McGuinty Cancels All Religious-Based Tribunals

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Sparhawk,

You are entirely correct. What the 'benevolent owner' of the company found irksome was that she built the company from the ground up, into a multi-million dollar enterprise, and she felt she should 'be able to do whatever the hell she wants with her money'. We all understood why RevCan made us pay the 10,000 for the vehicle, but then they also tried to dictate the payment terms....

[mockingbird]

Dear kimmy,

Perhaps twine sphere was simply questioning whether Hebrew is an accepted synomym for someone of Jewish faith.

I believe it is, or should be. I was trying to avoid, in this case, using the term 'the Jews', as I did not want it to appear derogatory or 'conspiratorily paranoid'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well a fuck you to you and a great big fuck you to trudeau potznasher over there.

[Durgan]

I am not intirely convinced the various Religious Courts in quotations should have ben abolished. They do or did have some merit. This I arrived at after sober second thought.

Anything would be an improvement over the Family Law Act. Most people are unaware of the glaring inequities in the Family Law Act, unless they have been through a divorce, particulaty a second marriage divorce.

Maybe the McGinty Government was too hasty in not accepting Sharia Law with conditions, such as review by the Courts of any ageement arrived at.

Few settlements are undertaken by religious laws as mentioned in some previous post. Just maybe the whole issue is a tempest in a tea pot.

Probably my post is more an attempt to try to bring focus on the inequitious Family Law Act, and this muddles my view towards thinking that religious courts might just be an improvement, unless the Family Law Act is revised and re-writtien in certain sections, particulay property division areas.

Durgan.