Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

So, do we exist to serve the constitution, or is it the other way around?

It's the other way around. The Constitution serves to protect the individual rights of every single Canadian to freedom from discrimination.

It doesn't matter a hoot what the government thinks of what someone wears or what the majority of Canadians want her to wear. What matters in constitutional law is her right to practice her faith as she wishes without being discriminated against for it.

.

  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Intuitively, Canadians know that something is amiss when people like yourself throw up your hands and say there is nothing that we can do.

Yes, we call all ratify an amendment to remove religious freedom from the constitution.

That means that churches will have taxation exemption removed, religious education can be banned, Catholics be forced to allow women priests....

Posted

Yes, we call all ratify an amendment to remove religious freedom from the constitution.

That means that churches will have taxation exemption removed, religious education can be banned, Catholics be forced to allow women priests....

Michael - you're going way over the top. Here's a critically important element of our Charter Rights and specifically - Freedom of Religion. Can you not agree that the removal of one's niqab while taking the Oath might fall under "reasonable accommodation"?

The duty of reasonable accommodation on religious grounds experiences some limits, because all rights are not absolutes.[20] Indeed, reasonable accommodation requires a balance between the rights of the claimant and the holder of the duty to accommodate.[21]

See "limits": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Canada

Back to Basics

Posted

Michael - you're going way over the top. Here's a critically important element of our Charter Rights and specifically - Freedom of Religion. Can you not agree that the removal of one's niqab while taking the Oath might fall under "reasonable accommodation"?

See "limits": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Canada

Reasonable accommodation is actually what allows her to wear the niqab. The thinking being that the benefits of allowing her to participate outweigh the risks of banning of the niqab and forcing her to retreat into her own community.

Posted

Reasonable accommodation is actually what allows her to wear the niqab. The thinking being that the benefits of allowing her to participate outweigh the risks of banning of the niqab and forcing her to retreat into her own community.

Forcing her? I don't think that she should be made to take it off, but no one is forcing her to reatreat anywhere. It's her own backwards religious beliefs that are 'forcing her' to wear the niquab. As an athiest it all seems pretty rediculous.

Posted

Forcing her? I don't think that she should be made to take it off, but no one is forcing her to reatreat anywhere. It's her own backwards religious beliefs that are 'forcing her' to wear the niquab. As an athiest it all seems pretty rediculous.

Ad there is the point, especially in this particular case. They are her beliefs, religious or otherwise, that cause her to want to wear the niqab.

Posted

Ad there is the point, especially in this particular case. They are her beliefs, religious or otherwise, that cause her to want to wear the niqab.

Of course. It doesn't change the ridiculousness of it, or make someone like Argus wrong.

Posted

I also do not subscribe to any religion, but I personally would stop short of callig someone who does, ridiculous. Argus, now thats a different story.

Religion is ridiculous. The more orthodox you are, the more ridiculous and impervious to reason you become.

Posted

Religion is ridiculous. The more orthodox you are, the more ridiculous and impervious to reason you become.

The same could be said for any ideological system......including the one that believes in canadian "values". An orthodoxy by any other name may smell as sweet......

Posted

The same could be said for any ideological system......including the one that believes in canadian "values". An orthodoxy by any other name may smell as sweet......

The difference being that one is based on something that actually exists and can be seen, and the other on a book about a sky man.

Posted

The difference being that one is based on something that actually exists and can be seen, and the other on a book about a sky man.

.....I'm also glad you readily admit your canadian values are..."impervious to reason."

Posted

The same could be said for any ideological system......including the one that believes in canadian "values". An orthodoxy by any other name may smell as sweet......

Are you saying you don't believe in having values?

"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

So, do we exist to serve the constitution, or is it the other way around?

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is designed to protect our rights and freedoms. That includes religious rights and freedoms.

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.

Posted

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is designed to protect our rights and freedoms. That includes religious rights and freedoms.

As I posted previously, here's a critical point about those rights......the "claimant" has a right to wear the niqab but it would seem that it would be a reasonable accommodation if they were to lift/remove it when taking the Oath of Citizenship. Does that not make sense?

The duty of reasonable accommodation on religious grounds experiences some limits, because all rights are not absolutes.[20] Indeed, reasonable accommodation requires a balance between the rights of the claimant and the holder of the duty to accommodate.[21]

See "limits": http://en.wikipedia....igion_in_Canada

Back to Basics

Posted

As I posted previously, here's a critical point about those rights......the "claimant" has a right to wear the niqab but it would seem that it would be a reasonable accommodation if they were to lift/remove it when taking the Oath of Citizenship. Does that not make sense?

See "limits": http://en.wikipedia....igion_in_Canada

As I posted before, here is how the SC actually interprets that part of the charter.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/supreme-courts-niqab-decision-strikes-a-reasonable-balance/article6599756/

Posted (edited)

Are you saying you don't believe in having values?

A framework of behaviours ever able to evolve to produce content society? Not belief but adherence. A strict ideology to which reason and flexibility are abhorrent......like "canadian values" :rolleyes: ...not so much.

Edited by Bob Macadoo
Posted

A framework of behaviours ever able to evolve to produce content society? Not belief but adherence. A strict ideology to which reason and flexibility are abhorrent......like "canadian values" :rolleyes: ...not so much.

Do you reject the notion that Canadians, by and large, subscribe to a particular set of values?

"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

Oh, so that mosque,church, synagogue down the street isnt real then. How come I can see it.

Do you misunderstand purposely or is that just a thing you have? You've seen God?

Posted (edited)

Do you reject the notion that Canadians, by and large, subscribe to a particular set of values?

.....if you are referring to my second reference...then I reject that "we" do.

Edited by Bob Macadoo

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
      10,898
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Flora smith
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Scott75 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Political Smash went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Politics1990 earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Akalupenn earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

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