23% of the seats in the HC. I don't have a problem with that.

The constitution is another story. It's not the same rules, the topics. Most of the content of the constitution regards the cultures. Englis, French, Natives...

The constitution must considere the people of Québec has a nation that have a say on it.

The HC is based on the representativity and it is just fine as is.

The senate... well the actual one is a mess, a load of crap. It should be the same as it is in most other countries, based upon the regions. The tradition in Canada is to divide the regions in 4. West+Ontario+Québec+Est. Some beleive the West should be divided in two, Pacific and Prairies. I don't mind, so be it. The regions choose who they send to the senate, not the elected prime minister of the HC for christ sake.

You have a twisted view on democracy...that is if you even know the meaning of democracy which it seems you do not.

What is it you don't understand with my explanations. Do you speak english or what? Oh by the way, if you wanna play smart with the democracy, the chineses outnumber all of us. So get rid of english, speak chinese and give the Canadian's sovereignty to them. This is where your logic leads you.

This is not a betrayal, this is the provinces reaching an agreement

They gave up everything they were fighting for. Trudeau won on all boards. That was NOT for the best interest of Canada. Unless you beleive the best interest for Canada is to motivate Québec to leaves.

Convince enough of your fellow Quebecers and the problem will be solved albeit in a much smaller Quebec.

I don't get it. What are you trying to say?

No, see it is ok to look out for the people that elected you, if you are the premier of Quebec you look out for Quebec its not the duty of Ontario to go against their best interests just to appease Quebec. Keep throwing the tantrum... it just shows that you and your arguments are not attached to reality.

If you don't know what to say, say nothing. Just think about it and eventually, you might pond something meaningful. You are explaining to me that it is in the best intesrest of the english canadians to turn 180 degrees and give up what they were fighting to make sure Québec is isolated.

[Benz]

What Lesveque did on 4 November was abandon the Group of Eight, when he alone agreed to Trudeau's offer to patriate the constitution with Trudeau's proposed amendments and put those amendments to a referendum or referedna.

Ahh! The good old lies of bambino. This is preciasely where he is totally wrong.

Levesque traded the Opt Out for the Trudeau's amendments. It was a big gain for the group of eight. Lévesque did NOT give up the group, he was suppose to try and convince de group that this new proposition was a good one. If the group would have decided to refuse, Lévesque would have not abend them. It's the next morning he realised that it is done deal, no possibility to discuss anything.

the results diminished in no way whatsoever the provincial powers that had existed since the end of the 19th century.

yes it did. The major shift was at the first or second WW. I don't remember exactly. The federal used the war measures law to attribute itself more power that it never gave back. The anglos don't matter because they already own the majority. The french were left in a position that has nothing to do to what was expected.

[Benz]

Benz, Benz, Benz...

I was tempted to respond to your diatribes in French, but I want other readers to understand my point... and share in the fun.

Bring it on.

WE want to be our own country. Noever mind that a majority of US don't even want a referendum on it.

What? Even I don't think it's the right time to do so. Try to focus.

WE are all Quebecers... the We excluding anybody who is not French-speaking, pure-laine or is not Catholic, according to you and the PQ propaganda.

Mange de la marde. Those who do not define themselve Québécois, are the anglos of West island. I am not excluding them, they are excluding themselve pretty good alone. Your lame attitude, you can keep it for yourself.

The Constitution Act of 1982, that gave Quebecers (yes Quebecers... interesting we often hear about Quebec rights, but not that often about the rights of Quebecers) as well as other Canadians more rights that was ever recognized to them, that enshrined the equality of status of the French and English languages at the federal, and acknowledged a right to education in French to virtually all French-speaking Canadians

We have more ambition to just protect french language. We are not a minority in our homeland. If you can't understand, at least be respectful.

..and that won the approval of all QUEBEC members of the House of Commons, elected by Quebecers, except one, that Constitution is a betrayal.

