Conservatives going "McCarthy"

[Donald G]

I will identify some traits that I consider to be Canadian Values;

1. Working toward having all Canadians accept equality between sexes and cultures.
2. Property rights,
3. Security of the person from harm (not always supported by the Criminal Court Judiciary)
4. Everyone is responsible for their own actions, except if a Social Agency has been set up to help. Or other persons, out of a sense of altruism, decides to contribute,
5. The right to pass on to a designated person or persons what you have accumulated.
6. Freedom of religion except if it interferes with the rights of others,
7. Freedom from being imposed into a caste system,
8. Freedom of upward financial mobility and education based on personal effort,
9 Freedom to live a lifestyle of your choice unless it interferes with the rights of others,
10. Freedom to be judged in Court according to reality and not a theoretical interpretation of the laws (presently lacking due to Judicial interpretation of Bill of Rights)
11. Complete separation of Church and State, including Sharia Law or Church Doctrine.
12. Working toward every mother and father being held responsible for their child until the child can fend for itself (presently lacking)
13, Court authorized authority to treat and monitor out of control drug addicts, alcoholics and mental patients through non consensual confinement if necessary (presently lacking due to Judicial interpretation of Canadian Bill of Rights)

[hobbyguy]

We have a Canadian constitution that deals with most of those things.

There is also a constitutional change mechanism for those things you feel are not covered. Unfortunately, you will find that most politicians will avoid the hard work and "political capital" to achieve one. That's why Harper's "tough on crime" efforts foundered upon the rocks of the constitution. (There were some of his ideas in there that I liked, but they were always unconstitutional).

[sooperphreek]

thank god for the constitution then. it is a scary time to live in when people actually consider principles that have been hard fought and won to be "inconvenient". the constitution isnt the problem. and the fundamental laws arent. its politics and lack of justice across the board.
its comments like

"Harper's "tough on crime" efforts foundered upon the rocks of the constitution"

and

"There were some of his ideas in there that I liked, but they were always unconstitutional"

that make me ill and are why i will NEVER support the right.

[hobbyguy]

sooper - we can agree to disagree. Every party has some good ideas.

I happen to think that there are indeed some folks who can not be rehabilitated. And it annoys me when those folks are granted parole into the community on parole even though they have been given "life" sentences, and judged to be "high risk to re-offend". So indeed, I would like to see that kind of thing considered for a limited constitutional change. That process is rigorous and open.

But I do not think that any group of us should attempt to define our version of "Canadian Values" and impose them on others. Especially as those potential immigrants that may pose a threat are already screened out. Beyond that, we should accept and embrace immigrants for who they are.

[sooperphreek]

on immigrants i agree. they are already screened.

[Rwede]

Yup. 97% of Canadians agree with immigrants adopting Canadian values.

multi.jpg

Bingo!

That should be the end of this thread.

97% of Canadians agree. Can Hobbyguy actually argue against that?

[Donald G]

*removed*

[The Green Barbarian]

*removed*

[hobbyguy]

Actually, the primary arguments against a "Canadian Values" code is very easy to make:

1. The only regimes around the world that have such things are not places places you want to live. Generally, they are countries where theocracy is a major theme. Like Iran. Do you really want to see something like "religious police" running about?
2. "Canadian Values" have evolved over time. If, for example, you defined "Canadian Values" and enforced them in 1850, you would have British Imperialist views of the world as "Canadian Values". Things like anti-Irish sentiments. http://www.victoriana.com/history/irish-political-cartoons.html Things like women could not vote. Those values (and many others of the time) do not reflect current "Canadian Values".
3. Who defines the values? Me? You? The Pope? I would venture to say that while it is easy to speak of "Canadian Values", there are probably about 30 million different definitions of "Canadian Values".
4. Part of the greatness of Canada (and it is a great country to live in) is that we have the freedom to hold and practice different value systems within an envelope defined by the constitution. That envelope of the constitution already provides enough definition of "Canadian Values".
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority That pretty much refutes the idea that you can use a majority to define "Canadian Values".

Then you have to stop and think about the simple questions. Why is Canada an attractive destination for many immigrants, including for most of us, our parents or grand parents or great grand parents? For many, it is and was because Canada is peace loving and tolerant country.

That very thing, our tolerance, is at the core of "Canadian Values". Part of that is protecting the freedom of minorities to hold different values. IF you look around you and you think about it, that tolerance is pervasive in our country (not universal, but pervasive). Our constitution enshrines tolerance. That tolerance is a very, very powerful thing. Virtually every immigrant group that has come to Canada has, over time, been drawn into it. Intolerances and prejudices that have come with immigrant groups are slowly worn away, and our own intolerances and prejudices are also slowly worn away. That tolerance achieves, like water slowly wearing away the earth to create a canyon, a harmonious and richer culture and country.

All that is required is that we stick to the core "Canadian Value" of tolerance. If we try to define "Canadian Values" and enforce them, then we sow the seeds of the destruction of our "Canadian Values" more surely than any immigrant group that may or may not harbor some intolerance, for we become intolerant ourselves.

[The Green Barbarian]

Actually, the primary arguments against a "Canadian Values" code is very easy to make:

1. The only regimes around the world that have such things are not places places you want to live. Generally, they are countries where theocracy is a major theme. Like Iran. Do you really want to see something like "religious police" running about.

The sad part is that if Canada continues to bend over backwards to placate intolerance in the name of tolerance, we will see religious police running about. In fact, this already is going on in Canada, but everyone just turns a blind eye to it.

[hobbyguy]

Actually GB, Canada does not bend over backwards to tolerate intolerance. We have hate crime laws and many other laws that work to prevent pervasive intolerance.

This makes an interesting read in a different (but related) context regarding tolerance: http://www.historytoday.com/eliane-glaser/tolerance-and-intolerance

"These counter-intuitive parallels help to answer the question of why, in the 21st century, we are mired in religious disharmony. They question assumptions of progress and the myth that we are following the noble instincts of tolerationist pioneers. They remind us that 17th-century toleration was far from straightforward and neither is the tolerance we have inherited. Recognising our enduring problem with tolerance may paradoxically constitute real progress."

The challenge that she poses is to find our own intolerances, and move forward. It is far easier to point a finger at others and point out their intolerances. But in doing so are we revealing our own intolerances?

That is pertinent to the discussion. Do we really want to change "Canadian Values" to be more intolerant? Or do we want to confront our own intolerance and become a better country?

I would argue that the notion of defining "Canadian Values" is, in and of itself intolerant.

[The Green Barbarian]

Actually GB, Canada does not bend over backwards to tolerate intolerance. .

Actually HG, Canada does bend over backwards to tolerate intolerance.

[frazdog]

GB, can you give some specific examples of how Canada tolerates 'intolerance.' In my experience growing up in the seafood industry I can give real examples of how we were intolerate - aboriginals were not allowed in the white section of the salmon camp yet I could freely go to the aboriginal side to play with my aboriginal friends.' I believe Canada has come a long way in not tolerating intolerance. I wait for your examples.

[maryjane48]

*Removed

[icanthearyou]

Actually, the primary arguments against a "Canadian Values" code is very easy to make:

1. The only regimes around the world that have such things are not places places you want to live. Generally, they are countries where theocracy is a major theme. Like Iran. Do you really want to see something like "religious police" running about.

The sad part is that if Canada continues to bend over backwards to placate intolerance in the name of tolerance, we will see religious police running about. In fact, this already is going on in Canada, but everyone just turns a blind eye to it.

Source? or just speculation?