(no subject)
Jan. 19th, 2006 01:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
theweaselkingSo, Stephen Harper is warning about those "activist judges", enforcing those damn dirty "civil rights".
I've got a quote for you from Keith Fountain, CPC would-be MP for Ottawa Centre:
See the weasel-words? The clause's only purpose is to allow the government to pass laws that violate section 2 or sections 7-15 of the Charter. Those would be freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association. It includes your rights to life, liberty, and security of the person. It includes your right to be free from arbitrary detention, your right to a trial, your right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, and your guarantee of equal treatment under the law, among others. Section 1 explicitly sets out the limit of those rights, and so Section 33 is only invoked when the violation of your rights is manifestly and demonstrably UNJUSTIFIABLE in "a free and democratic society."
And the CPC feels that this ability, to pass laws that infringe on your rights in ways that *explicitly* cannot be "justified in a free and democratic society", is something they need to PROTECT you from the courts who want to enforce that every person has these rights.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The CPC are the Reform party, redone. They're still white supremacists and religious nutbars, and the fact that they've *gagged* most of the idiots during this election while doing their best to *not* answer the question "So, is your opinion the same now as it was a mere six fucking months ago?" doesn't change that.
==============
PS: Dan Savage points out the obvious: Harper's re-imaging of himself is IDENTICAL to Bush's re-imaging of himself, and you know how well THAT turned out.
I've got a quote for you from Keith Fountain, CPC would-be MP for Ottawa Centre:
I support the continuance of the notwithstanding clause which I deem
essential to maintain a balance in the Constitution between an elected
Parliament and unelected courts. The clause is part of our Charter of
Rights and Freedoms for a reason.
See the weasel-words? The clause's only purpose is to allow the government to pass laws that violate section 2 or sections 7-15 of the Charter. Those would be freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association. It includes your rights to life, liberty, and security of the person. It includes your right to be free from arbitrary detention, your right to a trial, your right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, and your guarantee of equal treatment under the law, among others. Section 1 explicitly sets out the limit of those rights, and so Section 33 is only invoked when the violation of your rights is manifestly and demonstrably UNJUSTIFIABLE in "a free and democratic society."
And the CPC feels that this ability, to pass laws that infringe on your rights in ways that *explicitly* cannot be "justified in a free and democratic society", is something they need to PROTECT you from the courts who want to enforce that every person has these rights.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The CPC are the Reform party, redone. They're still white supremacists and religious nutbars, and the fact that they've *gagged* most of the idiots during this election while doing their best to *not* answer the question "So, is your opinion the same now as it was a mere six fucking months ago?" doesn't change that.
==============
PS: Dan Savage points out the obvious: Harper's re-imaging of himself is IDENTICAL to Bush's re-imaging of himself, and you know how well THAT turned out.