Who gives a damn. It doesn't work that way. The federal government does not have the legitimity to overpass the Québec government. The Québec people belong to Québec, NOT Ottawa. The Quebec members of the house of common had only the legitimity to speak in the name of the Québécois regarding federal matters only. The constitution regards the people of Québec as well. Only Québec had a say for itself. Not the backbenchers of the liberal party.

Freedom of religion is not to be respected.

What? Stop being an ass. Freedom of religion is respected, but in the values of the Québécois, religion is only a personal choice and it does not have superiority to the rules. If the anglos think otherwise, good for them. They do whatever they won't on their land. Here, it is unacceptable.

WE are a Nation, so we can do anything we want with our land. First Nations are nations, so they cannot do what they want with their land.

Childish. T'as quel mon ti-crisse pour parler de manière aussi infantile? You seem to think like most of them so I say you have no lesson to give to anyone regarding the natives. You think you own them and that they are happy to be owned by you. I can't wait to see you explaining this to them.

The Anglos have equal rights... in French.

Look at the poor diciple of imperialist propaganda. Just because we insist that french language is used with a predominence over english, they whine that they cannot use english only. The very huge majority of english here are very fine with our rules. Very few are complaining like drama queens. It is very stupid from you to jump into that bandwagon.

DIEU MERCI JE SUIS FRANCO-ONTARIEN.

T'es juste un épais. Ton intervention est minable est impertinente. Je suis certain que t'es capable de faire mieux. Mais tu joues les petits chiwawa envers tes maîtres. Moi je ne partage pas ton sentiment d'infériorité. I brought in this thread several constructive solutions. But guys like you prefer to blabler on les vieilles rangaines.

[TheNewTeddy]

our homeland.

"our" homeland.

You need to be an "us" to have a homeland.

To be an "us" with a homeland, you need to be an ethnic group. "Ethnie" in french.

Quebecois are not an Ethnic Group

You thus have no "homeland"

You are just Canadians who speak French. If you spoke English you'd be just like every other Canadian.

To put it another way

For there to be an us "Nous" there needs to be a them "Elles"

Deciding someone is "Nous" and someone else is "Elles" is racism.

Edited September 7, 2012 by TheNewTeddy

[CANADIEN]

It's not a proof, it's poof.

It is also two historical facts.

[Wild Bill]

Deciding someone is "Nous" and someone else is "Elles" is racism.

We went round and round with Benz some months ago on this issue. I told him then but he seems to have forgotten that to ROC, his arguments just scream racism!

He doesn't want to believe this, I guess. Who would? And I'm sure he doesn't think of himself as a racist. Still, that doesn't change the fact that the separatiste philosophy looks that way to Canadians outside of Quebec.

He is not going to change that by scolding us. The perception is what it is and in politics, perception is reality. THIS perception influences the way ROC regards the separatistes and thus would also influence any negotiation with them!

The sad thing is that the separatistes not only do not see this negative perception of them in ROC, they have no idea of how this would affect any terms worked out between Canada and a separate Quebec. So things will happen as they will and it will not be until and unless Quebec chooses to leave that it will discover how their negotiating rivals regard them.

To TROC, it will be a bit like negotiating with the KKK.

Don't believe me? Just ask Parizeau. Get him to repeat his words about the rich and the ethnics.

[CANADIEN]

Mange de la marde.

In case you haven't figured it out yet,profanity of this kind is against the rules of this forum. No matter the language And in any language, that’s the last defence of those who have no argument.

Those who do not define themselve Québécois, are the anglos of West island. I am not excluding them, they are excluding themselve pretty good alone. Your lame attitude, you can keep it for yourself.

I am sure there are still a few people in the West Island who don't consider themselves Québécois. But don't be surprised if I get the impression that for you it is a sign of self-exclusion when someone in Quebec thinks (rightly) that there is diffrence between mandating that French be on commercial signs and demanding that rules be used to make surethat "offending languages" have as little a place as possible or, when they think (righly) that each and every Québécois should be able to decide by themselves in which language (French or English)their children will receive their education (just too example). If that's what you think, it wouldn't be different than when someone tells me I am excluding myself because I think that, as a Franco-Ontarian I am excluding myself because I won't consider my language to be inferior or that I will not accept anything less than the respects of my rights when I obtain government services. In that case, either you are right and they are right, or they are wrong and you are wrong. Tell me, am I excluding myself from my fellow Ontarians?

