Does our charter cater to cults?

[Drea]

Still waiting leafless for your post of "stripped rights" . Will I have to wait long?

From what I understand, and from limited personal experience in Montreal, the requirement of bi-lingualism from civil service participants is in fact highly discriminatory against English-speakers. Allegedly bi-lingual Federal security personal patrolling the Gomery hearing were not willing to speak English when I stumbled into the hearing area in search of a bathroom. They feigned not understanding the word "bathroom" and shook a set of handcuffs at me, until I said, awkwardly, "salle de baines, sivouplez (sp)".

I understand from some career military people that their promotion and advancement career was destroyed by the discrimination in favor of Francophones. These are no piddling matters.

If civil servants need both languages -- is it not discriminatory toward the french-only speaker as well?

You coulda just pointed to your crotch and did the pee-pee dance! Works in all languages.

[Leafless]

But just who are these extended rights being granted to?

They are basically Quebec, Aboriginals and homosexuals.

Such humbug!

It is NOT humbug.

It is in the charter.

Read it sometime.

[Leafless]

If civil servants need both languages -- is it not discriminatory toward the french-only speaker as well?

Your statement is illogical as French is NOT a national language of commerce, English is.

So within that context any public servant who insist on using French within federal government which is a national entity, discriminates against the English one.

If the federal government chooses to utilize a language other then English without being described as a 'national language of commerce, ALSO DISCRIMINATES against the English speaker, even more so as that language does not represent Canada nationally.

[Drea]

...yet France and Belguim (to name only two) are two countries on earth that don't necessarily use english at all. There are many countries on earth where the people don't speak english, yet they still manage somehow to have commerce. Amazing innit.

In Canada if you want to work in civil service (for the Federal govt) then you need to know both official languages.

This means, Leafless, that if I speak only English, then I will need to learn to speak french. This also means that my cousin who speaks only french will have to learn english. (If he or I want that job).

What is unequal about this?

Actually, I've heard that english is the most difficult language to learn, while learning french is not as difficult.

So who is being discriminated against again? The french learning english or the english learning french?

[jbg]

So who is being discriminated against again? The french learning english or the english learning french?

The discrimination results in part from the fact that most Francophones who live in at least the urban parts of Quebec, of necessity, are bi-lingual, isnce English is the language of most of ROC, the "RONA" (rest of North America) and international commerce.

By contrast, most Anglophones, particularly those not living in Quebec, have as much reason to learn, say, Spanish or Japanese as French. Thus, the pressure on them to vary their conduct, and learn French instead of more internationally useful language, is severe and prejudicial discrimination.

[Drea]

Actually jbg, here in southern BC I would be better off learning Mandarin and Hindi.... but those two languages are not the official languages of Canada.

French and English are both official languages in this country. This is not going to change. And I do not see what the problem is.

[Leafless]

Actually jbg, here in southern BC I would be better off learning Mandarin and Hindi.... but those two languages are not the official languages of Canada.

French and English are both official languages in this country. This is not going to change. And I do not see what the problem is.

As usual Drea, you are misrepresenting facts.

French and English are NOT the official languages of Canada, they are the official languages of our federal government.

On a more important provincial basis, they are only official in a single province, that being New Brunswick.

[Leafless]

...yet France and Belguim (to name only two) are two countries on earth that don't necessarily use english at all. There are many countries on earth where the people don't speak english, yet they still manage somehow to have commerce. Amazing innit.

In Canada if you want to work in civil service (for the Federal govt) then you need to know both official languages.

This means, Leafless, that if I speak only English, then I will need to learn to speak french. This also means that my cousin who speaks only french will have to learn english. (If he or I want that job).

What is unequal about this?

Actually, I've heard that english is the most difficult language to learn, while learning french is not as difficult.

So who is being discriminated against again? The french learning english or the english learning french?

In reality you are forcing Canadians to learn French, an inconsequential language of cultural conveinence limited to a single province. This is a cheap power grab and constitutes acute discrimination especially when its promoted by Canada's national federal government.

This is a total waste of Canada's resources and discriminates against the mainstream commercial language English.

Have you ever heard of users of a majority language being forced to assimilate to a minority language anywhere?

Why do you suppose Quebecers ever learned English initially, because they were so interested in linguistics, sure.

