Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Quebec's Proposed Charter of Hate

Bernard Drainville -Religious intolerance personified
It isn't a new manoeuvre, governments in trouble have for centuries used the strategy of targeting minority groups as a scapegoat to deflect attention and responsibility for running an incompetent or racist state.
"QMI Agency has learned the Parti Quebecois government plans to amend the Quebec charter of rights and freedoms and ban most religious signs and symbols from public institutions such as daycare centres, public schools, hospitals, clinics, and other government buildings.
Visible crosses, yarmulkes, hijabs, niqabs, burkas and turbans would all be banned.
According to sources close to the government, all health workers, public school teachers and public daycare workers would have to leave their religious symbols at home when they go to work." Read the rest of the story
And so the PQ is going down that very same road, hoping to save themselves at the expense of some of its most vulnerable citizens.
The first part of the plan has already borne fruit, that is convincing the public that there is a problem, one that needs fixing.
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed -- and hence clamorous to be led to safety -- by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.-  H.L. Mencken
 Sadly, when governments promote fear and hate, they find a receptive audience, such is the frailty of our human nature to blame others for our personal or societal problems, real or imagined.

Mr. Drainville, the chief PQ architect of the Charter, tells us proudly that he is exercising the will of the people.
It isn't surprising that a majority of Quebecers actually support this new Charter of Hate, they have given in to the ignorance and fear, egged on by selfish, manipulative fools who don't understand the evil they will unleash.

This has always been the PQ's specialty, frightening the public with horror stories and claims of impending doom. But in targeting minorities, Drainville has channelled the xenophobic nature of Quebec's insular and exclusive society, where the only immigrants that are to be tolerated are ones that don't speak English, act too foreign or religious.

The real problem with the Charter of Hate is that it serves as a blueprint for all of society, not just the interaction in hospitals, schools and government.

The PQ government's message is clear, it opposes all things religious, and the logical result is that this attitude will spill over into the private sector where religious intolerance will become acceptable.

Long ago I recounted an incident that I witnessed in Canadian Tire in St. Laurent, where a seventy-something francophone woman decided to browbeat a teenage cashier for wearing the Hijab.
She told the young lady in no uncertain terms, who was actually quite stylishly dressed, that she was a disgrace, a religious slave and a fool, unable to think for herself.
The poor girl was brought to tears and the manager had to come out and replace her.

This readers, is our future, that type of incident will multiply and spread as the people are encouraged by the government to hate.

Yet on an interestingly note, the law is already designed with enough loopholes to sail a crucifix through, all in a cynical effort to protect Christian signs, symbols and patrimony.
As for the Jewish General Hospital, the PQ has promised an exemption. The question is, why?

The answer is simple, the Charter of Hate is aimed at but one group, Muslims, a minority group that is roundly feared and despised by xenophobic Quebecers, who are collectively afraid that they will be over-run in the long term..
Including all religions in the Charter of Hate, is just window dressing, that is why there will be exemptions for Jews and Christians..

It's all too transparent, a faltering government targeting its least popular element, to deflect attention and somehow win a reprieve.
It remains to be seen who in the National Assembly will actually stand up and salute this monstrous assault on personal freedom.
I'm not confident.

And so gentle readers, whether you are for or against the principle of removing religious symbols from 'public' life in Quebec, understand that the consequences goes far beyond that of removing a hijab at the license bureau or a kippah in the hospital.

We've seen it with Bill 101 where citizens are assaulted by other citizens for speaking English, why should this be different?


P.S.
If religious regalia is to be banned in public institutions, how about political messages?


Or union messages, here the Montreal police union have added a  message on the backs of their vests complaining about their three day week  being taken away.



Should people be banned from wearing a Rainbow, Lady Gaga, or Justin Beiber T-shirts to cegep?

Just what is offensive... that is the question.

I imagine the day that this t-shirt will also become illegal in Quebec, promoting unhealthy attitudes.... IT CAN HAPPEN!




For those who have French, here's an interesting take written by Charles Taylor in the Journal de Montreal  absolutely  pillorying the potential law, entitled :  Charles Taylor fait un parallèle avec la Russie de Vladimir Poutine 
Mr Taylor savages the PQ government, comparing it to that of Vladimir Putin, who recently enacted anti-gay legislation in Russia.

Of particular interest are the comment s under the story.

136 comments:

  1. The PQ wants immigrants who know French.
    Most new immigrants who know French come from Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria and Lebanon.

    The PQ then says it doesn't want Muslim headscarves
    but still wants immigrants who know French.

    The PQ don't make any sense.

    Most countries that France colonized are located in Africa, most notably Northern Africa where there be Muslims.

    The PQ wants immigrants who know French.
    The PQ wants secular immigrants.

    The PQ cannot have everything.

    The PQ do not make sense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Editor: First of all, do you enforce the no anonymity rule or not?

      Anon: Why can't the PQ have everything? I think this is just what Quebec needs to do. After all, the collective majority has been against English for the last 40 years, if you consider Bill 22 as the start of it all. Actually, it's really over 50 years, taking the manifestations of the Quiet Revolution into account.

      The final proof in the pudding will be which way the CAQ winds blow come voting day in the Assembly. Is what Howard Galganov said in his speech at CRITIQ back in the spring.

      Let's face it: The PQ legitimizes and overtly promotes hate. Robert Libman promoted CAQ in the last election? What an obvious mistake that was, even before the CAQ was given chance to show their medal. THEY'RE SEPARATISTS! For the love of God, what else would you expect from separatists! A separatist is a separatist is a separatist! Case closed!

      Let the "Charter of Hate" pass and let the chips fall where they may.

      Very little has happened to impede

      Delete
    2. Oops! I rushed off and haste makes waste.

      Very little has happened to impede the Quebec governing parties of all stripes from pushing its anti-English legislation through, little by little, step by step, law by law, enforcement by enforcement.

      Incidentally, to correct what I wrote above, we'll see how the CAQ's mettle is tested. Like the editor of this blog, I'm not confident either, but then again, aside from far too much equalization money going to Quebec, why should I care?

      The separatists hate the minorities, and so do the Quebec Liberals. They never side with English, so Howard Galganov is right!

      Delete
  2. Will they also ban Christmas, Easter and Church?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JA
      Easter? Is that the day that that Jesus comes out of a cave reincarnated as a bunny rabbit?

      Delete
    2. No, it's the day that has been took over by big companies in order to make money off of ridiculous things. To much of north america it doesn't have anything to do with Jesus. Good point John, extremists really annoy me.
      JD

      Delete
  3. As an atheist I don't wear religious symbols, I find religion a waste of time and wearing symbols to be pointless. That said I also think wearing Ugg boots are ridiculous and a waste of time, but I'd never tell anyone to take off their boots or their symbols. What people wear does not affect me in the slightest, it doesn't affect anyone really, well I guess other than those with crippling insecurities who think their poor Franco-Christian child will go out to play, see a hijab and become a Muslim.

    Not telling people what to wear, or what to think or who to worship is part of what makes this part of the world great, to take that away out of irrational fear of minorities is disgraceful and disgusting. I didn't think the PQ could sink any lower but they seem to be the political equivalent of a game of limbo, how low can you go? I expected them to hit the bar months ago yet they continue to shock. If this contemptible stunt wins any votes or supporters for this fascist party I'll have completely lost my hope for the people of Quebec. The worst part is they still do not see the irony in their repression of minorities justified by their claims of French Canadians being a minority. Sad, sad, days and a low point for this once great province.

    ReplyDelete
  4. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTWednesday, August 21, 2013 at 6:49:00 AM EDT

    If the majority of citizens vote for it, it is democratic.
    The PQ is pro-active here; look at all the crap in the world right now caused by religion...
    Keep your religion in your house. Burkas as well. This is north America. Not the middle east.
    It is extremely important, however, that the law become a tool for extreme cases.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Guardians of Rights & FreedomsWednesday, August 21, 2013 at 12:50:00 PM EDT

      There is NO definition of Democracy that does not include 2 points >

      1) Equality of ALL its citizens!

