Simple question here. Are Sections 29 and 16 to 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms just a grab for entitlements from Canada's religious and ethnic majorities?
Simple question here. Are Sections 29 and 16 to 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms just a grab for entitlements from Canada's religious and ethnic majorities?
Are you saying that those people in Canada of certain religious affiliation and/or cultural heritage are to be without rights?
Damn. So much for my right to fill out my driving license paperwork in Klingon.
Are you saying that those religious communities not mentioned in Section 29 are without rights?
And what about those not covered under Section 23?
Damn. So much for my right to fill out my driving license paperwork in Klingon.
I want to live in a country that's officially bilingual in English and Pirate. The stopsigns would say:No
What about them?
Not only is it your right, you are also entitled to have an army of Klingon translators follow you around to translate you every wish and desire to the community at large
Are you saying that those religious communities not mentioned in Section 29 are without rights?
And what about those not covered under Section 23?
Would have been nice to have a link and the artifices posted.
Or repost the thread, beg The Big L to delete thisun.
What about them?]/quote]
Well, if their rights aren't infringed by not being included, then ours should'nt be infringed by removing Section 23, right?
Not only is it your right, you are also entitled to have an army of Klingon translators follow you around to translate you every wish and desire to the community at large
Where does it say that in the Constitution? The closest I can see to that effect is Section 23 that guarantees that even if you're an English-Canadian living in Quebec city, you stil have a right to send your child to school in English, and same for a French-Canadian in Victoria.
Makes it easier is all.The Charter isnt all that hard to look up.
I want to live in a country that's officially bilingual in English and Pirate. The stopsigns would say:
STOP
Arrr, matey, back yer tops'ls
So then removing Section 23 should not infringe on anyone's rights but only unfair entitlements, right?
Well, if their rights aren't infringed by not being included, then ours should'nt be infringed by removing Section 23, right?
Would have been nice to have a link and the articles posted.
Or repost the thread, beg The Big L to delete thisun.
Are they bitching about it?
If not, then it might be only you that is all up in arms aboot it