[bk59]

French and English are NOT the official languages of Canada, they are the official languages of our federal government.

Of course. How silly of Drea to say that English and French are the official languages of Canada.

Official Languages Act

2. The purpose of this Act is to

(a) ensure respect for English and French as the official languages of Canada...

[bk59]

What we have in Canada is a system 'Governmental Apartheid' allowing minorities to strip away the RIGHTS of majority English speaking Canadians concerning an existing ESTABLISHED country.

That is an interesting position to take given your main argument. You say that the Charter gives advantages to groups like people from Quebec, homosexuals, and Aboriginal peoples. One of the reasons behind this statement is that the Charter has (somehow) taken away rights that people had in an established country / society.

Wouldn't that reason work in favour of Native Canadians who are trying to get back some of the rights they had in their prior, existing established society?

Even before you answer that one, please tell me what extra advantages the Charter has given Native Canadians. You've done your bit on Quebec & the French language. I've seen your previous threads on homosexuals. (Personally, I think you're in deep left field on both issues... in fact, it's possible that you're not even playing the same sport...) But now I'm curious to hear your viewpoint on Native Canadians.

[bk59]

From what I understand, and from limited personal experience in Montreal, the requirement of bi-lingualism from civil service participants is in fact highly discriminatory against English-speakers. Allegedly bi-lingual Federal security personal patrolling the Gomery hearing were not willing to speak English when I stumbled into the hearing area in search of a bathroom. They feigned not understanding the word "bathroom" and shook a set of handcuffs at me, until I said, awkwardly, "salle de baines, sivouplez (sp)".

I understand from some career military people that their promotion and advancement career was destroyed by the discrimination in favor of Francophones. These are no piddling matters.

Problems such as the one you had with the security guards should be dealt with swiftly and harshly, no matter which language was ignored. (Assuming that they were in fact bilingual and just being d*cks to you.) But incidents like that aren't really the fault of federal bilingualism. It's just some idiots that need to be straightened out. You can find people like that everywhere. Unfortunately.

Your comments regarding career advancement are more at the heart of the matter. I don't think that bilingualism is "highly" discriminatory against English speakers (meaning those with English as a first language). The fact is, we have two official languages. Even before the Official Languages Act there was a need for bilingualism in many areas. Those areas have just been expanded by the Act. But from everything that I have heard, the government and military are more than willing to give people the opportunity and training to learn the second official language (whether that be French or English). It is in the government's best interest to have (otherwise) qualified people meet the language requirement in the same way that it is in an employer's best interest to have (otherwise) qualified people learn computer skills for a job that requires computer skills.

[Leafless]

French and English are NOT the official languages of Canada, they are the official languages of our federal government.

Of course. How silly of Drea to say that English and French are the official languages of Canada.

Official Languages Act

2. The purpose of this Act is to

(a) ensure respect for English and French as the official languages of Canada...

Maybe then, you can tell me WHY all provinces in Canada ARE NOT officially bilingual including Quebec?

Because I will tell you, they are NOT, provincially legally recognized as such, except for New Brunswick as provincial powers only have that type of legal linguistic language control to declare English and French OFFICIAL working languages of Canadian provinces.

So much for artificiality of 'OFFICIAL LANGUAGES' as it only applies under the corrupt, federal discriminatory hands under federal entities and NOTHING to do with provincial officialism, which is what matters when you are talking the grand scope of Canada.

[Leafless]

What we have in Canada is a system 'Governmental Apartheid' allowing minorities to strip away the RIGHTS of majority English speaking Canadians concerning an existing ESTABLISHED country.

That is an interesting position to take given your main argument. You say that the Charter gives advantages to groups like people from Quebec, homosexuals, and Aboriginal peoples. One of the reasons behind this statement is that the Charter has (somehow) taken away rights that people had in an established country / society.

Wouldn't that reason work in favour of Native Canadians who are trying to get back some of the rights they had in their prior, existing established society?

Even before you answer that one, please tell me what extra advantages the Charter has given Native Canadians. You've done your bit on Quebec & the French language. I've seen your previous threads on homosexuals. (Personally, I think you're in deep left field on both issues... in fact, it's possible that you're not even playing the same sport...) But now I'm curious to hear your viewpoint on Native Canadians.