      2) Responsibility of the Majority to care for and protect its Minority!

      Canada goes overboard to protect the Minority French... While in Quebec we have the exact opposite.... If you want to make a Political analogy.. I think Fascist applies more correctly then Democratic when referring to Quebec !!

      Delete
    2. True as hell Guardians - Fascist is the appropriate term. Shame on all of them.

      Delete
    3. Democracy has been described as the dictatorship of the majority. In the case of the PQ it is the fascist dictatorship of the minority government democratically elected.

      Delete
    4. "If the majority of citizens vote for it, it is democratic." So says the Gars Sympathique de Frankfort. Yes, Frankfort or Frankfurt - Germany. In the 1933 German election, the last held before WWII, the Frankfurt/Oder region voted 55% in favour of Hitler's Nazi Party. While Hitler did not win an outright majority of the overall German popular vote, at 41% the Nazi Party was by far the most popular and was able to easily form a government. Democracy means a lot more than what the majority of citizens vote for my friend.

      The Rationalist.

      Delete
  5. Don't know if it will do any good but sign and share please:
    http://www.thepetitionsite.com/855/317/283/vote-to-have-a-re-election-pauine-marois-out-of-office/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well I guess we can say that about everything in this province but to say nothing and try nothing is worse. Do what you will. Other people may feel differently and try to change things.

      Delete
  6. It's a totally arbitrary line that is drawn between what is a "culture" and what is "religion".

    Religion = Culture in many cases

    I have no interest in religion. Nothing seems sillier then somebody walking around with symbols/headdress from thousands of years ago in the modern age. In every other area of life as we learn things we evaluate the past and change our assumptions etc. (IE Science, commerce etc). Religion is largely exempt from this. Certain religions require people to be killed for even suggesting that the religion might not be quite what it appears.

    Nothing says control of the followers quite like that.

    However, if people want to wear silly clothes, bavarian leiderhosen or kirpans around on the streets who gives a shit.

    This is so flagrantly opportunistic and manipulative by the PQ.

    How is wearing a headscarf not simply a culture issue exactly the same as protecting french.

    Quebec needs to get out of the business of regulating every single aspect of our lives.

    Laws for booksellers now? There is no end to the idiocy in Quebec.

    No matter how one see's the issue of "charter of values", the main issue is that the PQ is yet again trying to distract attention from it's inability to govern or have a good idea that doesn't involve shoveling money at unions, students or other favorite groups.

    The govt should be limited BY LAW to pass only 3 new laws per year.

    Perhaps then they will focus on what is important instead of this useless crap.

    Language laws and "charters of values". This is the best the modern state of Quebec can come up with while the province is in economic and construction shambles?

    Scary shit that the PQ faithful vote for this over and over.

    Makes you wonder if they are any different from the religious fanatics wearing the silly hats. Whatever the rulers/religion tell them they do.

    No thinking for themselves ever.

    Unless they parrot the "party/religous" line they are ostracized.

    PQ life seems so much like what we see in religious fanatics.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lord Dorchester

    The PQ is doing what the PQ does best, scaring francophones into voting for them by using language & identity politics. The economy be dammed. Like a bad hemorrhoid this latest accommodation flare-up started with a flawed poll that they commissioned earlier this year that basically showed Québécois people have little tolerance when it comes to minority religious accommodation. No one was actually talking about this but the PQ felt it necessary to push the issue into the spotlight. So based on this one poll, the Government had no choice but to act, apparently. Classic example of a government fabricating a problem and framing an argument then proposing a solution to said fabricated problem. During the next election, the PQ will play the proverbial drama Queen and spout how they and they alone are the only true defenders of the faith err Québécois culture. That will garner them the usual 30% of the vote (the losers, racists, illiterates and ignoramuses). The thing to look for is how well the CAQ will do. Its safe to say that they have been an uninspiring collossal dud so far and Legault's Plan St Laurent idea, is by all accounts, dead in the water. If the CAQ flames out, the Liberals are in majority territory and the PQ is gonzo once again. Economic issues are what generally win elections (ask Harper), and I don't recall the PQ talking about job creation EVER.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You can get better employment rates by raising the number of jobs or reducing the number of citizens.

    In 100% of other places int he world the work on the number of jobs.

    The PQ don;t create jobs. they just drive people to leave the population in the hope the job statistics look better.

    The PQ wants to reduce the number of citizens of Quebec to "make it all work".

    At the same time they want to push out all the "undersirables" ie anglophones, immigrant etc.

    What normal people dont; understand is that "charters of values" ARE the PQ employment plan.

    You leave and there is one less citizen fighting for that job.

    It's all nonsense of course that has started and economic spiral downwards as the critical mass of non-govt sponsored companies dwindles.

    The idea that people move to Silicon Valley to be around other companies and build up a critical mass of experience etc is lost on Quebecers. The PQ doesn;t have a policy paper on that so it's not important.


    ReplyDelete
  9. Des prédicateurs islamistes radicaux attendus à Montréal

    On verra bientôt débarquer à Montréal des prédicateurs islamistes européens qui bannissent la mixité, qui considèrent qu'une femme doit raser les murs dans la rue, que c'est un péché de lui serrer la main, que de refuser de porter le voile est «pire» que d'avoir le cancer ou encore que la télévision est un «poison» à cause des lectrices de nouvelles «dénudées».


    http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/201308/20/01-4681683-des-predicateurs-islamistes-radicaux-attendus-a-montreal.php


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Simon Rancourt - you might want to calm down with the rhetoric there, buddy.

      Besides, here are some parts of the province that never have to worry about immigrants in the first place...so why are they complaining?:

      http://screencast.com/t/w1bU0jVdpGC

      http://screencast.com/t/hbfQXpHTLZ

      http://screencast.com/t/x83qymNcZYh

      Doesn't look like places that immigrants go to...so worry not.

      Delete
    2. Makes you think you might want to quit while you're ahead, wouldn't you agree? ;-)

      Delete
    3. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTWednesday, August 21, 2013 at 12:04:00 PM EDT

      Pour une fois que je suis bien d'accord avec toi S.R.
      En Allemagne, les musulmants REFUSENT de s'integrer a cette societe. On le voit aussi au Canada; je l'ai vu a Calgary. Islam est l'ennemi commun de tous.
      ------------------
      Nous partons pour la ville de quebec pour 3 jours.

      Delete
    4. JA
      Right, the Muslim Mayor of Calgary is just soooo radical. Please, racist generalizations hurt your credability.

      Delete
  10. Anybody know where we can buy "Kippas" or somethign that looks similar and get some "monogrammed" stuff done.

    Can order some nice ones with

    "Fuck you PQ"

    on the top.

    Any religous symbol that that words can be printed on works really.

    Imagine if the PQ didn;t offer jews at montreal general an exemption. The entire world would hammer at Quebec.

    It's not that they don;t want to ban jewish symbols also, it's just they are too afraid.

    They need to "ban" one religion at a time. Can;t fight all religions at once.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "...qui considèrent qu'une femme doit raser les murs dans la rue, que c'est un péché de lui serrer la main..."

      ?!? ... o_O

      Delete
    2. Of course there are stone age religions, but lets stop pretending this PQ action is about protecting women.

      As Don Macpheason points out in a column in the gazette. The PQ have run out of places to protect women as cover for the real changes they want.

      If a woman is subservient and gives up her own free will to wear a full covering or whatever that is not the issue of the state.

      She has willingly agreed to go down that path. As long as laws are respected thats none of our business in a free liberal society.

      Can you let people wear white "casper the ghost" outfits but yet ban them when they become black? Of course not.

      Just because we don;t agree with it doesn;t mean we have the right to interfere in their lives.

