PQ's charter of values

421 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist

Bärlüer wrote:

lagatta wrote:

That is quite something, as the FTQ has always been a staunch PQ supporter.

I heard just 8 protestors.

8 protestors against what?

I believe lagatta was referring to my other post about the Concordia debate today.

DaveW

just back from Europe, where these debates are all the rage,  including for example Italian-speaking canton on Switzerland voting against public wearing of extensive veils;

in France, centre-right thinking on identity politics gaining ground the upper hand in national debate:

http://www.lepoint.fr/politique/alain-finkielkraut-etre-francais-ce-n-est-pas-etre-une-composante-de-la-diversite-10-10-2013-1744071_20.php

www.lepoint.fr

 

 

Unionist

Maria Mourani says in a letter issued today that she is no longer an independentist - that federalism is the best way to protect minority rights - and indeed "Québec identity".

Here it is in someone's dropbox:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9vk38kel5eonpq4/Lettre%20Maria%20Mourani_18%20...

 

theleftyinvestor

Thanks, was an interesting read.

Of course she would not be able to jump to the NDP. Not without re-running in an election, and even then the optics of taking a BQ refugee might hurt the NDP across the country, so it seems like a long shot.

I wonder how well she's gotten to know Elizabeth May over in the little-party corner of the House? :P

Unionist

Don't write off the Liberal Party. They'll take anyone.

 

WyldRage

Duceppe about Mourani:

Il a soutenu que Maria Mourani lui avait demandé, en 2006, de revoir la position du Bloc québécois sur la reconnaissance du génocide arménien sous prétexte que «les Arméniens votent libéral et les Turcs (appuyaient Mme Mourani)».

«C'est pas comme ça qu'on doit faire de la politique. Quand on est prêt à reconsidérer un génocide (parce que) les gens votent libéral, c'est pas des principes très élevés, c'est le moins qu'on puisse dire», a ironisé Gilles Duceppe.

Translation:

He argued that Maria Mourani asked him in 2006 to review the Bloc's position on recognition of the Armenian genocide under the pretext that "the Armenians vote Liberal and Turks (supported Ms. Mourani)."

"This is not how we should do politics. When you are ready to reconsider genocide (because) people vote Liberal is not very high principles, it is the least we can say, "quipped Gilles Duceppe.

Source: http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/politique-canadienne/201312/19/01-4722547-duceppe-fustige-la-logique-tortueuse-de-mourani.php

Had I known that during the BQ leadership race, I certainly wouldn't have voted for her! NDP or Liberals, I guess she'll wait to see where the wind blows. 

 

cco

Couillard: Liberals support ‘most’ of the charter

Quote:

“To all those who come here to profit from our freedoms and our democracy to then attack and ultimately destroy, we say loud and clear: ‘You are not welcome here. We will fight you. We will prosecute you without letting up.’ ”

As an example of unacceptable behaviour, Couillard referred to Lev Tahor, the extremist Jewish sect whose members are alleged to have abused their children.

“We know very well, don’t be naive,” he added. “We know very well that there exist nebulous groups, we can say, international terrorists who are interested in our country.”

If the parties had been reversed, tomorrow's headline in the Gazette would read:

MAROIS: JEWS "INTERNATIONAL TERRORISTS"

cco

Newly released documents detail Lev Tahor abuse allegations

Quote:

Chris Knowles, lawyer for the family, is attempting to get the case dismissed and says it infringes on the members’ Charter rights.

“If you’re going to take these kids away from this community, how are you respecting their religious rights?” said Knowles. “They have rights that are enumerated under that act. The cultural, spiritual rights, and we have to respect those rights.”

Yes. The children have "religious, spiritual, and cultural" rights to be abused by their parents until they all have fungal infections. We all know that these 5-year-olds freely chose to be part of a sect that even most Haredi consider extreme. Sending them to foster care would take away their freedom. Way to go, (1982) Charter.