[Leafless]

What we have in Canada is a system 'Governmental Apartheid' allowing minorities to strip away the RIGHTS of majority English speaking Canadians concerning an existing ESTABLISHED country.

That is an interesting position to take given your main argument. You say that the Charter gives advantages to groups like people from Quebec, homosexuals, and Aboriginal peoples. One of the reasons behind this statement is that the Charter has (somehow) taken away rights that people had in an established country / society.

Wouldn't that reason work in favour of Native Canadians who are trying to get back some of the rights they had in their prior, existing established society?

Even before you answer that one, please tell me what extra advantages the Charter has given Native Canadians. You've done your bit on Quebec & the French language. I've seen your previous threads on homosexuals. (Personally, I think you're in deep left field on both issues... in fact, it's possible that you're not even playing the same sport...) But now I'm curious to hear your viewpoint on Native Canadians.

Maybe you can tell me how the charter has taken away rights from Quebec, homosexuals and Aboriginal people. Did these groups ever had any sort of sovereign power to establish rights to begin with?

The federal government is currently pandering to Aboriginals in a way that expresses 'individualism' rather than to include them overall like any other Canadian. I see no reason why Canada should be giving Aboriginals a NICKEL. Either they live on their reservations and hunt and fish like they claim they want to, or join mainstream Canadian society. The choice is theirs.

[Leafless]

From what I understand, and from limited personal experience in Montreal, the requirement of bi-lingualism from civil service participants is in fact highly discriminatory against English-speakers. Allegedly bi-lingual Federal security personal patrolling the Gomery hearing were not willing to speak English when I stumbled into the hearing area in search of a bathroom. They feigned not understanding the word "bathroom" and shook a set of handcuffs at me, until I said, awkwardly, "salle de baines, sivouplez (sp)".

I understand from some career military people that their promotion and advancement career was destroyed by the discrimination in favor of Francophones. These are no piddling matters.

Problems such as the one you had with the security guards should be dealt with swiftly and harshly, no matter which language was ignored. (Assuming that they were in fact bilingual and just being d*cks to you.) But incidents like that aren't really the fault of federal bilingualism. It's just some idiots that need to be straightened out. You can find people like that everywhere. Unfortunately.

It seems you have not recognized the reckless game the feds are playing.

You cannot force Canadians to learn an inconsequential, useless, non-commercial language, just for the sake of brownie political points.

Quebec has proven OVER AND OVER it is incompetent in helping itself, as it is not willing to loose its language and Quebec nationalism resulting in losing major investment in Quebec.

Now, just isn't that to bad because it HAS NO LEGAL RIGHTS to FORCE he government of CANADA to support this type of individualism.

It is to bad certain federal parties have traitorous characteristics that endangered Canadian nationalism and Canada as a country.

[bk59]

Maybe then, you can tell me WHY all provinces in Canada ARE NOT officially bilingual including Quebec?

Because I will tell you, they are NOT, provincially legally recognized as such, except for New Brunswick as provincial powers only have that type of legal linguistic language control to declare English and French OFFICIAL working languages of Canadian provinces.

So much for artificiality of 'OFFICIAL LANGUAGES' as it only applies under the corrupt, federal discriminatory hands under federal entities and NOTHING to do with provincial officialism, which is what matters when you are talking the grand scope of Canada.

What "interesting" logic. The federal government has declared English and French the official languages of Canada. But you say that isn't so because all of the provinces have not declared English and French official within their borders.

By the same logic Canada has no army. Oh sure, the federal government has troops and weapons, but none of the provinces do therefore there is no such thing as a Canadian army.

By the same logic Canada has never entered into an international treaty agreement. The federal government has made agreements with other countries, but none of the provinces have, therefore Canada has never made an agreement with another country.

I would suggest learning a bit more about our system of government. The federal government can do (some) things at a national level without having the consent of every single province. Likewise, the provinces can do some things within their borders without the consent of the federal government. One of those things that the federal government can do is to declare English and French the official languages of Canada.

And no. "Provinicial officialism" is not what matters when talking about "the grand scope of Canada." National issues involve the national (i.e. federal) government.