      Make all public employee's wear a uniform without exception(ie no turban RCMP). If people are allowed to wear their own clothes then they get to wear what they want without exception.

      Many places would rather let people wear what they want even if it allows religous symbols rather then wear a uniform all day.

      For people with kids in school they understand that uniforms save a lot of money and also a lot of issues with kids.

      Civil servants are like children anyway, seems fitting.


      Delete
  11. It seems the simplest solution if the PQ really wants one is to have all public institutions (like in the past and in some other countries) wear a uniform.

    The clothing stores will all be up in arms. The PQ can then set minimum clothing prices to "guarentee" they stay in business. Just say "amazon.ca"!

    Not simply the green onions or police anymore.

    Every different part of our burocracy can wear the Quebec uniform with appropriate designations for rank/ job title and union affiliation.

    Needs to start with all the construction workers banning wearing whatever T-shirts they want. Cant have that anymore. Often they come from Florida and have english words on them like "surf" and other bad thoughts.

    While we are at it, can we classify all the nasty die job short orange hair old ladies as a religious group?

    Perhaps "white trash nuns" or something and then ban it.

    Sux going to the SAQ and getting one of them vs a real person without such idiotic religious beliefs they have to have orange hair.

    ReplyDelete
  12. from Lenoir

    History and anthropologic psychiatry will judge Quebec as just another example of "ETHNIC PSYCHOSES"
    Along with Nazi Germany, Rwanda, Bosnia. That this mass psychopathology has been created by church/state throughout the history of Quebec to "pathologize" the masses is clear.
    Children are taught from birth,from the parents, community, through school to hate and fear "the other", and to feel special, distinct and entitled based soley on membership with the group. Rights, even the concept of the individual, disintegrate into a "collective narcissism" characterized by magical thinking, delusions of grandeur, denial of reality, thirst for power and control and lack of empathy for the "other"who is demonized for perceived wrongs.
    ETHNIC PYCHOSES unchecked can deteriorate into full blown Paranoid Schitzophrenia.
    You wanna bet Pauline is just following the orders of the little voices in her head?

    ReplyDelete
  13. You pro bill 101 clowns, bigots can spin it any way you want…You can blame the PQ, but it really does not matter which party is in power in Quebec. They are all anti-English language bigots. They have proven this for decades. Bills 22, 178, 101…were brought in and enforced by all parties since the 1970’s…the liberals are the worst of bad lot. Just take a look at all the corruption, fraud, money laundering that has gone on in Quebec for the last 5 decades…PQ, ADQ, Liberals…all the same, the province is a mess, heavily in debt…everyone is on the take and they don’t care. Greed, greed, and more greed... It is the French way and has been for many, many decades. Quebec is a cesspool of slime, sleaze and corruption and it will not change one bit. Get out now…it will only get worse… It has been fun watching the demise of this province. You get what you deserve bigots…May you rot in hell French language Nazis bigots.

    ReplyDelete
  14. It will be interesting to see how far the francophone majority is willing to go to "affirm" itself.

    This Charter, along with Bill 14, have absolutely no place in a society that considers itself free and democratic.

    This kind of thing used to make my blood boil when I lived in Quebec. Now, it just makes me shake my head in sadness.

    ReplyDelete
  15. 5 more days of this horseshit.. 5 more days. Its too bad I am not unemployed I could of lowered the stats when I leave.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. Gezzz, I wonder what he said ?. Maybe " good luck Steve I will miss your tax money paying for my Welfare check and lottery tickets ", I am sure it was very positive.

      Delete
  16. According to an article in today's Metro paper, neither Couillard, Legault, nor Francoise David will support this "projet de laïcité".

    ReplyDelete
  17. Although the PQ is doing this for all the wrong reasons, I'd like to see measures put in place to get rid of all religions entirely. No exemptions for any of the cults.

    The PQ government's message is clear, it opposes all things religious, and the logical result is that this attitude will spill over into the private sector where religious intolerance will become acceptable.

    Might be just me, but that sounds like a good thing. Just like smokers, religious people can pray 9 meters away from any public building. After all, religion has caused much more deaths than smoking.


    However, if people want to wear silly clothes, bavarian leiderhosen or kirpans around on the streets who gives a shit.

    Do you know what a kirpan is? If you want people walking around with weapons in public, perhaps you'd be happier living in the US. Maybe the southern rednecks should start a religion which requires them to carry a gun at all times?

    Religion is a choice, unlike language, race or sexual orientation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Although the PQ is doing this for all the wrong reasons, I'd like to see measures put in place to get rid of all religions entirely. No exemptions for any of the cults.

      Within the last 100 years that was tried by the Germans and the Russians…

      Might be just me, but that sounds like a good thing. Just like smokers, religious people can pray 9 meters away from any public building. After all, religion has caused much more deaths than smoking.

      Thank goodness it is just you… Political ideology and politicians have caused much more death that smoking too. Perhaps we should ban that as well.

      Do you know what a kirpan is? If you want people walking around with weapons in public, perhaps you'd be happier living in the US. Maybe the southern rednecks should start a religion which requires them to carry a gun at all times?

      A kirpan is a dull ceremonial dagger used as a religious symbol. If you are that concerned about people walking around with weapons in public, perhaps you should stay home. I took my lunch to work today… I was carrying a steak knife and a fork because I have to cut my reheated piece of chicken. Should I be banned from bring such implements to work?

      Religion is a choice, unlike language, race or sexual orientation
      Actually, language is a choice. That’s why there are so many multi-lingual people in the world today. People have freely chosen over thousands of years to learn languages other than their mother tongue. If Quebeckers chose to speak Japanese tomorrow, what would stop them?

      Delete
    2. Within the last 100 years that was tried by the Germans and the Russians…

      Godwin's law...
      Also I suggested getting rid of religion in public, and the first thing you think of are mass murders?

      A kirpan is a dull ceremonial dagger used as a religious symbol. If you are that concerned about people walking around with weapons in public, perhaps you should stay home. I took my lunch to work today… I was carrying a steak knife and a fork because I have to cut my reheated piece of chicken. Should I be banned from bring such implements to work?

      Where does it state that it's a "dull" knife? Either way, you don't seem to understand the difference between using something that could be considered a weapon as a tool and just carrying it around for the fun of it.
      Did you carry your steak knife around with you all day? Try it, see how your co-workers react. People also use guns for hunting, they don't walk around downtown with a rifle.

      Actually, language is a choice. That’s why there are so many multi-lingual people in the world today.

      You can stop believing in Republican Jesus™, Jehovah, Rael, Xenu or whatever whenever you decide to. If you were raised in one language, you're going to have to work hard to learn another.
      You don't *need* religion to survive, good luck getting by without being able to communicate.


      We're in the 21st century, I personally think we'd be much better off without religion in public. What you do in your private home is, as usual, your own business.

      Delete
    3. I'm not a pro-religion advocate, but I'm against this law. Those religious symbols are just something that I wouldn't touch with a 10-feet pole, especially, because it's not really that much of an issue right now. All those people saying that they are tired to "adapt themselves" to religious minorities because they've been served by a woman who wears a niqab at the clothing store is just pure bullshit.

      However, I find it quite ironic that accepting that a woman wears a scarf on her head to pledge allegiance to a divinity which doesn't even exist is viewed as a form of social progress. I'm ready to accept her freedom of choice as long as it doesn't affect my own liberties but I don't think that those religious symbols are still pertinent in 2013. Hopefully, they'll slowly disappear with time, education and integration.

      Delete
    4. Also I suggested getting rid of religion in public, and the first thing you think of are mass murders?

      Do you think the mass murders just happened? Of course not, it started by dehumanizing and marginalizing people of different backgrounds. Do you think the Jews were allowed to practice their religion in public in Nazi Germany? One of the first things the Communists in Russia did was to—as you put it—“get rid of religion in public”. They destroyed and desecrated churches and persecuted priests and believers.

      Where does it state that it's a "dull" knife?

