There is an anti-‘Islamophobia’ Liberal Muslim private members Motion in Parliament, presented by a Muslim MP, that would take us one step closer to criminalizing criticism of Islam:
“Canada is on the verge of passing what amounts to Islamic blasphemy laws.
“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Government is quickly proceeding to address unproven increases of “Islamophobia”— and he’s going to do it by curbing the right to free speech.
Continue reading “‘Freedom of Speech and ‘Islamophobia’”
The folly of ‘nations’ within a ‘Nation’ has come home to roost, yet again. Most Canadians have a relatively full life, working, raising families, playing (mostly watching) sports, surfing the Net, etc. One thing most Canadians don’t spend time on is politics. However, disturbing changes to our nation are forcing Canadians to sit up and take notice.
One of the biggest factors in this awakening is the realization that our nation of Canada is now only one of several “nations” within our borders, with the other ‘nations’ also receiving special Constitutional powers. This has created a Constitutional rights hierarchy, rather than equal rights for all Canadians.
It began, of course, with the Quebecois “nation” and has spread like a virus, with new would-be aboriginal “nations” springing up in all corners of our land. Now, it’s even taboo in some circles to refer to Canada as “One Nation”:
“A ‘Parti Quebecois’ leadership candidate is calling on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to retract comments he made referring to Canada as “one nation” in a Canada Day video message.
“Martine Ouellet says the message posted Friday on Trudeau’s official ‘Facebook’ page ignores Quebec’s heritage and status as a ‘nation’. Continue reading “‘nations’ Within A ‘Nation’”
‘Section 15(1)’ of the ‘Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ contains the constitutional guarantee of equality and it states:
‘Equality before and under law, and equal protection and benefit of law’
(1) “Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.” Then, this Principle is immediately undermined by:
‘Affirmative action programs’
(2) “Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.”
The political — and therefore, ‘flexible’ — tool that is subsection (2) means that the Constitutional Principle of Section 15(1) cannot really exist as a ‘Principle’, and merely serves as an inspirational introduction to the court-driven social engineering enabled by subsection (2).
As a result, legal equality of individual Canadian citizens has become a thing of the past. Continue reading “‘The Strange Case of Canadian ‘Legal Equality’”