kelownabomberfan Posted October 4, 2015 Report Share Posted October 4, 2015 The slippery slope argument is moot. Wearing a niqab at a citizenship ceremony will not lead to the legalization of beatings in the name of religion because of S.1. in our Charter. That's not a silly answer, it is a legal fact. I don't want to say much more either, other than to say that I heartily disagree with the above statement. First of all, I've seen enough rulings and law practiced in Canada to know that the term "legal fact" is about as big an oxymoron as it gets. Second, saying that the slope isn't slippery simply because it won't lead to beatings is in my opinion just plain choosing to focus on small worst case scenario, and ignoring the giant elephant in the room. In fact, your comment displays to me a willingness to be deliberately obtuse, in that while you accuse other Canadians of not being educated, it is you and others here that are not willing to educate yourself about the bigger picture, and what is happening in the world right now. Men being allowed to discipline their wives as they see fit under Sharia Law is a small part of a much bigger issue, and a much bigger slope that is extremely slippery. That's wonderful that a woman is protected in Canada under S.1 of the charter. Great. But Sharia Law is so much more than that. In an effort to be super-tolerant-liberals who want to appear as enlightened as possible to their fellow liberals, other western nations have allowed sharia law to creep into their legal structure, and as such, "legal facts" as you call them have already become much murkier, as the sense of what constitutes religious freedoms is constantly being tested versus what other values are held dear by our society. Have a look at Britain sometime. They've already allowed Sharia Law to be allowed for Islamic disputes in some cases, and the BBC has been reporting that SURPRISE, women are being screwed over in divorce cases. But hey, let's not talk about any slippery slopes, and just focus on worst-case scenarios. To say that there is no slippery slope because Canada won't allow beatings or honor-killings is disingenuous. But that being said, I don't believe that the niquab being worn in a citizenship ceremony matters. That also being said, after having seen what is happening in Europe, in the name of "tolerance", leads me to believe that there is something to be worried about, and just calling people ignorant and bigots, or even saying that they aren't educated, by people who don't seem to want to educate themselves either, is not acceptable either. There is a middle ground, in which everyone's concerns should be listened to, and fully understood, without name-calling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Arbitration_Tribunal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCB Posted October 4, 2015 Report Share Posted October 4, 2015 The slippery slope argument is moot. Wearing a niqab at a citizenship ceremony will not lead to the legalization of beatings in the name of religion because of S.1. in our Charter. That's not a silly answer, it is a legal fact. I don't want to say much more either, other than to say that I heartily disagree with the above statement. First of all, I've seen enough rulings and law practiced in Canada to know that the term "legal fact" is about as big an oxymoron as it gets. Second, saying that the slope isn't slippery simply because it won't lead to beatings is in my opinion just plain choosing to focus on small worst case scenario, and ignoring the giant elephant in the room. In fact, your comment displays to me a willingness to be deliberately obtuse, in that while you accuse other Canadians of not being educated, it is you and others here that are not willing to educate yourself about the bigger picture, and what is happening in the world right now. Men being allowed to discipline their wives as they see fit under Sharia Law is a small part of a much bigger issue, and a much bigger slope that is extremely slippery. That's wonderful that a woman is protected in Canada under S.1 of the charter. Great. But Sharia Law is so much more than that. In an effort to be super-tolerant-liberals who want to appear as enlightened as possible to their fellow liberals, other western nations have allowed sharia law to creep into their legal structure, and as such, "legal facts" as you call them have already become much murkier, as the sense of what constitutes religious freedoms is constantly being tested versus what other values are held dear by our society. Have a look at Britain sometime. They've already allowed Sharia Law to be allowed for Islamic disputes in some cases, and the BBC has been reporting that SURPRISE, women are being screwed over in divorce cases. But hey, let's not talk about any slippery slopes, and just focus on worst-case scenarios. To say that there is no slippery slope because Canada won't allow beatings or honor-killings is disingenuous. But that being said, I don't believe that the niquab being worn in a citizenship ceremony matters. That also being said, after having seen what is happening in Europe, in the name of "tolerance", leads me to believe that there is something to be worried about, and just calling people ignorant and bigots, or even saying that they aren't educated, by people who don't seem to want to educate themselves either, is not acceptable either. There is a middle ground, in which everyone's concerns should be listened to, and fully understood, without name-calling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Arbitration_Tribunal I challenge you to go ask any lawyer you know versed in the Charter. They will say the case of beatings is already settled for the reason I mentioned. I also referenced beatings because that is the example you cited. Admittedly, I don't know anything about what is going in the UK regarding sharia law, but I did read the wikipedia article you reference and it says these tribunals are not legally recognized: "The Muslim Arbitration Tribunal has no powers to grant a divorce which is valid in English and Welsh law. A talaq can be granted to recognise divorce. A sharia marriage has no bearing on personal status under UK law. The Muslim Arbitration Tribunal has no jurisdiction on criminal matters but can attempt reconciliation between spouses." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted October 4, 2015 Report Share Posted October 4, 2015 It's not working against the cons lol The problem with political discussions is opposing sides are too entrenched and arguments they'd use to support their positions they ridicule if used to support the other side Usually trend to the lowest common denominator. However there are some good points in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraser Posted October 4, 2015 Report Share Posted October 4, 2015 It's not working against the cons lol The problem with political discussions is opposing sides are too entrenched and arguments they'd use to support their positions they ridicule if used to support the other side Usually trend to the lowest common denominator. However there are some good points in this thread. Really? Seems to be firmly in second now don't they? #peoplelikenenshi was in support of the cons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark H. Posted October 4, 2015 Report Share Posted October 4, 2015 If nothing else, it's going to be the most interesting election we've had in years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcin94 Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 Admittedly, I don't know anything about what is going in the UK regarding sharia law, but I did read the wikipedia article you reference and it says these tribunals are not legally recognized: "The Muslim Arbitration Tribunal has no powers to grant a divorce which is valid in English and Welsh law. A talaq can be granted to recognise divorce. A sharia marriage has no bearing on personal status under UK law. The Muslim Arbitration Tribunal has no jurisdiction on criminal matters but can attempt reconciliation between spouses." I recommend looking at news reports coming out of Europe as opposed to stuff coming out of the CBC and ask yourself whether you want that happening here. kelownabomberfan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcin94 Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 I find it odd at people saying "Harper is using the Niqab issue ..." From my recollection, none of this was an issue. Harper went to courts and lost which is nothing new. Nobody really cared. Then some smuggler father put his wife and kids in a ricketty boat and his poor son washed up on shore. Media went crazy. Countries went crazy. Then an NDP MP claimed that he informed the Cons about a sponsership about the boy earlier (denied by the boy's family) to blame the cons. Then everyone jumped on the Cons hate Muslims bandwagon and then these stories about Cons fighting the Nijab came out. Then all of a sudden, people opened their eyes about the "Syrian refugees" in Europe, and started to support the Cons stance on the issue. Where did the Cons start this whole situation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark H. Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 The hijab issue is not necessarily connected to the refugee issue. The hijab issue should not even be an issue - people are identified before they swear the citizenship oath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcin94 Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 The hijab issue is not necessarily connected to the refugee issue. The hijab issue should not even be an issue - people are identified before they swear the citizenship oath. While they are not directly connected, they both came about the same way. Conservatives are racists and hate muslims. Here is your proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark H. Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 The hijab issue is not necessarily connected to the refugee issue. The hijab issue should not even be an issue - people are identified before they swear the citizenship oath. While they are not directly connected, they both came about the same way. Conservatives are racists and hate muslims. Here is your proof. I never said that, nor would I ever. But the hijab issue is a despicable thing to raise as an election wedge issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcin94 Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 The hijab issue is not necessarily connected to the refugee issue. The hijab issue should not even be an issue - people are identified before they swear the citizenship oath. While they are not directly connected, they both came about the same way. Conservatives are racists and hate muslims. Here is your proof. I never said that, nor would I ever. But the hijab issue is a despicable thing to raise as an election wedge issue. While I do agree, the assertion that it was the Cons who brought it up is my point. It wasn't the cons who brought it up, and so disgust over it is being pointed in the wrong direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcin94 Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 The hijab issue is not necessarily connected to the refugee issue. The hijab issue should not even be an issue - people are identified before they swear the citizenship oath. While they are not directly connected, they both came about the same way. Conservatives are racists and hate muslims. Here is your proof. I never said that, nor would I ever. But the hijab issue is a despicable thing to raise as an election wedge issue. BTW if you thought I was saying you thought the Conservatives are racist and hate muslims, I apologize for the unclear wording. I meant it was brought up by the opposition in that light (albeit, likely not in the same words) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 Media goes nuts, blames cons. Breaking news. Lol Anyway.... In other news @680CJOB: BREAKING: Reports a deal has been reached on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. News conference scheduled for 8 a.m. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 This must be the polling Fraser was talking about. I hadnt seen til this morning The latest nightly tracking by Nanos Research for CTV News and the Globe and Mail shows the Liberals trending up, the NDP trending down, and the Conservatives holding steady. The numbers, which were released at 6 a.m. on Sunday, Oct. 4, suggest: The Liberals are at 35.3 per cent support nationally The Conservatives are at 31.0 per cent support nationally The NDP is at 24.3 per cent support nationally The Green Party is at 4.5 per cent support nationally **** What the heck happened to the NDP? What an implosion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 Globe & Mail A broad-cross section of Canadian businesses – from cattle ranchers and grain exporters to small-scale manufacturers – applauded Canada’s signing of the Trans Pacific Partnership, a monumental trade deal that will open up new export opportunities in a number of fast-growing markets along the Pacific Rim. The deal – signed Monday following negotiations that stretched over the weekend between 12 nations representing 40 per cent of global GDP – has the potential to dramatically reshape Canada’s trade landscape. It will gradually reduce steep tariffs on a number of Canadian exports to mature markets such as Japan and Australia, as well as emerging markets such as Malaysia and Vietnam, even as it opens up Canada to imports from those countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 This was funny: @charlesadler: Quebec #CBC host 2 #Mulcair "In Scrabble niqab is a word that's worth 14 points&that's about what you've lost in the polls over it" #elxn42 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark H. Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 What happened to NDP? Mulcair saying he'd block that trade deal really helped their cause. /sarcasm Most unionized industries are heavily dependant on exports. What on earth was he thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 @CBCAlerts: #JustinTrudeau promises $750M increase to post-secondary student grants. More students would qualify, individual amount gets boost. #elxn42 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelownabomberfan Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 What happened to NDP? Mulcair saying he'd block that trade deal really helped their cause. /sarcasm Most unionized industries are heavily dependant on exports. What on earth was he thinking? Mulcair takes his orders from unions, who are the unelected defacto leaders of the NDP. In the past few weeks, this campaign has almost played out like the Unions have been trying to sabotage the campaign to get rid of him, including signing on to the Leap Manifesto, which was the first torpedo into team New Dumb. I would expect by Christmas Mulcair has gravitated back to his natural home, the Liberals, and the NDP go back to their natural state of third place, while electing a much nuttier and even more unelectable leader who will say what they want to hear, which is the usual economy-destroying non-reality-based garbage that appeals to their base, the completely delusional. The Unknown Poster 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelownabomberfan Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 The hijab issue is not necessarily connected to the refugee issue. The hijab issue should not even be an issue - people are identified before they swear the citizenship oath. While they are not directly connected, they both came about the same way. Conservatives are racists and hate muslims. Here is your proof. I never said that, nor would I ever. But the hijab issue is a despicable thing to raise as an election wedge issue. and my wife and her family where horribly offended that Trudeau tried to bring up the abortion issue as a wedge issue. As women, they didn't want a man (and with Trudeau I use that term loosely) re-opening an issue they've been so passionate about solely to create a wedge issue/political football. They waited for the media to report and womens' groups to rage about it, but of course, if it isn't Harper doing it, then it's not a "wedge" issue. A lot of people are so tired of how the Conservatives are held to one standard, while Trudeau can just do whatever he wants, without any repercussions. I too thought that Trudeau babbling away about abortion was wrong. Talk about trying to create a "wedge" issue, that was truly despicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 What a bonehead move by Trudeau to make a policy announcement at the same time the TPP gets signed. I realise he had this scheduled, but he should have pushed back. Knowing Trudeau, he would be asked about the TPP and have no reasonable response anyway. Apparently some news stations showing the JT announcement actually switched coverage in mid-sentence to the PM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 What a bonehead move by Trudeau to make a policy announcement at the same time the TPP gets signed. I realise he had this scheduled, but he should have pushed back. Knowing Trudeau, he would be asked about the TPP and have no reasonable response anyway. Apparently some news stations showing the JT announcement actually switched coverage in mid-sentence to the PM. How could anybody have an opinion about the TPP when no details of the negotiations have been released? Anyway, I think the details of this agreement could be the tipping point of this election that breaks up the logjam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 What a bonehead move by Trudeau to make a policy announcement at the same time the TPP gets signed. I realise he had this scheduled, but he should have pushed back. Knowing Trudeau, he would be asked about the TPP and have no reasonable response anyway. Apparently some news stations showing the JT announcement actually switched coverage in mid-sentence to the PM. How could anybody have an opinion about the TPP when no details of the negotiations have been released? Anyway, I think the details of this agreement could be the tipping point of this election that breaks up the logjam. I would not only assume but expect the leaders to havean opinion, which ofcourse they do. Regardless, a good leader would have an answer. Trudeau might have a great answer, I was being facetious knowing he has been caught unable to answer direct questions in the past. I agree this will dominate the election for awhile. Some online play I've seen has sarcastically remarked that the opposition will accuse Harper of orchestrating this announcement. So I assume the feeling is this would be a positive for the Conservatives. Most of the media coverage has seemingly pointed out the positives. In any event, difficult for anyone to paint the Cons as unable to play with the big boys on the world stage now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 On the surface, this new TPP agreement looks promising, but of course we don't know the details..nor the concessions, so the applause will have to wait..until after the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraser Posted October 5, 2015 Report Share Posted October 5, 2015 sweet, dairy prices don't seem to be going down. I like paying twice what the Americans do for dairy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts