Harper Assisting in Sovereignty: Duceppe

NaturalLemonFlavour

New Member
Mar 17, 2006
44
0
6
Toronto, Ontario
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms pretty much put Canada on the map, in terms of human rights back then. Before 1982 (the year of its creation), there were numerous disgusting, foul acts done, by both the government and the public. The Charter was created to prevent these from happening. Without the Charter, no one would have any obligation to refrain from racism.

Examples of things the Charter was designed to prevent:

1. In 1858: Chinese "coolies" were paid pennies, many of them dying on the job, to work on the Canadian Pacific Railway. They were not allowed to vote, or retain citizenship. They were basically slaves.

2. During the 1880's, "head taxes" were placed on Chinese immigrants in a veiled effort to stop them from immigrating to Canada. There was no reason for this, save xenophobia.

3. The Chinese Immigration Act of 1923, which basically banned immigration from China for no other reason besides xenophobia. Approximately six Chinese immigrants arrived during the time period this Bill was in place.

4. In 1907, a riot occured in Vancouver, targetting Chinese and Japanese stores. The Vancouver Police Departmentdid nothing.

5. Asian-Canadians were banned from voting up until 1947. That is a mere 60 years ago.

6. During WWII, many Japanese Canadians were forced into atrocious internment camps, and not compensated for being put through this ordeal for years. To this day, compensation has not been received for the discrimination put in place against Chinese Canadians decades ago.

7. To this very day, Aboriginal Affairs are largely dictated by a bill called the Indian Affairs Act, which is largely considered racist, but has been amended. Before 1960, and Aboriginal person would be required to give up his afforded rights in order to vote. I can't find any information on the schools they forced Aboriginal children through, but I do recall learning from my history textbook that they were frequently beaten, forced to conform to Canadian (read: white British) society norms, and were largely responsible for the loss of Aboriginal culture.

8. Up until The Rt. Hon. Joseph Philippe Pierre Yves Elliott Trudeau's, P.C., C.C., C.H., Q.C., M.A., L.L.D., F.R.S.Cterm as Minister of Justice, being homosexual was illegal. The Charter was not introduced until his term as Prime Minister, I believe. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, as Five noted above, the Charter guarantees freedom of speech, and democratic rights to EVERYONE. Something a lot of people didn't have "way back then"


:!: I couldn't restrain myself. I had to use color. :p Copyright belongs to FiveParadox, I know. Sue me.

EDIT: Hey, it doesn't look right... Oh, I have to bold it.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Excellent points, NaturalLemonFlavour. I don't think I could have put any of it better myself!

:!: Motion

I, Christopher Girodat, also known as FiveParadox on Canadian Content, do move that NaturalLemonFlavour be now appointed the Deputy Minister of Post Formatting and Deputy Minister Responsible for the Status of Colours.

The motion is deemed to have been adopted.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Jay, would you contend that the rights and freedoms contained within the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are not necessary for a free and democratic society? If not, then what are your arguments, if any, in opposition to the retention of the Charter?

:!: Revision : Corrected a typo.
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
I do, but I'm trying to understand why your leaving the better half of common law out of the argument....I know Five is 18, but I don't know how old you are and if you can understand life before the 80's.

None of these issues were solved because of the Charter.

What seems to be happening here is a complete disregard for common law (boarder lining dismissing it's existence) and suggesting citizens of Canada were without rather basic human rights pre 1982. It isn't true. How could it be?
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Basic human rights were guaranteed to whatever degree the ineffectual Canadian Bill of Rights could ensure — however, the leiglsation was difficult to implement and did not have the authority to strike down legislation to protect whomever's rights were being infringed upon. Moreover, rights could be added to or removed from that legislation with a simple Act of Parliament as opposed to the comprehensive constitutional amendment process — and before the Bill of Rights, rights and freedoms in Canada were not guaranteed in legislation whatsoever, to my knowledge.
 

NaturalLemonFlavour

New Member
Mar 17, 2006
44
0
6
Toronto, Ontario
Re: RE: Harper Assisting in Sovereignty: Duceppe

Jay said:
I do, but I'm trying to understand why your leaving the better half of common law out of the argument....I know Five is 18, but I don't know how old you are and if you can understand life before the 80's.