We have more ambition to just protect french language. We are not a minority in our homeland. If you can't understand, at least be respectful.

Fine, then you show me what rights you, as a Québécois, lost in 1982. Not Québec, you, as an individual.

Who gives a damn. It doesn't work that way.

Less we forget. It works what ever way the Péquistes decide it should work.

The Québec people belong to Québec, NOT Ottawa.

You got it wrong. Quebec belongs to Québécois - all of them. And Canada belongs to Canadians - all of us. People do not belong to a nation or a country.

The constitution regards the people of Québec as well. Only Québec had a say for itself. Not the backbenchers of the liberal party.

Last time I checked, those backbenchers from Québec were part of the Québec people too.

What? Stop being an ass.

Stop talking to yourself

Freedom of religion is respected, but in the values of the Québécois, religion is only a personal choice and it does not have superiority to the rules.

Rules denying expression of religions that are not contrary to the safety of the public are a violation of basic human rights. I do not agree with them whether they exist is Tehran, Ottawa or Quebec City.

Childish. T'as quel mon ti-crisse pour parler de manière aussi infantile? You seem to think like most of them so I say you have no lesson to give to anyone regarding the natives. You think you own them and that they are happy to be owned by you. I can't wait to see you explaining this to them.

I will be more than happy to explain it to them... the second I start beleving it, in other words never.

I suspect here you didn't get my point. My point is that to the Péquiste ideology Québec as a nation has right to form it's own country separate from Canada but the Innu NATION, the Cree NATION, the Abenaki NATION (I won't name them all, you know where I am going with this) don't have a right to form their own country separate from Québec. Sorry, doesn't quite work that way. If you can say Québec is OUR homeland, a Wyendat, an Inuit, a Naskapi can say the exact same thing about the land they inhabit. You can leave Canada, they can leave Québec. Perhaps you know the English expression... what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Look at the poor diciple of imperialist propaganda. Just because we insist that french language is used with a predominence over english, they whine that they cannot use english only. The very huge majority of english here are very fine with our rules.

Seriously, how many people in Québec these days want to go back to the day when it was all fine to have no French in a commercial sign. There is a difference between saying "the language of the majority must appear on commercial signs", which is legitimate, and running around with rulers to make sure the offending languages are not more than a certain size on a sign (which is treating speakers of that language like second class citizens, and I'll spare you less flattering epithets about it).

Actually, the predominance argument is not that different from the argument of those who think English, and only English, is acceptable in Canada outside Quebec. Do you think they're right?

I brought in this thread several constructive solutions.

They must have been deleted. Edited September 8, 2012 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

I kept two very remarkable ahem pearls for a separate post.

If the anglos think otherwise, good for them. They do whatever they won't on their land.

Just want to make sure I understand you here. Canada outside Québec is Anglo land? It is their homeland? Does this mean it is not MY homeland too as a Franco-Ontarian? Not an homeland to the Acadiens, the Métis, the Franco-Ténois? That I should accept the same kind of second class status you want for non-French-speaking Québécois?

Because if this is the case... there are a few people here who can tell you I have not, do not, and will not take that non-sense from anyone. Not when it is said in English. not when it is said in English with a French accent, not when it is said in the French language.

T'es juste un épais. Ton intervention est minable est impertinente. Je suis certain que t'es capable de faire mieux.

. I could do better, but why bother to rise above your level?

Mais tu joues les petits chiwawa envers tes maîtres. Moi je ne partage pas ton sentiment d'infériorité.

Look above and tell me you believe I consider myself inferior to anyone because of my language or my identitiy. Ask people who have been here for more than one of two years if they believe I consider English-speakers to be my masters.

Feel free to believe such non-sense. I will keep KNOWING that I will not accept second-class status for non-French speakers in Québec when I don't accept it for myself in Ontario and in Canada.

Edited September 8, 2012 by CANADIEN