      Type in “are Kirpans dull” into any Search Engine and educate yourself on the issue. For the most part, they are dull ceremonial blades used as a religious symbol.

      Either way, you don't seem to understand the difference between using something that could be considered a weapon as a tool and just carrying it around for the fun of it.

      I understand the difference quite well! Clearly, you are the one who does not understand. Do you think Sikhs carry their kirpans around just for “fun”?

      Did you carry your steak knife around with you all day? Try it, see how your co-workers react.

      No, I did not, but that’s irrelevant.

      Say I carried my steak knife around all day in my pocket and no one knew or could know (because I had deep enough pockets or kept it in a bag), how would they react?
      When you are in public, or say, take the metro or the bus (assuming you do)… Do you ever wonder how many of the people sitting next to you carry around knives, batons or pepper spray in their pockets or purses?

      People also use guns for hunting, they don't walk around downtown with a rifle.

      Of course, a guy walking around with a rifle on a downtown street would look strange and arouse suspicion. Would a guy walking around with a pocket knife tucked deep into his pocket arouse the same suspicion?

      You can stop believing in Republican Jesus™, Jehovah, Rael, Xenu or whatever whenever you decide to. If you were raised in one language, you're going to have to work hard to learn another.

      So you cannot, at any time decide of your own free will, to learn a particular language or consciously stop using another language as a personal choice? I know people who’ve forgotten their mother tongue because they have not used it in half a century.

      You don't *need* religion to survive, good luck getting by without being able to communicate.

      Ah… But the issue isn’t about being able to communicate. It is about whether or not language is a choice. Clearly, we all need to communicate. However, what you said is that language was not a choice. I’m trying to argue that it is…
      Then again, your assertion that humans don’t need religions is not an argument, but a statement of personal preferences. Basically, you wish to impose your personal preferences on society. One the basis of *need* there are many things that could and should be banned.

      One doesn’t *need* beer or soft drinks to survive.
      One doesn’t *need* to fly down south every winter
      One doesn’t *need* to have pets.
      One doesn’t *need* tattoos.
      One doesn’t *need* to eat meat to survive
      One doesn’t *need* to vote to survive.
      And so one and so forth…

      Then again, many psychological studies have shown that human are in fact hard wired to believe and that they do *need* religion, or at least *need* to believe in a higher purpose. So to “believe” is clearly necessary to our survival. One could even say it is central to being human.

      We're in the 21st century, I personally think we'd be much better off without religion in public. What you do in your private home is, as usual, your own business.

      I think there are a lot of things we’d be much better off without in public, but I’m not suggesting they be banned or barred. I try to practice tolerance and respect for those who are different than me and not impose my view on them by insisting they should keep it whatever they do at home.

      Delete
    5. Putting restrictions on religious symbols can be a slippery slope. You never know where it can bring you.

      History shows that once you start going in some direction, you keep going further and further. It never just stops in one place. The language laws in this province are a perfect example. This thing was passes with such fanfare in 1977, and yet today, in 2013, these people are still squirming, still looking for more areas of life to restrict and control.

      We are all entitled to our prejudice, and so are you Quebecker of Tree Stump, but we're not entitled to having the state settle our petty scores for us. That's what I always try to tell cultural warriors of Quebec: hate the anglos and allos if you must, but learn to live with them, you have no choice, they're not going anywhere any time soon.

      Delete
    6. adski: If we're constantly worrying about what might happen, things can never move forward. I'm reminded of Americans who are against any form of gun control because they're worried that it will lead to more of their "freedoms" being removed.
      It's a valid issue, but it's also a diversion from the real problem.

      I don't think we should hide behind "what might happen". Let's decide if this is something we need and want to do, rather than bringing up all the past instances where something similar has had negative results.


      I know you all probably think I'm simply intolerant, but to me, getting rid of religion in our everyday lives would be a progressive measure. Moving towards the future, where there's less and less that divides us as humans, rather than sticking with the past simply because we're used to it.



      Delete
    7. I don't think we should hide behind "what might happen". Let's decide if this is something we need and want to do, rather than bringing up all the past instances where something similar has had negative results.

      So we shouldn't learn from the mistakes of the past? If every time something similar has been done it has had a negative result, why do you think this time would be different?

      I know you all probably think I'm simply intolerant, but to me, getting rid of religion in our everyday lives would be a progressive measure. Moving towards the future, where there's less and less that divides us as humans, rather than sticking with the past simply because we're used to it.

      If you think religion is bunk and we'd be better off without it, I can understand and accept that view. I can even see why you would think that way. I disagree with that view, but I can see where it comes from. The issue, for me, is why do you think it is acceptable to seek to impose such a view on a society as a whole, where a sizeable percentage of the population and perhaps even the majority would fundamentally disagree with that view?

      Delete
    8. " If we're constantly worrying about what might happen, things can never move forward."

      So stop worrying that a Hindu can go berserk and use his kirpan to slice you to pieces, and let him have his kirpan.

      You should see how many people bring metal knives for lunch in my company and other companies around downtown. In the summertime, you see them eating lunches outside all over the place. Look at these people, and then think about the kirpan. And you'll realize that your concerns for "safety" are just a cloak for cultural (not even religious, I think) prejudice.



      "I know you all probably think I'm simply intolerant,"

      I do think that and I don't judge you for it. In a complex society whose driving force is competition nobody is free from prejudice. We all end up running into situations which corrode our character. I disagree with many people on the left that campaigns such as "put a stop to racism" are of any use. To stop racism, we would need a total overhaul of the current system followed by a cultural change. Trying to stop racism or intolerance in the current socio-economic system and a culture based on competition is like tilting at windmills.

      Having said that, as much as I do tolerate individual intolerance, I cannot stand people making recourse to the state system (i.e. the apparatus of coercion) in order to act out their prejudices. Just like SR who would not flinch from having language cops ticket people for using Englsih, you would want to restrict religious people to 9 meters away from public buildings, or something. All because these people are offending your esthetic sensibilities, and nothing more.

      Before you compare it to relegating smokers to 9 meters away from buildings, note that things like second hand smoke, polluted water, polluted air, etc...attack us physically. Things like religious practices in public or the Englsih language attack no more than sensibilities and personal thoughts. So regulating the former is not like regulating the latter. Also, note that when religious practices involve physical harm (like ritual killing of animals, or circumcision - both male and female), I am in favor of strict regulation. So for me, the criterion is physical harm to others, and not "mental harm", like in the case of intolerance of hijab, English language in Quebec, Spanish language in Arizona, etc...

      One last thing: just because something fits with your idea of "progress" is not a valid reason to institute coercion. Weren't progress and reason two slogans of the French Revolution? Look how many heads rolled in their name.

      Delete
    9. adski,

      So stop worrying that a Hindu can go berserk and use his kirpan to slice you to pieces, and let him have his kirpan.

      Kirpan is a Sikh artifact, not Hindu. While they both originate from India, Sikhism and Hinduism are not the same and there are 3000 years of difference between them.

      Delete
    10. @mister d-

      i like your style, mate. you remind me of me. keep it up!

      Delete
    11. FROM ED
      Quebecer, Why do you want to get rid of reoigion? How can it bother you. If your not religious simplyy don't go to Church. There is no one screaming God i the streets.
      ark. my next door neighbour is a Muslim Priest. He showed me a copy of the original Koran before the Ayatollahs put their hatred into it. In it, Allah (read God) tells Mohammed to follow the teachings of his son, Jesus Christ. Ed

      Delete
    12. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTFriday, August 23, 2013 at 6:53:00 AM EDT

      @ED

      YOU have never been so wrong about religion. Stay out of THAT debate unless you like to look like a fool.

