herbie Posted December 19, 2023 Report Share Posted December 19, 2023 Using the 'notwithstanding' clause actually means he knows it's wrong but is gonna do it anyway. Not because he thinks it's righteous, because he thinks it might be popular. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted December 19, 2023 Report Share Posted December 19, 2023 Just now, herbie said: Using the 'notwithstanding' clause actually means he knows it's wrong but is gonna do it anyway. Not because he thinks it's righteous, because he thinks it might be popular. Nonsense. The notwithstanding clause is in there for the very specific reason that they knew that the charter would occasionally get it wrong and that gov'ts needed a mechanism to CORRECT the mistakes the charter makes. It's not possible to write the charter in such a way that it's perfect. Also - it's some times necessary when judges let their personal politics and bias get in the way of reasonable legal decisions. Sorry - this is an example of where the CHARTER got it wrong. and the tool is there to correct it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbie Posted December 20, 2023 Report Share Posted December 20, 2023 The Charter got it wrong did it? Cryin' shame. eh? Should be your right o teach your lid to beat the shit outa them little fags and brag about it on FB too. It says so in the Koran/Bible/Tradition/Locker room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted December 20, 2023 Report Share Posted December 20, 2023 (edited) 30 minutes ago, herbie said: The Charter got it wrong did it? Cryin' shame. eh? Well no - no shame at all. The crafters created a tool to fix it and it's been used - problems solved. Quote Should be your right o teach your lid to beat the shit outa them Er...... suuuuurrreeee.... you teach o your lid whatever you like. I guess. Quote little fags and brag about it on FB too. It says so in the Koran/Bible/Tradition/Locker room. I seriously doubt you've read any of those books But - according to you the teacher should keep the problem from the parent and if the kid gets beat up like that it's none of the parents business. Pretty much everyone sane disagrees. So - now there's laws to prevent that. See? The system works! Edited December 20, 2023 by CdnFox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted February 1 Report Share Posted February 1 Now that Alberta is introducing a Parental Bill of Rights, can Ontario get one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannuck Posted February 11 Report Share Posted February 11 On 12/19/2023 at 5:53 PM, herbie said: Using the 'notwithstanding' clause actually means he knows it's wrong but is gonna do it anyway. Not because he thinks it's righteous, because he thinks it might be popular. Uh...gee, that IS what democracy is supposed to be about. The MAJORITY rules, not the fringes of radical looney minorities. We've got our Federal government to piddle away trillions doing more of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted February 11 Report Share Posted February 11 On 12/19/2023 at 7:27 PM, herbie said: The Charter got it wrong did it? Cryin' shame. eh? No, it's inevitable. No document can accuarately predict EVERYTHING - that's why they put in the notwithstanding Quote Should be your right o teach your lid to beat the shit outa them little fags and brag about it on FB too. It says so in the Koran/Bible/Tradition/Locker room. Oh look - herbie has to lie and create a fake argument to try to make his point. Yawn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbie Posted February 11 Report Share Posted February 11 3 hours ago, cannuck said: that IS what democracy is supposed to be about. The MAJORITY rules, not the fringes of radical looney minorities. We've got our Federal government to piddle away trillions doing more of that. 51 people deciding to kill the other 49 is also perfectly democratic. And you can blame the Federal govt for putting in that anti-democratic clause in in the first place. One province deciding to do something regardless of what the other 9 -plus 3 territories want is anything but democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted February 11 Report Share Posted February 11 32 minutes ago, herbie said: 51 people deciding to kill the other 49 is also perfectly democratic. Sure = democracy is the tyrrany of the majority. It's two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. A fact losers like yourself immediately forget when discussing the "Desperate need for more democracy with proportional representation" blah blah blah Which is why we limit democracy severely to protect against excessive abuses. But - this is in fact entirely within the limits we've imposed so sucks to be you. It's hilarious how you on the left are all about rights and democracy if it serves your purpose but horribly opposed when it doesn't. The rights of the parents need to be respected and the need to provide for the children is spelled out in law and i believe the charter as having to provide the necessaries of life and that would include not mutilating them. 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.