News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.8K     0 

zang said:
Yeah, it was just to create policy, and not deliberate thought and judgement. That’s why it took a week to get it.

This idea of activist judges is bullshit. Our system is set up so that not one body has exclusive right to make law. Denying the judicial part of it is denying individual rights to recompense, and saying the collective decision once every four years is the only one that matters. Both systems work in tandem to make society better and livable. Trying to delegitimize one side is effectively trying to rewrite the system on which our country is built, to make it easier for one branch to get its way.
Click to expand...

My point is this whole drama shows that one court felt it had a duty to stop the Ford plan and go back to normal and another court was like yeah Ford plan is stupid but he has the right to do it.

My point is the judiciary is not perfect, so it can be seen with scepticism at times but of course, undermining it with section 33 is wrong.

I frankly found the decision last week as a prime example of the flaws of the judicial system in Canada but of course Ford was not right to go nuclear.
 
You're assigning motivation. One court found that, under the law and constitution, Ford's bill was unconstitutional. The other court disagreed. That's what judges do. It's not about personal opinions, it's about interpreting the law. Sometimes a higher court has some judges who find one way and others who disagree. It's not cut and dried absolute fact.
 
PinkLucy said:
You're assigning motivation. One court found that, under the law and constitution, Ford's bill was unconstitutional. The other court disagreed. That's what judges do. It's not about personal opinions, it's about interpreting the law. Sometimes a higher court has some judges who find one way and others who disagree. It's not cut and dried absolute fact.
Click to expand...


It is seen as such.
 
Yesterday, I heard about a 30 something Civics teacher who didn't know about the NWC. I am hearing more and more about people who don't know how our systems works, i.e., a parliamentary democracy where the law (not the elected officials) is the supreme authority, and where there are three branches: legislative, executive and judicial.

Do kids not learn this in school any more? What do they learn in those Civics classes?
 
PinkLucy said:
Yesterday, I heard about a 30 something Civics teacher who didn't know about the NWC. I am hearing more and more about people who don't know how our systems works, i.e., a parliamentary democracy where the law (not the elected officials) is the supreme authority, and where there are three branches: legislative, executive and judicial.

Do kids not learn this in school any more? What do they learn in those Civics classes?
Click to expand...


Civics class was 10% actually civics and 90% about political indoctrination from the teacher about her politics for me and I had it a few years ago.

I had to mostly teach myself about how the system works and most younger people I know wont put the effort into it.
 
jje1000 said:
There is an online government survey reviewing government spending, closes tomorrow:

Consultation: Review of Ontario government spending
https://www.ontario.ca/page/consultation-review-ontario-government-spending?_ga=2.20864696.1
jje1000 said:
There is an online government survey reviewing government spending, closes tomorrow:

Consultation: Review of Ontario government spending
[URL]https://www.ontario.ca/page/consultation-review-ontario-government-spending?_ga=2.20864696.1690130795.1536457704-2066461423.1536457704
Click to expand...
jje1000 said:
There's a suggestions page for anyone who wants to offer their thoughts.
Click to expand...

690130795.1536457704-2066461423.1536457704[/URL]

There's a suggestions page for anyone who wants to offer their thoughts.
Click to expand...

Thank you! I put in three suggestions.

The first will likely go nowhere, but I won't stop trying (merge the Catholic and Public school systems, AND abolish school boards.

I also offered more complex suggestions on social service and health.
 
tiffer24 said:
LOL.
If liberal teachers have been "indoctrinating" hundreds of thousands of students for the last fifteen years, how could conservatives ever have a chance to win these elections?
Maybe students today are just sorely lacking in critical thinking skills...
Click to expand...

Nevermind winning elections - if teachers were so good at "indoctrination", the PCs wouldn't have been moaning and groaning about discovery math.

Videodrome said:
Some honeymoon period!
Click to expand...

And the best part - the real cuts haven't even started yet.

AoD
 
PinkLucy said:
Yesterday, I heard about a 30 something Civics teacher who didn't know about the NWC. I am hearing more and more about people who don't know how our systems works, i.e., a parliamentary democracy where the law (not the elected officials) is the supreme authority, and where there are three branches: legislative, executive and judicial.

Do kids not learn this in school any more? What do they learn in those Civics classes?
Click to expand...

Going back nearly 30 years ago when I was still in elementary/high school, there were no "civics" classes. What little I knew back then was briefly taught in History classes and the few Law electives I took in high school. Which makes sense, given what's happened in politics in the recent past. Too few people with the will to vote regularly, but also educated about what they're doing. From what I see from current curriculums, a lot more focus is being put back onto social structure and civics. But it's gonna take 20 years for those kids to grow up and want to be active participants in politics and the social contract.

In my opinion, we've received too much of our knowledge of civic/political underworkings from US media. I don't know how many people I've talked to in my life who believe we have a "Bill of Rights" here in Canada, or that we have an absolute, undeniable "right to free speech", and the idea that we vote for people (rather than parties) is so incredibly pervasive that it makes me want to bang my head on the wall. Politicians play it up as well (see: King Doug), thinking they're supreme leaders. Too few people are willing to (or even have the knowledge that they can) put pressure on parties to turf ineffective/unpopular leaders; something that is well within the rights of our system of politics.

Not that I agree that Wynne was anything worse than a good person with bad PR, but I feel that if her leadership had been revoked in favour of another, Doug might not be Premier right now.
 
zang said:
In my opinion, we've received too much of our knowledge of civic/political underworkings from US media. I don't know how many people I've talked to in my life who believe we have a "Bill of Rights" here in Canada, or that we have an absolute, undeniable "right to free speech", and the idea that we vote for people (rather than parties) is so incredibly pervasive that it makes me want to bang my head on the wall. Politicians play it up as well (see: King Doug), thinking they're supreme leaders. Too few people are willing to (or even have the knowledge that they can) put pressure on parties to turf ineffective/unpopular leaders; something that is well within the rights of our system of politics.
Click to expand...

This - I cringe every time I hear claims that we should "impeach" our elected officials. Put it simply (perhaps overly simply), they've let life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness gotten into their heads instead of peace, order and good government.

AoD
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top