[bk59]

Maybe you can tell me how the charter has taken away rights from Quebec, homosexuals and Aboriginal people. Did these groups ever had any sort of sovereign power to establish rights to begin with?

The federal government is currently pandering to Aboriginals in a way that expresses 'individualism' rather than to include them overall like any other Canadian. I see no reason why Canada should be giving Aboriginals a NICKEL. Either they live on their reservations and hunt and fish like they claim they want to, or join mainstream Canadian society. The choice is theirs.

What kind of answer is that?

First, I never said that the Charter has taken away rights from anyone. So no, I'm not going to answer a question about a position I never took.

My point about "established countries" (as you put it) was that if you are claiming that rights were taken away from English Canadians who were in an established country before the Charter, then how would you argue against a Native tribe that says they had land rights in their established society that were taken away from them? It seems like a poor answer to say that in one case the "established country" matters more than in the other case. That had nothing to do with the Charter. But that wasn't even my main question...

Second, why haven't you answered my question? You claim that the Charter has given extra advantages to (among others) Aboriginal peoples. What advantages has the Charter given them? Ranting about giving Aboriginal people a nickel (without explaining how, why, etc.) is not an answer. Your post had nothing to do with the Charter.

[Leafless]

Maybe then, you can tell me WHY all provinces in Canada ARE NOT officially bilingual including Quebec?

Because I will tell you, they are NOT, provincially legally recognized as such, except for New Brunswick as provincial powers only have that type of legal linguistic language control to declare English and French OFFICIAL working languages of Canadian provinces.

So much for artificiality of 'OFFICIAL LANGUAGES' as it only applies under the corrupt, federal discriminatory hands under federal entities and NOTHING to do with provincial officialism, which is what matters when you are talking the grand scope of Canada.

What "interesting" logic. The federal government has declared English and French the official languages of Canada. But you say that isn't so because all of the provinces have not declared English and French official within their borders.

By the same logic Canada has no army. Oh sure, the federal government has troops and weapons, but none of the provinces do therefore there is no such thing as a Canadian army.

By the same logic Canada has never entered into an international treaty agreement. The federal government has made agreements with other countries, but none of the provinces have, therefore Canada has never made an agreement with another country.

I would suggest learning a bit more about our system of government. The federal government can do (some) things at a national level without having the consent of every single province. Likewise, the provinces can do some things within their borders without the consent of the federal government. One of those things that the federal government can do is to declare English and French the official languages of Canada.

And no. "Provinicial officialism" is not what matters when talking about "the grand scope of Canada." National issues involve the national (i.e. federal) government.

The military is a direct federal responsibility UNLIKE 'official languages' the result of IMO corrupt Liberal politics and a Liberal induced 'Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism' which was rejected in favour of 'official multiculturalism'. Declaring 'official languages' without a national referendum is sabotaging the provincial right of language control.

I really don't know why you would bring up Canada's military as a comparison between joint agreement of the provinces when it is a well known fact that Quebec refused to fight in both world wars.

If you don't agree "provincial linguistic officialism" trumps the federal desire to implement 'official bilingualism, then all you have to do is look at Quebec the only province in Canada that unilaterally declared itself 'officially unilingual French' while totally ignoring the federal dream of provincial 'official bilingualism' after all it did for Quebec creating its language an 'official language. This also does not questions the 'big mystery' why English provinces do not demand that their repective provinces demand 'official English only status' like Quebec.

That's exactly what this topic is trying to convey in discussion is Canada's pandering to Quebecism, homosexualism and Aboriginalism pertaining to cults as a totally unnecessary venture backed by a corrupt charter and a total waste of taxpayers money.

[bk59]

The military is a direct federal responsibility UNLIKE 'official languages' the result of IMO corrupt Liberal politics and a Liberal induced 'Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism' which was rejected in favour of 'official multiculturalism'. Declaring 'official languages' without a national referendum is sabotaging the provincial right of language control.

I really don't know why you would bring up Canada's military as a comparison between joint agreement of the provinces when it is a well known fact that Quebec refused to fight in both world wars.

If you don't agree "provincial linguistic officialism" trumps the federal desire to implement 'official bilingualism, then all you have to do is look at Quebec the only province in Canada that unilaterally declared itself 'officially unilingual French' while totally ignoring the federal dream of provincial 'official bilingualism' after all it did for Quebec creating its language an 'official language. This also does not questions the 'big mystery' why English provinces do not demand that their repective provinces demand 'official English only status' like Quebec.