I'm not leaving the "better half of common law" out of the argument. Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but I just don't know why you're advocating the repeal of the Charter. Admittedly, yes: the concept behind the Charter could be covered by common law, but common law is flexible and wishy-washy, and subject to the whim of the Government of Canada in power. Quite honestly, I want human rights, and democratic rights to be firm and inflexible, and a foundation, upon which all the OTHER laws are built.

And no, I wasn't alive during the 80's, so most of my understanding of the issues before then come from my parents, grandparents, seniors at the home my great grandmother is staying at, and textbooks.

None of these issues were solved because of the Charter.

Really? It seems to me that NONE of those issues would ever happen again... and if they did, there was legal grounds for prosecution.

What seems to be happening here is a complete disregard for common law (boarder lining dismissing it's existence) and suggesting citizens of Canada were without rather basic human rights pre 1982. It isn't true. How could it be?

I just provided you with many examples of how many groups were without basic democratic (not sure about human) rights. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms assures them it. Doesn't it? Why bother abolishing it?
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
NaturalLemonFlavour said:
1. In 1858: Chinese "coolies" were paid pennies, many of them dying on the job, to work on the Canadian Pacific Railway. They were not allowed to vote, or retain citizenship. They were basically slaves.

Clearly this was not solved by any "Charter". They weren't citizens and weren't afforded the same rights as citizens. The BNA act was written in 1867, so 1858 is about as far out there as you could ever reach for a Charter argument.

NaturalLemonFlavour said:
2. During the 1880's, "head taxes" were placed on Chinese immigrants in a veiled effort to stop them from immigrating to Canada. There was no reason for this, save xenophobia. .

3. The Chinese Immigration Act of 1923, which basically banned immigration from China for no other reason besides xenophobia. Approximately six Chinese immigrants arrived during the time period this Bill was in place.

Xenophobia wasn't outlawed by the Charter. Nor was whether or not the government would accept a particular immigrant or if they would charge that person money. How could the Charter apply to people outside its jurisdiction? Perhaps it's just my theory on the abilities of documents like the Charter, but they apply to the citizens of the country, not the entire world.

NaturalLemonFlavour said:
4. In 1907, a riot occured in Vancouver, targetting Chinese and Japanese stores. The Vancouver Police Departmentdid nothing.

It has always been against the law to riot and bust up stuff....no Charter needed here. Cops not doing their job, nothing new, Charter didn't stop that either.

NaturalLemonFlavour said:
5. Asian-Canadians were banned from voting up until 1947. That is a mere 60 years ago.

So the citizen laws were diffent back then....didn't seem to take the Charter to end it.

NaturalLemonFlavour said:
6. During WWII, many Japanese Canadians were forced into atrocious internment camps, and not compensated for being put through this ordeal for years. To this day, compensation has not been received for the discrimination put in place against Chinese Canadians decades ago.

And on this one you might be right to a certain extent, as I don't know the status of these people necessarily so I can’t seriously comment on it, but what I would say is if all hell broke loose with Japan etc, and martial law wasn't in effect (or however that works), would we round them up again? I seriously doubt it, so my argument is the Charter isn't necessary to protect those rights today.

They didn't just dream up those rights in the Charter you know.

NaturalLemonFlavour said:
7. To this very day, Aboriginal Affairs are largely dictated by a bill called the Indian Affairs Act, which is largely considered racist, but has been amended. Before 1960, and Aboriginal person would be required to give up his afforded rights in order to vote. I can't find any information on the schools they forced Aboriginal children through, but I do recall learning from my history textbook that they were frequently beaten, forced to conform to Canadian (read: white British) society norms, and were largely responsible for the loss of Aboriginal culture.

Yes we know the plight of Natives, and we know it extended far before the formation of Canada....rights won pre Charter have no bearing on the argument "we need the Charter"; rights after perhaps.

NaturalLemonFlavour said:
8. Up until The Rt. Hon. Joseph Philippe Pierre Yves Elliott Trudeau's, P.C., C.C., C.H., Q.C., M.A., L.L.D., F.R.S.Cterm as Minister of Justice, being homosexual was illegal. The Charter was not introduced until his term as Prime Minister, I believe. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Is the repeal of those laws specifically tied to the Charter?