      Delete
  18. This is the greatest law the pq has come up with. Do you guys want the same problems that the uk and france has with muslims? Stop being so naive, the more you give them the more they'll demand. Welcome to the islamic republic of quebecistan!! Theyve already got trudeau.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where were the good people of the UK and France in the 19th century? Why were they in far-way countries pillaging, destroying, exploiting, stealing, killing, imposing their will and patronizing the locals? Then in the 2 decades after the world war 2, why did the governments of the UK and France go to those countries for the second time, this time in search of cheap labor for the French and British economies?

      The natural habitats of these people are destroyed and they were enticed to move from their devastated countries to the country of their former colonizer. And today, we have people like you fearing the islamic republic.

      Well, you get what you asked for. The chickens have come home to roost.

      Delete
    2. FROM ED
      Adski, where do you get this bullshit. England and France have never gone to pillage and destroy. How dare you accuse the two most civilized countries at the time of mass murder. England was in India keeping Sikhs, Muslims and Hindus from killing each other. The only mass murder was created by Ghandi's headstrong greed to have his way. After WW II both countries were trying to create jobs for the men coming home from the war, they did not need employees. . How could you not know that. Making up history is WRONG. Ed.

      Delete
    3. Official history is tailored for elite's benefit and in elite's interest. You have to dig deep to discover mystifications and distortions. If you don't do your homework, you'll go around thinking that you come from the best people in the world. Kind of like you do.

      Since you are clearly an Anglo supremacist, I'd recommend this book for you.

      http://www.amazon.ca/The-Web-Deceit-Mark-Curtis/dp/0099448394


      "History will be kind to us gentlemen, for I intend to write it" - Winston Churchill


      Delete
  19. Le vote pour la souveraineté de notre pays,toujours à 40% (le même qu'en 95).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good - let Miss Piggy call a referendum right now - most of us no longer give a shit. We'll let the areas leave that want to leave. No problem at all. We'll all be dead and gone when this is settled through the courts and international courts anyway. I want you to leave but areas that vote to stay are allowed to stay. Off you go!

      Delete
    2. "let Miss Piggy call a referendum right now"

      Right now, no areas will vote to leave. Here you stay!

      Delete
    3. Funny how separatists have been saying that with Harper as PM, the support for separation will increase (I think you have said this too SR). Well, it's been 7 years and support is still at 40%, around which it has hovered even before Harper.

      Delete
    4. S.R, I would be more than happy to see these assholes leaving but unfortunately it's not gonna happen. The difference is that in 95 maybe 50% of them lived off Canada money, now, it must be around 90%.

      Delete
  20. Interesting reads on this subject

    Le Voir (In French)
    From Huffpost Canada (Hopefully they'll plan on having a french version for Huffpost Québec)

    ReplyDelete
  21. Why is there always a moron that says the majority decides it, nope a charter is to protect from the majority. Example, 2 wolves and a sheep have a vote to see who is served for supper. A charter is to protect from the dictatorship of the majority, except here in quebec, where the charter is here to protect the majority, talk about shameful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, everything they propose is to protect the majority which is so ass-backwards to every other civilized society. God help us if they stay in charge for very long - we will have an exodus of about 3M people and the rest of us will be expected to make up for their loss by paying 80% of our income to taxes. Tax, spend, create havoc, cause trouble and civil unrest, hateful bills, no one immigrating - all of this will be Miss Peggy's legacy - welcome to quebec.

      Delete
  22. Maybe the people of quebec dont care if their doc wears a hijab, but the doctor will demand that she wont treat men or the male muslim docs wont treat woman because their religion wont let them. Its already happening in europe. Wake up people!!

    ReplyDelete
  23. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTWednesday, August 21, 2013 at 5:04:00 PM EDT

    Haaaaaaa
    I can obviously see that this blog is slowly falling apart.
    Nice...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. À l'image du monde dans lequel nous "évoluons".

      Delete
    2. That's OK guys - we don't have any doctors now - this is the worst place in North America for racism and intolerance and I'm damned if we can afford to lose more doctors, nurses and the taxes they pay but who cares eh people. Let's show the world just how racist we can get - we're on the right track. Why the hell can't you people live and let live? The only thing I can see is the covering of the face - that's it, that's all and only because we have to identify people if we meet them again or they have to prove who they are. Can't believe we have so many people on this blog that feel we have the right to impose OUR views on everyone else - that's the reason the PQ get away with this shit. Stop revoking our rights and freedoms dammit!
      http://www.cjad.com/CJADLocalNews/entry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10580291&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

      Delete
    3. They are the ones imposing their views on us
      . Vive le quebec!!!'

      Delete
    4. Cutie. It's only you that thinks driving doctors out of the province is bad. This is just short term thinking.

      The rest of us understand that some suffering is required of the population to keep our society pure.

      Over the long term our glamorous universities (when students not on strike) will graduate thousands to replace the missing doctors. Finally after gutting McGill Medicine we can get enough doctors trained.

      Over the long term Quebec always wins (not the actual citizens, just the romanticized idea of Quebec).

      Delete
    5. Yeah, I'm glad to see I'm not alone in my thinking - wait until they can no longer get service at their own hospitals and doctors because there will be none left here - they will be victims, once again, but this time the blame can be laid where it properly belongs - right at their own GD doorstep. Again, I repeat, IDIOTS!

      Delete
    6. Mark - prove that they are imposing their views on you - and don't give us any shit about how they dress.

      Delete
    7. The main goal of islam is to impose it on the world. We must all submit to islam. Go read the koran and you will learn that this is a violent religion based on a pedophile claiming to be a prophet. Check out thereligionofpeace.com

      Delete
    8. The main goal of islam is to impose it on the world. [Which is exactly the same thing as with other proselytising religions, such as Christianity.]

      We must all submit to islam. [False… unless you also feel you must submit to other proselytising religions such as Christianity.]

      Go read the koran and you will learn that this is a violent religion… [Go read the Bible and you will see that it is exactly the same thing with the bloody, violent religion of Christianity.]

      Check out richarddawkins.net

      Delete
    9. "The main goal of islam is to impose it on the world."

      We should oppose militant Islam. But should I see 2 ladies who wear head scarves in my son's daycare as an instance of militant Islam? Are these ladies seeking to impose their religion on me so that I have to run to the governemaman du Quebec and plead with them to impose a ban on head scarves? Because these 2 ladies are budding militant extremists? Because it's head scarf today, Islamic state tomorrow? Is this the kind of fear mongering you want to peddle? Just like with the English language? We allow immigrants some English today, tomorrow we will be anglicised?

      See, the problem with people like you is that in defense from other people's extremism, you are ready to take us into your own extremism. You want to fight one extremism with another extremism. To fight religious extremism, you want to resort to secular extremism. And that makes you no different from the people you oppose. In fact, in Quebec the secular religion of L'Etat Quebecois is much more dangerous than any other religion, simply because the priests of this religion are currently in power.

      Delete
    10. Are you seriously comparing islam to christianity? Lol. Obviously you know nothing about the message of love in the new testament. You must be the anti christ.

      Delete
    11. I was actually comparing Islam to the secular religion of Quebec, the one that took place of Catholicism in the 1970s, the one which replaced the Bible with the Charter of the French language, Jesus with Rene Levesque, the cross with the fleur-de-lys, the Vatican with La Francophonie, December 24/25 with June 24, the gospels of prophets with the gospel of the French language, etc...

      And as I said, at this point in time in our region of the world, the secular religion of Quebec is more threatening to individual freedoms than Islam is. So I'm not apologizing for militant islam, I am simply prioritizing threats according to their proximity.

      Delete
  24. Harper laisse tomber ses réponses bilingues

    http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/385605/harper-laisse-tomber-ses-reponses-bilingues

    Quelle surprise!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shows he has good manners and common sense. Too bad your politicians can't (and I mean LITERALLY can't) do the same thing. Way to go Harper - the people asking the questions deserve the respect to be answered in their own language. Foreign policy to the A##hole separatists but not to people with a brain in their head.