That's exactly what this topic is trying to convey in discussion is Canada's pandering to Quebecism, homosexualism and Aboriginalism pertaining to cults as a totally unnecessary venture backed by a corrupt charter and a total waste of taxpayers money.

There is no such thing as the provincial right of language control. Making up rights does not prove your argument. The provinces choose their official language(s) for themselves. The federal government chooses Canada's official languages.

Your "fact" about Quebec and the World Wars has nothing to do with anything in this topic. The examples I gave indicate that your logic was flawed. National policies are set without having every province set the same policy. This includes the existence of the Canadian military, international treaties, etc.

This is at least the third time I have had to correct your assumption that there are no provinces in Canada that are officially English only. Here is one example (Ontario):

English is Ontario's official language

Once again you have avoided my question about how the Charter has given Aboriginal people an advantage. Please feel free to answer that question at any time.

[Leafless]

The military is a direct federal responsibility UNLIKE 'official languages' the result of IMO corrupt Liberal politics and a Liberal induced 'Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism' which was rejected in favour of 'official multiculturalism'. Declaring 'official languages' without a national referendum is sabotaging the provincial right of language control.

I really don't know why you would bring up Canada's military as a comparison between joint agreement of the provinces when it is a well known fact that Quebec refused to fight in both world wars.

If you don't agree "provincial linguistic officialism" trumps the federal desire to implement 'official bilingualism, then all you have to do is look at Quebec the only province in Canada that unilaterally declared itself 'officially unilingual French' while totally ignoring the federal dream of provincial 'official bilingualism' after all it did for Quebec creating its language an 'official language. This also does not questions the 'big mystery' why English provinces do not demand that their respective provinces demand 'official English only status' like Quebec.

That's exactly what this topic is trying to convey in discussion is Canada's pandering to Quebecism, homosexualism and Aboriginalism pertaining to cults as a totally unnecessary venture backed by a corrupt charter and a total waste of taxpayers money.

There is no such thing as the provincial right of language control. Making up rights does not prove your argument. The provinces choose their official language(s) for themselves. The federal government chooses Canada's official languages.

Your "fact" about Quebec and the World Wars has nothing to do with anything in this topic. The examples I gave indicate that your logic was flawed. National policies are set without having every province set the same policy. This includes the existence of the Canadian military, international treaties, etc.

This is at least the third time I have had to correct your assumption that there are no provinces in Canada that are officially English only. Here is one example (Ontario):

English is Ontario's official language

Once again you have avoided my question about how the Charter has given Aboriginal people an advantage. Please feel free to answer that question at any time.

(a) The provincial right of language is what you are describing that the province itself can declare a language for that particular province, that is a 'provincially officially language' SEPARATE from the FEDERAL OFFICAL LANGUAGES being ENGLISH and FRENCH which is only applicable under federal ENTITIES.

( National policies are national policies and if Quebec wishes to default not much can be done. this of course if government chooses to hold a referendum on whether or not to retain provinces that do not abide by national policies. What's the sense of being part of country when a certain province thinks its a country.

© Ontario is not a PROVINCIALLY designated a 'officially English province' like Quebec designated itself provincially 'officially French'.

I am surprised though that the website you linked to that says " English is Ontario's official language" is extremely DECEIVING and Premier Dalton Mc.Guinty should be held accountable for the publishing of this FALSE information. Ontario uses one of Canada's federal 'official languages' as the majority language but is NOT provincially designated as 'provincially officially English', it has NO official provincial language.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario

(d) The aboriginal issue like the Quebec issue benefits from charter equalization and regional disparities and bouncing charter rights of one or another forming a minority power hold over Canadian society at large.

Canada is presently supporting the country of Canada and two independent solitudes depriving the country of needed financial resources.

IMO 'The Charter of Rights and Freedoms' or more specifically parts covering 'official multiculturalism', Quebec and the Aboriginals are a weapon against Canadian society aimed at the destruction of English Canada by ways of a corrupt transfer of power utilizing this initially Liberal invented charter.