Matthieu

Mesdames et messieurs, here is the new position of the main anti-charter party in Québec, the PLQ:

- Niqabs and Burqas are banned for everyone giving and receiving state services (by principle of having the face visible).

- The Chador is banned, but only for teachers and child-care workers.

- Case by case for other symbols and other jobs.

Source, in French, here: http://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/societe/2014/01/15/002-audiences-pu...

Am I the only one who thinks that the liberal position makes no sense? That it is based on no principle, except whatever their leader's current humeur is?

Unionist

Matthieu wrote:

- Niqabs and Burqas are banned for everyone giving and receiving state services (by principle of having the face visible).

This part is old news.. Charest's government introduced Bill 94 almost 4 years ago, but it died on the order paper. The only opposition to it in the Assemblée was from parties who thought it didn't go far enough in implementing Bouchard-Taylor or otherwise. There is no significant voice on the Québec political scene which can be heard opposing this - just stating an empirical fact.

Quote:
- The Chador is banned, but only for teachers and child-care workers.

This is new, and the result obviously of the [url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/fatima-houda-pepin-breaks-liberal... Houda-Pépin[/url] affair, which embarrassed Couillard - and he improvised a "solution".

Quote:
- Case by case for other symbols and other jobs.

And this is so he can leave the door open to the next embarrassment that needs to be improvised.

Quote:
Am I the only one who thinks that the liberal position makes no sense? That it is based on no principle, except whatever their leader's current humeur is?

No - there are at least two of us. Smile

ETA: By the way - did anyone catch Françoise David on RDI today talking about the start of the Commission hearings and the overall issue? She was calm, convincing, and brilliant.

The essence of her intervention is on the [url=http://www.quebecsolidaire.net/projet-de-loi-60-sur-la-laicite-au-dela-d... website today[/url].

 

cco

After kicking Fatima Houda-Pépin out of caucus, the Liberals have finally come out with their official charter position: All religious symbols are OK except for some Muslim ones. Got it.

mark_alfred

Apparently the Current is going to be in Montreal and talking about this on Tues Jan 28th 7pm.  link

DaveW

cco wrote:
After kicking Fatima Houda-Pépin out of caucus, the Liberals have finally come out with their official charter position: All religious symbols are OK except for some Muslim ones. Got it.

recall of course that Fatima Houda-Pépin was the hardliner in the caucus -- leaning toward fuller bans and restrictions, esp. on the most extensive female body cloaking, and that is the common factor here

DaveW

a backgrounder in l'Actualité on intercultural misunderstanding that  Montreal city councillor Alex Norris today calls the best on the subject:

http://www.lactualite.com/actualites/politique/les-pineault-caron-et-le-...

 

 

cco
cco

Houda-Pépin introduces her own secular charter bill

The only thing of note, other than a clause that would prevent parents from opting their children out of classes for religious reasons, is that she thinks it should take a 2/3 supermajority vote to remove the crucifix. The Gazette calls her bill "tough", no doubt in preparation to eventually support it once the Liberals change their position again.

Matthieu

It begs the question: what was so terrible in that bill that the liberals needed to kick her out of their caucus? The ban for people in coercitive authority? Or was it removing the crucifix from the National Assembly (which the liberals oppose because it will "win them votes")? 

Unionist

All the more so, given that even Thomas Mulcair has publicly supported the Bouchard-Taylor recommendations, which are hard to distinguish from her bill.

Unionist

The Quebec Federation of Labour generally supports the direction of the Charter (in particular, formalizing secularism within various pieces of legislation) but not the restrictions on wearing religious signs. That's the upshot of their appearance at today's commission hearings. They issued a [url=http://www.newswire.ca/fr/story/1304977/charte-des-valeurs-de-laicite-se... release[/url] to that effect.

 

 

cco

New York MTA plans to remove its requirement that workers who wear turbans place an MTA logo on it

Now, see, why didn't Marois think of that? You can wear a niqab on the job, as long as it has a fleur-de-lys on it. Problem solved.

Pages