      Delete
    2. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTWednesday, August 21, 2013 at 8:15:00 PM EDT

      Ouin pi? C'est logique, ma crotte. Pourquoi devrait-il repondre en japonais a une question en francais?
      T'es bin cave... Ma tante Pauline ne repond pas en anglais car elle ne prend pas de questions des anglos. T'as pas de logique, mon grand.
      Allez, un grand verre de Chardonnay pour t'en remettre:)
      Et aussi je te remercie d'exposer le cynisme et l'imbecilitee des separeux comme toi. Moi je te ferai porte-parole officiel des separeux aupres des medias.

      Delete
    3. Le japonais n'est pas une des deux langues officielles de ce "pays".

      Delete
    4. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTThursday, August 22, 2013 at 6:21:00 AM EDT

      S.R.:
      Si le Canada, ton "pays" a deux langues officielles, donc le quebec a aussi deux langues officielles. Criss que tu peux etre cave.
      T'as quel age? 17 ans?

      Delete
    5. @UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORT

      C'est a toi a determiner son age: http://screencast.com/t/tk9UvyPyB

      Delete
    6. http://www.cliqueduplateau.com/2013/08/22/separes-a-la-naissance/

      Delete
  25. The Editor mentioned it but so far no one else has. While La Presse presented an intelligent point of view from the eminent Charles Taylor (of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission on Reasonable Accomodations), the Pepsi drinkers over at the Journal de Montréal are almost unanimously falling all over one another to see who can cheer the loudest for their support for this intolerant measure. The PQ certainly knows on which side their bread is buttered.

    The cynical pequistes are doing this because they WANT to incite a backlash against their policies. The PQ knows perfectly well that this bill is a non-starter that will immediately be contested as offending both the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as well as the Quebec version. This is intended as part of their “sovereignist governance”, which means provoking and instigating as many disputes as possible in order to be able to point to the shocked reactions that result and then claim that this is why Quebec needs to separate.

    Even Anarchopanda has mocked this cynical PQ ploy by creating the following game on his Facebook page:
    1. Take a pencil and paper.
    2. Make a list of the ten most urgent works that are required to protect and/or promote democratic life in Quebec.
    3. Crack open a beer or some other treat - that was a lot of work! Practically not a game!
    4. Reread your list. On what number did you write "forbid the hijab from hospitals?"
    5. Nowhere? Congratulations! You’ve won the game! Have another beer!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. R.S,

      I have to strongly object your comment.

      ...the Pepsi drinkers over at the Journal de Montréal...

      Pepsi is my favorite soft drink, particularly Pepsi Wild Cherry. Please do not paint all Pepsi drinkers with the same brush.

      (^o^)

      Delete
    2. Pepsi Wild Cherry enthusiasts are hereby excused from being subjected to the stereotypes of their regular-Pepsi-drinking brethren.

      (^o^)

      Delete
  26. For me the problem about this legislation is the logistics for its enforcement.

    What is a religious symbol? How can one differentiate between a truly religious symbol (the wearer wears it for a religious belief) and a fashion statement? How does one determine that a piece of outfit is religious in nature instead of just ethnic? For example, the crucifix. When Madonna and George Michael wore it as earrings in the 80s are they being observant or just creating a fad? Another example, Sikh men have the obligation of keeping their beard. Muslim men believe that Muhammad kept long beard and they do so to follow his way. So they keep their beard for religious reason. What about Duck Dynasty beard? So which beard is allowed and which beard is not?

    So I think it boils down to the intent. Are we then as a society need to scrutinize each other's intent and to split hair to determine which one is religious and which one is not? Or else, will there be a "guideline" from our leaders to spell out which kind of outfit is acceptable and which one is not? Further, will this restriction on what to wear clash directly with individual's freedom of speech? How and where does one draw the line?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Troy, even though I don’t know you, I know you enough to know that you don’t actually believe this has anything to do with religion. This is purely a political ploy to distract the sheep from the real problems that the PQ is unable to address, and it is guaranteed to rile people up regardless of the genuine problems that we need to address.

      La Marois has already said she she would not hesitate to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause with no reservation whatsoever in order to get around the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, even though the PQ’s proposed bill also contravenes the Quebec Charter.

      People who screech the loudest for their “freedom” are the first to deny it to others. Spot the error.

      Delete
    2. R.S,

      Well, I am not naive enough to not see that this is a ploy from the separatist government that can not possibly pass, politically or judicially. I just want to expose the flaws in logic that they are trying to present to us.

      Delete
  27. This is more than just a distraction, it exposes the PQ at its most basic root level. ALL that matters, all that may exist, that MUST exist (in this stench ridden cesspool of hate and bigotry called Quebec) are three words: French, Catholic and white. Everything else must be driven out or abolished.

    Putrid laws like Bill 101, Bill 14 and this new Charter of Quebec Bigotry Values all spell that out very precisely and clearly. First through bureaucratic means, and if that fails, violence is next. And all you need do is fan the embers of hate already so abundant in this province.

    The motives of these separatist extremists are becoming more transparent as the years go by...

    Once Bill 14 passes this fall, the door is opened to pretty much anything at all, including this latest proposal of government sanctioned hate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTThursday, August 22, 2013 at 6:26:00 AM EDT

      @Apple2gs

      Your statement shows that you haven't been to east european countries lately; ethno-nationalism rules there. Especially Serbia, Russia and a few others...
      I am not defending the PQ but they are not unique here. MANY "new" countries "protect" themselves that way.

      Delete
  28. McDonald's to re-examine unilingual-French sign policy in Quebec
    August 21st, 2013
    http://thesuburban.com/news/articles/?id=article02376

    The McDonald's restaurant chain prides itself on consistency. It goes to great length to ensure that you enjoy pretty-much the same experience, no matter which golden arches in the world its customers dine at. “It's a company decision that everything from the menu boards to posters is to be consistent from one location to the other,” Jason Paduano told The Suburban in an interview. “In English Canada, you have English signage,” declared McDonald's Canada's regional communication manager. “In French Canada, you have French signage.”

    The issue arose after Pierrefonds resident Chris Eustace noticed the unilingual signs at his local McDonald's. “The Tim Horton's restaurant right next door is completely bilingual,” Eustace told The Suburban. “The posters and the menu boards are all bilingual, as is the drive-through.” Eustace wondered whether the American food giant was aware that it's not illegal to use English in Quebec. “McDonald's does many fine things for the community,” he acknowledged. “No question. It's a good corporate citizen and an employer that has instilled a strong, positive work ethic in several generations of youth.” “I was just surprised and disappointed not to see one word in English.”

    A visit to the outlet on Sources and Pierrefonds Blvds confirmed Eustace's complaint about the unilingual menu boards and tray advertisements, though a security sign on the children's play area emergency door is bilingual, as is an interior sign promoting free Wi-Fi Internet access. Staff behind the counter provided service in both official languages, and the food was packaged in bilingual containers. “The same packaging is used across the country, so it's all bilingual,” explained Paduano.

    Eustace said that he hopes that McDonald's will consider posting bilingual menu boards and posters inside and outside its Quebec locations. “In our case, it's all about consistency,” Paduano continued. “We make sure that our customers can ask any question in French or English.” “Our English and French customers are important, and we want to listen to them,” he said. “We don't take this lightly. We will look into all of those comments,” he concluded. You never know where the future will bring us.”

    Eustace recalled that last month another American burger chain, Five Guys, backed off on its French-only menu plans on the eve of a boycott of its restaurants, July 4, after language activists complained.

    Four weeks ago, Target Canada spokesman Sébastien Bouchard told The Suburban that his company's stores plans to install bilingual interior signs “where we know that there is a significant English-speaking population.” The giant American retailer will be opening 25 stores in Quebec this fall, as part of the company's first foreign foray into Canada this year. Bouchard added that Target already offers service in Spanish at its American stores “where we have many Spanish-speaking guests.”