Just look at the 'official bilingualism' policy in the federal government and how it has been expanded since its initiation to present times and continues to dominate the federal public service outside of French Quebec, with no limits or control over the federal powers it utilizes to accomplish this.

[jbg]

This is at least the third time I have had to correct your assumption that there are no provinces in Canada that are officially English only. Here is one example (Ontario):

English is Ontario's official language

Once again you have avoided my question about how the Charter has given Aboriginal people an advantage. Please feel free to answer that question at any time.

Your link, Your link on language(Ontario), is out of context:

English is Ontario's official language, although French language rights have been extended to the legal and educational systems. There are entire communities where French is as easily spoken as English, thanks to their French-Canadian history.

[bk59]

Your link, Your link on language(Ontario), is out of context:

English is Ontario's official language, although French language rights have been extended to the legal and educational systems. There are entire communities where French is as easily spoken as English, thanks to their French-Canadian history.

Leafless said there are no provinces that are officially English only. My link was just to show otherwise. While Ontario does extend some French language rights, the official Ontario website lists English as Ontario's official language. I don't really think that's out of context. English is still the only official language mentioned.

[geoffrey]

bk is right. New Brunswick is the only offically bilingual province.

[bk59]

(a) The provincial right of language is what you are describing that the province itself can declare a language for that particular province, that is a 'provincially officially language' SEPARATE from the FEDERAL OFFICAL LANGUAGES being ENGLISH and FRENCH which is only applicable under federal ENTITIES.

Look, my point was simply this: the federal government has declared English and French the official languages of Canada. Your assertion (in post #32) that they are not Canada's official languages is flat out wrong.

© Ontario is not a PROVINCIALLY designated a 'officially English province' like Quebec designated itself provincially 'officially French'.

I am surprised though that the website you linked to that says " English is Ontario's official language" is extremely DECEIVING and Premier Dalton Mc.Guinty should be held accountable for the publishing of this FALSE information. Ontario uses one of Canada's federal 'official languages' as the majority language but is NOT provincially designated as 'provincially officially English', it has NO official provincial language.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario

So you're taking wikipedia as a source over the official Ontario website? That seems a bit backwards. Even if you only choose to believe wikipedia then maybe you can explain why it lists some provinces as officially English only?

Alberta

Newfoundland and Labrador

Prince Edward Island

Saskatchewan

Maybe it would be better to just give up your claim that no provinces are officially English only.

(d) The aboriginal issue like the Quebec issue benefits from charter equalization and regional disparities and bouncing charter rights of one or another forming a minority power hold over Canadian society at large.

Canada is presently supporting the country of Canada and two independent solitudes depriving the country of needed financial resources.

IMO 'The Charter of Rights and Freedoms' or more specifically parts covering 'official multiculturalism', Quebec and the Aboriginals are a weapon against Canadian society aimed at the destruction of English Canada by ways of a corrupt transfer of power utilizing this initially Liberal invented charter.

You haven't answered the question about how the Charter gives Aboriginal peoples extra rights that make them superior to other Canadians. You have just written some nonsense here.

1. Point to a place in the Charter that gives Aboriginals extra rights.

2. Show how these rights give this minority group power over Canadian society.

3. What are you talking about when you say there is a "corrupt transfer of power"? What power are you talking about? Where is it coming from? Where is it being transferred to? How is it corrupt?

4. What are you talking about when you say "bouncing charter rights of one or another"?

[cybercoma]

theloniusfleabag

So to sum it up, Quebec, homosexuals, Aboriginals, atheist, new mass immigration with all their baggage, are all riding the same gravy train screwing up an existing established society, all benefiting from that HOLY GOVERNMENT BIBLE, the CHARTER of RIGHTS and FREEDOMS. All of this, thanks primarily to Quebec.

This at the same time of course is depleting the resources of the tax payers of Canada, putting them in the poor house while corporations rub their hands with glee, with the influx of refugees and assisted immigrants all ready to spend their free government dollars on their products.

I have a feeling and it won't be all that long hopefully, that this country will collapse under the weight of its own STUPITY, when then we could possibly all become U.S. citizens, HOPEFULLY.

Please illustrate how atheism is depleting the resources of the taxpayers anymore than the Churches that get a free ride a la tax-exemption.