Archive for the ‘ Justice ’ Category

Prop 8 Overturned

See, right here is the difference between a Democracy & a Terrorist State like Iran. 

The court system works, not always, but over time it generally gets it right, which is what makes us different, and such a target for the lunatic fringe.  IF people like George Bush & Stephen Harper would only learn, that they can object to differences all they want, but when push comes to shove, it is the COURTS THAT DECIDE.

IF it wasn’t for these courts, where would we be?  People like Barack Obama would not be even an outside chance of being in Government, let alone President.   As it was the COURTS that insured that all citizens had the same civil rights, irrespective of color.

Certainly I can see appeals coming down the road, and yes, it is possible a higher court will overturn today’s decision, but it is the fact that we all, irrespective of our different beliefs, trust in the RULE OF LAW.



When decisions are made in secret, void of any public judicial oversight, we are no better than our enemies.  THAT IS WHY WE ARE UNDER ATTACK.

Supreme Court Rules Against Khadr

The Supreme Court has said NO to the lower courts, on forcing the Harper Regime to bring back Khadr to Canada to stand trial.

In the ruling, the Court AGREED that our Mr. Harper & His Gang DID violate his human rights, DID fail to protect his citizenship rights under the Charter, but instead, voted Unanimously that Foreign Affairs are the purvey of Government, and TAKES PRECEDENCE over our Charter of Rights. (see CBC News for story here)

Personally I find the ruling confusing. I agree, that Foreign Affairs is within the jurisdiction of the Government, any government including the Harper Gang, however when that policy is a violation of our rights, or fails to protect our rights, should the Courts NOT have the right to intercede?

I suppose that this ends the debate, and TERROR has won over DOING WHAT IS RIGHT, though in all honesty, DEMOCRACY has sort of won. It went to the Courts, a decision was rendered, and we should adhere to it.

However, we need to examine the Foreign Policy of those we elect, who bail on standing up for the rights of the individual. I have no idea WHAT NATIONAL GOOD, it does to VIOLATE HUMAN RIGHTS OF CITIZENS, however the Supreme Court seems to feel it does.


Harper’s Solution To Everything

The Federal Government, under the management of Stephen Harper, has a simple motto. They make people afraid of something, then pretend to be the only one’s who can adequately handle the issue, either through mandatory sentencing, or some other, proven to not work, solution.

The federal government plans to introduce mandatory jail sentences for criminals convicted of serious fraud, part of tough legislation aimed at white-collar crime. ( CBC News )

Personally, I approve of tougher sentencing for crime, whether it be white collar or blue collar, but the issue still remains, that JUDGES should be the one’s making those decisions, not politicians or prosecutors. I firmly believe in a Justice System, where the individual crime, needs to be assessed, and judgement rendered as it applies to those involved, not on some average, or general perception.

Frankly, we need to stop pandering to fear, whether real or imagined, which Mr. Harper is very good at creating. His assault not long ago, on the Bloc, for their opposition to mandatory sentencing, shows how evil he is, how manipulating he is, in trying to appear as having an answer to problems, real or imagined. Yes, there is a lot of white collar crime, and it should be dealt with, but a lot of the reason for such crimes, is the economic situation, where people are desperate to get ahead.

AND that can be laid at Mr. Harper’s feet, due to his inability to protect our economy, or to protect our national treasures. He has neglected our resources, has cozied up to Big Business to the point, where they call the shots, allowing these crooks to be more successful. He has added to the ‘greed quotient’ with his tax cuts, his inability to secure high paying jobs for Canadians, and by his ruthless attacks on those who disagree with his philosophy.

Mandatory sentences, should never be an option in a true democracy, and such tampering with our system of justice, is why Stephen Harper must go.

Political Ads & Free Speech

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that B.C. Transit violated the free speech rights, when it refused to carry third party political ads, on the outside of its buses. Transit used the excuse that it didn’t carry ads that were controversial, offensive, or political in nature, out of deference to those who might be offended.

So ads for Tampex or some Get Rich Quick Scheme aren’t offensive either?

The two groups that took this case to the courts, aren’t what I’d call exactly good role models but the issue is about free speech. I really don’t believe that the Teacher’s Union, should be running political ads, but hey, that is my opinion. And that is what the Courts have protected, with its ruling.

While I don’t agree with the stand taken by the Union, either the Student or Teacher’s, I object more to B.C. Transit trying to decide what is, and what isn’t, offensive to me. That should be left to me to decide, not some hand picked manager. And let’s be honest, they do provide advertising, and so why should they deny anyone from using that service?

For the time being, Transit is an extension of Government. It isn’t privately owned, or operated, and is funded not just by its own revenues, but by the taxpayers. In that sense, I believe they have a moral obligation to not discriminate on what ads they show, or don’t. IF they were privately run, then that might be a different matter. BUT THEY AREN’T.

Now on the other hand, IF I were a teacher, I’d be more upset about the Union wanting to make me pay for the political point of view of a select few, or even majority, rather than staying out of the fray, and picking sides. I’d OBJECT to them giving political contributions to ANY political party, never mind running political ads on buses.

The Saskatchewan Party has a dilema, on how to appease the religious right, and how to enforce the civil rights of its citizens. Not an easy task, and yet at the same time, it does show how Religion & Politics mix, when they shouldn’t.  The issue here, is about whether or not a marriage commissioner can abstain from marrying a gay couple, on religious grounds.

The Saskatchewan Party government is proposing legislation that would allow the province’s marriage commissioners to refuse to perform same-sex marriages.

In a news release Friday, the government said the proposed law would ensure there are other marriage commissioners available to fill in if someone refused to perform the service because it violated his or her religious beliefs. ( CBC News )

My problem is this whole issue about whether anyone, has the right to not do the job they are hired to do.  I mean the ability to be married, under civil law, now exists across this country. That is a simple fact.

Now, for those who were hired PRIOR to this law being enacted, I can see granting them some form of exemption. I mean when they took the job, marriage was simply between a man & woman. So this change, a rather drastic one ( in some people’s mind), might have prevented them from taking the job in the first place. I don’t think they should lose that job, because of it, and be allowed to continue, as long as someone else is available to perform the ceremony.

To me, that is the fair and just way, to handle that.

HOWEVER, for those who were hired since the same sex marriage law was passed, I don’t believe they should be given any exemption. I mean the requirements of the job are there for everyone to see, to understand. IF, they have religious objections to same sex marriages, they should not have taken on the job.

It really is that simple.

I am constantly amazed at how people suddenly justify their unwillingness to fulfill their obligations, for jobs. I mean when you seek employment, and get hired, you know what the pay is going to be, you are told what is expected of you. So why then, when you get hired, do you object to some of the terms and/or conditions of that employment?

I hate it when people like Teachers, for example, say that if we want our kids to be taught how to read & write, pay them more, is just greed. They knew what the pay was, and teaching kids to read & write is the job. Suddenly it’ll only happen if they get more money?  THAT IS BLACKMAIL & EXTORTION.   It is also no different with those who take on the job of Marraige Commissioner, knowing that same sex couples have the right to be married under civil law.

Anyone, hired since the law came into effect, should NOT be given any exemption. And that is where Religion is interferring in politics. The Government has a right to protect ALL of it’s citizens. Giving an exemption to those who were already employed is one thing, to extend it to those hired since, is simply giving into religious blackmail.

It is wrong.