    In addition, at its May 13 city council meeting, Côte St. Luc mayor Anthony Housefather directed city staff to encourage McDonald's to ensure a bilingual sign policy when it completes construction of its new outlet at Côte St. Luc Shopping Centre.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I too have witnessed this recent slippage (or dérapage) in the past couple of years from bilingual advertising/promotion toward unilingual promotion, even in very bilingual, never mind majority-anglophone, neighbourhoods. I can already imagine how Yannick would be incensed if stores in Dieppe, NB, were to subtly become English-only in the past two or three years... isn't that right? After all, that is the exact equivalent of what is currently happening right here. I wonder whose outrage would be stronger, though…

      Delete
    2. Gotta love Mr. Horsefeather! He stands for what he believes in and doesn't back down to these language bigots. We need many, many more mayors like him that defend the rights and freedoms of their minorities in each city!

      Delete
  29. Separatists will, of course, succumb to their knee-jerk reaction and instantly call this “Quebec-bashing”, all the while remaining being unable to intelligently dispute one single fact that is presented here…

    Dan Delmar: Bursting the sovereigntists’ economic bubble
    Dan Delmar | 13/08/15
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/08/15/dan-delmar-bursting-the-sovereigntists-economic-bubble/

    The man who just months ago dreamed of being the first to lead an independent, prosperous Quebec gave up and took a job with the colonial oppressors in England.

    Quebec’s sovereignty movement can be a parody of itself. Its leaders are firmly entrenched in a place where optimism and delusion meet. They seem happy to embrace English and the Anglophone business world personally, while ensuring their constituents are denied access to those same opportunities.

    During the last election campaign, the startup Option Nationale (ON) party received only about 2% of the vote. But it did succeed in creating a buzz with leader Jean-Martin Aussant’s brand of sovereignty, which seemed at first to be more inclusive. It focused on education, rather than repression and division, a hallmark of the Parti Québécois’ (PQ) platform. ON even released pro-sovereignty ads in English and Spanish.

    The election results, however, saw ON lose its only seat — Aussant’s own (he’d defected from the PQ). In June, he resigned as leader, and this week, made another startling announcement: The man who just months ago dreamed of being the first to lead an independent, prosperous Quebec gave up and took a job with the colonial oppressors in England. He’s return to London to work in finance, which many Quebec sovereignists will view as a textbook case of “selling out.”

    Aussant, a sharp and tolerant man, has every right to pursue opportunities abroad. But his decision to relocate is a classic example of a problem the sovereigntists prefer to deny exists. “I’ve had discussions in the past few weeks with various organizations,” Aussant wrote in his blog for Urbania magazine. “However … no substantial offers came from Montreal or Quebec City.” All the jobs were abroad.

    Aussant, 43, is hardly alone; virtually all educated, young Quebecers have considered leaving for greener pastures. There is a glass ceiling for professionals; a ceiling with significantly lower clearance for Anglophones. If the leader of a credible political party, less than two years after that party was created, has trouble finding suitable employment in Quebec, what hope is there for others without the profile and prestige that comes with holding public office?

    On his blog, Aussant wondered if his lack of prospects in Quebec had anything to do with his “strong identification with sovereignty.” Being a vocal sovereignist can hurt one’s chances of employment, particularly in finance, where the ability to perform basic arithmetic (like subtracting federal transfer payments from provincial revenues) can prove to be a useful skill. Even with the stigma of sovereignty in the business world, it’s still worrisome that Aussant couldn’t manage to find the right job here.

    Under the PQ’s watch so far in 2013, 40,000 jobs have been lost in Quebec, while 80,000 were gained in all of Canada. Quebec was responsible for 75% of the job losses nationally last month. Since the PQ came to power less than one year ago, Quebec has created a mere 800 jobs. Jonathan Wener, CEO of developer Canderel, recently told the Montreal Gazette that, because of PQ policies, “the market has definitely gotten softer and a lot of people are putting major decisions on hold.”

    Aussant’s brand of sovereignty may have been more economically viable than the PQ’s. But there’s no denying that the prospect of leaving Canada is bad for business. The numbers just don’t add up. According to a recent column by the Journal de Montréal’s Michel Girard, without federal transfer payments, an independent Quebec would be $19-billion in the red annually.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quebec is over-regulated, over-bureaucratized and fosters a climate that is not only unwelcoming to international business, but on occasion, downright hostile. Major retailers have been forced to take the Quebec government to court over the right to their brand names. A 17-year-old entrepreneur — the very type of person an independent Quebec would desperately need — was told by the language police that his company’s name was too English-sounding. Such examples of state-sanctioned xenophobia are hardly the exception.

      No wonder Aussant couldn’t find a good job in Quebec; few want to do business here. Aussant’s decision to move tacitly acknowledges that the very notion of independence he promulgated is not realistic. An independent Quebec would retain all the political dysfunction but lose the Canadian safety net.

      And the province’s economic self-sabotage is only worsening under the PQ. I hope Aussant finds in London the prosperity and peace of mind that’s increasingly hard to find here.

      Dan Delmar is the co-founder of Provocateur Communications and the co-host of Delmar & Dwivedi on CJAD 800 Montreal.

      Delete
    2. @r.s

      delmar is wrong in his interpretation of aussant's latest move. the only thing one can conclude out of it is that montreal doesn't make the short list of the world's top financial hubs. but you knew that r.s didn't you? seems like your favourite columnist wasn't aware.

      if quebec was independant, and if a bank of quebec was created, more opportunities would arise locally for dudes like him, obviously. on the other hand there would be less opportunities for bad-mouthers like delmar and you.

      Delete
    3. The funniest part about aussant and shows he's a real traitor to Quebec is he'd rather make real money and speak english then live in Quebec and make a pittance as a bus driver and speak french.

      Show's he's not committed to the real cause. Seppies must sacrifice, we all know that! Sacrifice starts at home!

      The flies in the face of true PQ logic where "Les Canadiens" are last but have all french players and are "proud".

      It's like he's using higher level thinking and practical decision making the rest of the PQ followers arn;t allowed to have.

      Lets repeat that again.

      If the most ardent crazy spereratist will move to english and speak english to make money instead of stay in Quebec in a second rate career speakink french what does that say about their morally bankrupt cause?

      Fully highlights the difference between the seperatist leaders and the party faithful yet again.

      It's funny to see seppies troglodytes defend him.

      Even when faced with his treachery to the cause they are unable to admit it. It just makes them mad and more irrational then before.

      "You can lead a horse to water, but you can;t make him drink".

      Delete
    4. JA
      More flawed Separatist logic by our resident CLOWN. You do realize Montreal was Canada's financial capital for 100 years before the PQ got elected in '76? The jobs were here! Money is magnetically attracted to stability. Toronto offers that safe haven that Montreal does not because of Separatist policies. Unless you get a supermajority vote to separate, instability will rule the day.

      Delete
    5. Bank of Quebec! = hahahahahahahahahahahah - going to be the best joke of the week!

      Delete
    6. The key point in Delmar's article, in my opinion:

      "[Quebec leaders] seem happy to embrace English and the Anglophone business world personally, while ensuring their constituents are denied access to those same opportunities."

      Delete
    7. Okay, I will bite. This is a pet peeve of mine.

      RBC and BMO, respectively the first and third largest banks in Canada, have their legal headquarters in Montreal as they grew up in Montreal. Up to the early 80s both had their base of operations in Montreal as well. Maybe student can then explain to us what is going on since then that those two banks chose to move their bases of operations - along with the associated jobs, hundreds of them - to Bay Street.

      Delete
    8. "if quebec was independant, and if a bank of quebec was created, more opportunities would arise locally for dudes like him, obviously.."

      Statements like this prove that secular religions of the state can produce fairytales not less preposterous than those produced by mainstream religions.

      Delete
    9. "if quebec was independant, and if a bank of quebec was created, more opportunities would arise locally for dudes like him, obviously.."

      I am amazed at how stupid people are everyday. Let's make our borough independent and create its own bank. Then maybe a clown like you would become CEO and all the separatists would have decent job instead of staying at home and waiting for welfare checks?

      Delete
    10. Student,

      If Quebec were ever to become independent it would have to use the Canadian dollar as its currency. It would have no control over monetary policy and there would be no purpose for there to be a Bank of Quebec as its central bank.

      Delete
    11. @john krug

      if quebec becomes independant it will have the choice of creating its own currency or using whichever currency it pleases, american, canadian, bitcoin, name it.

      wild hypothesis apart, what will happen is it will use the canadian dollar for a while for stability and then when things settle, if economists think a new currency would lift quebec's economy, the bank of quebec will come up with a nice rené lévesque bill.

      Delete
    12. @adski

      "...produce fairytales not less preposterous than those produced by mainstream religions."

      come on mate. raise your game. we're trying to have a discussion here.

      Delete
    13. if quebec becomes independant it will have the choice of creating its own currency or using whichever currency it pleases, american, canadian, bitcoin, name it.

      Apparently this student feels that he is smarter than many of separatist leaders (see Parizeau, Jacques, PhD, LSE) who stated many times in both referenda that independent Quebec would need to maintain Canadian dollar.

      Delete
    14. Crikey! Dudent's telling adski to raise his game. Now, that is funny, coming from someone who hasn't got game.

      Delete
    15. @troy

      of course, in the first years after independance, for stability purposes, quebec would probably be better off carrying on using the canadian dollar. that's what parizeau meant. but later, all options will be available to quebec. maybe, but i doubt it, a good mutual arrangement will be dealt with canada that would benefit both countries in using the same currency. but that's exactly what independance is all about, mate: more freedom.

      quebec has no option right now than to take the hit and deal things in canadian petro dollars. for a state that doesn't export oil, it's not good. of course quebec gets its share of oil revenue through equalization, but i think it would be healthier to depend less on this and more on local production, like it was the case before the dollar started taking oil dope.

      Delete
  30. Equality Party should clarify their position vis-a-vis this "charter". And, with a a list of the organizations of the ethnic communities in hand, systematically contact these to make the position known. Don't waste the opportunity.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Equality Party! = hahahahahahahahahahahah - going to be the best joke of the week!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually no, you are best joke, every day with your goofy comments in some foreign language...you keep us entertained daily...lollllllllll

      Delete
    2. Foreign tongue? Don't you know that unilingual people are often less intelligent?

      Delete
    3. La preuve : Même pas assez intelligent pour se trouver un pseudo :)

      Delete
  32. We need to be talking about how construction continues to destroy the city and province.

    http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Highway+construction+sites+abandoned+contractor/8815763/story.html

    The unions are mad they didn;t get all the wage increases they wanted and are playing games. Their bosses the mafia/engineering firms are pissed they got raked over the coals.

    they are all playing games and continue to ruin the city.

    A work crew could be out there in 1 hour and reopen many of these area every night or while the constrction crews are fucking around. No effort is made. If we accuse them of not doing it they drag out "safety" as a generic catch all for not doing anyhting.

    Meanwhile when they need to divert us the safety of what is provided is no "safer".

    Montreal and Quebec, a province run by bureaucrats for bureaucrats. Citizens interests are irrelevant. Nanny state always knows better. We must collectively suffer for some greater good. the greater good always has the side effect of padding a lot of pockets.

    Montreal should stop all new construction projects and put all companies on finishing the ones that are currently ongoing. Start to double up and work 2 or even 3 shifts a day on all work sites.

    Will stimulate the economy like nothign else.

    Oh wait, lazy unions control the rules and we arn;t allowed to question them. We are told it buys labour peace.

    More like extortion.


    ReplyDelete
  33. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/distinguishing-quebec-as-close-minded/article13903137/#dashboard/follows/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Les gais ne semblent pas avoir d'agenda secret...Comme certains autres que je ne nommerai pas :)

      Delete
    2. @S.R

      Alors mon petit...lequel est-tu? Un Montagnais? Un Coquelicot...ou le star de Francheville?

      Hmmmmm?

      Delete
    3. Can't wait for my next sejour to the Cantons de L'est. :-)

      Delete
    4. L'appellation "Cantons de l'Est" n'est plus utilisée depuis longtemps pour désigner la région de l'Estrie,sauf pour les publicités touristiques.

      Delete
  34. Why was Simon's (S.R.) address and link to his face pic taken out, Editor?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. S.R is not a public figure and if he wants his name, address and picture published, than he can do so himself, but not here,
      People post here anonymously, just like I blog anonymously.
      I remove ALL comments that 'out' other posters using Screen names.

      Delete
  35. I'm not a pro-religion advocate, but I'm against this law. Those religious symbols are just something that I wouldn't touch with a 10-feet pole, especially, because it's not really that much of an issue right now. All those people saying that they are tired to "adapt themselves" to religious minorities because they've been served by a woman who wears a niqab at the clothing store is just pure bullshit.

    However, I find it quite ironic that accepting that a woman wears a scarf on her head to pledge allegiance to a divinity which doesn't even exist is viewed as a form of social progress. I'm ready to accept her freedom of choice as long as it doesn't affect my own liberties but I don't think that those religious symbols are still pertinent in 2013. Hopefully, they'll slowly disappear with time, education and integration.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Adski, I am circumcised and prefer it. In any event, it is none of your business.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have no problem with your preference as far as you are concerned.

      I have an issue with imposing this preference on someone else, usually a child.

      Delete
    2. Agreed, adski. I too am circumcised and wish I weren’t. Unfortunately, I had no choice in the matter because it was basically automatic back then. Thanks for depriving me of the choice, parents.

      Delete
  37. UN GARS BIEN SYMPATHIQUE DE FRANKFORTThursday, August 22, 2013 at 4:49:00 PM EDT

    BTW Editor I find your title a bit baffling.
    Charter of Hate? Really?
    Last time I checked immigrants or any other segment of society who live in a given society MUST conform to the majority; it is the law of civility.
    FYI 90% of the world must be filled with hate given your reasoning. For example you go live in Pakistan and bring over there your booze, strippers and the way you dress. Guess what? You'll die rather fast. I still have friends in the Canadian Forces Reserve that went to Afghanistan. You would not believe all the crap they had to do in order to conform. Did they think it was hateful against them? I''ll leave you readers to judge.
    I think Editor that your bias - over time - has got you here. Take time to visit other places than NYC.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you want places like Pakistan to be the frame of reference?

      I would say that the world standard is that the welcoming society has expectations and so do the immigrants, who as tax payers are entitled to their preferences. There is always some tension between the locals and immigrants, and the host's attitudes depend on the his culture and his feeling of security, which in QC are both seriously compromised. The culture is tainted in supremacy, the insecurity is stoked by the elites.

      Delete
    2. Beaucoup trop intelligent pour ce blogue adski.

      Delete
    3. JF

      Aljezeera has picked up the racist PQ "Values" story. Another black eye for Quebec.

      http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/8/21/quebec-muslims-mayhavetochoosebetweenjobsandheadscarves.html

      Delete
    4. @jf

      the report only includes comments from muslim women. i've read much worse, to tell you the truth, but it's not up to my standards. seems it's enough to reach yours, though.

      Delete
    5. Je ne vois aucun "black eye"...Désolé.

      Delete
    6. Who cares what is in Al Jazeera? A website of biased reporting unworthy of reading.

      Delete
  38. conforming to the majority, that worked out well for the First Nations people didn't it

    ReplyDelete
  39. Well done Pauline and gang, this Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms seems to be anything but, at least with respect to religious expression! As with so many areas of jurisdiction, Quebec can certainly be distinctive - and not always in a good way. I wonder how this will play with the Canadian Human Rights Charter or the UN Charter of Rights. I haven't observed any big concerns raised by Quebec human or legal rights groups about this - though I may have missed their comment to support or reject such a Charter.

    ReplyDelete