Conservatives Don't Understand Freedom
Nov. 23rd, 2006 10:52 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mbarrick
When you pick up a gun and commit a crime you lose your right to be free.Nice sentiment, sure to get support from the backwater rednecks and easily the panicked sorts that elect these fascists.
From now on the justice system will stop giving you the benefit of the doubt and send you to jail for a long time.— Stephen Harper
What they are talking about here, hiding it behind the newspeak "reverse onus", is eliminating the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" and replacing it with a presumption of guilt. Much like the Americans doing away with habeas corpus, this flies in the face of the fundamental qualities that differentiate free countries from authoritarian tyrannies.
Section 11(d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms states states pretty damn clearly: "Any person charged with an offence has the right ... to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal".
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-11-24 07:31 am (UTC)"It's starting to look like apartheid!"
Date: 2006-11-24 03:06 pm (UTC)I know, I know - but how many vote with their own riding in mind and not with a view as to who will make the PM job?
but your reasoning is the perfect reason to vote for any other party
Not sure what you mean by there except for simple, blind sarcasm?
As for the issue of Quebec, I have no problem with Quebec itself being a French-only province within the constraints of federalism, but to be recognised as some sort of "first-amongst-equals" could set a dangerous precident. Everyone else will then want the same recognition; next all the Injuns will want to be recognised as a *nation* on the same level of benefit as Quebec, etc. At that point, if we've not become one sooner, we've thus become an apartheid state, the difference being it's based on one's culture. Is that what you want?
Re: "It's starting to look like apartheid!"
Date: 2006-11-24 03:38 pm (UTC)Re: "It's starting to look like apartheid!"
Date: 2006-11-24 04:21 pm (UTC)Yes - my thoughts exactly. It comes across as being nothing more than an attempt to win votes in that province.
and to be honest the first nations have a more legitimate claim to nation status than does quebec
Between Quebec and the Native Indians, yes I would also say the Indians have a much stronger claim. But then again, I look at both groups as being conquered peoples. If we start giving Quebec and Native Indians special recognition, then we have to do the same with Anglo-Canadians (because they/we are also a key component in the formation and heritage of Canada) but I really don't see that happening. There'd be such a huge public outcry - so granted, if so... then why not the same outcry for Quebec and Indians as well? After all, we're all suppose to be equal, aren't we?
Re: "It's starting to look like apartheid!"
Date: 2006-11-24 04:26 pm (UTC)Re: "It's starting to look like apartheid!"
Date: 2006-11-24 05:23 pm (UTC)Agreed, my observation as well. It'll have much more effect in the East but practically none here in the West. Quebec by an large is a non-issue in BC.
Re: "It's starting to look like apartheid!"
Date: 2006-11-24 03:39 pm (UTC)