tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post113783401979678978..comments2024-03-28T03:54:21.932-04:00Comments on Canadian Cynic: Dear Canadian wankers: How will we know if Stephen lied to us?CChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1138049270674222402006-01-23T15:47:00.000-05:002006-01-23T15:47:00.000-05:00Sez Babzog: The NWC is not required because this i...Sez Babzog:<BR/><BR/><I> The NWC is not required because this is a legal issue, not a charter issue. The NWC applies to charter issues.</I><BR/><BR/>A couple of points here:<BR/><BR/>1) The marriage challenges are strangely based around section 15 of the charter.<BR/><BR/>2) The charter forms a rather significant part of our legal foundation.<BR/><BR/>Therefore, if it is a matter of "legalities", it is similarly, bound by the charter.<BR/><BR/>(e.g. You can't legislate without giving consideration to the charter - unless you want the courts to declare your legislation unconstitutional...which, perhaps, Mr. Harper wants - who knows)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137954146078495922006-01-22T13:22:00.000-05:002006-01-22T13:22:00.000-05:00Harper will be lieing when he makes noise from his...Harper will be lieing when he makes noise from his mouth...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137933539120900262006-01-22T07:38:00.000-05:002006-01-22T07:38:00.000-05:00Keep in mind that I was using SSM and the NWC only...Keep in mind that I was using SSM and the NWC only as an <I>example</I>. Personally, I don't think Harper would try this since he's made his position so forcefully that I think it would be political suicide to change direction on it now.<BR/><BR/>The question was -- are there <I>other</I> promises Harper has made that, if he were to renege, even his loyal supporters would have to admit he lied?CChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11406057201126015750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137884012876816272006-01-21T17:53:00.000-05:002006-01-21T17:53:00.000-05:00Harper is quite right that he won't use the NotWit...Harper is quite right that he won't use the NotWithStanding clause. I don't think this is a lie.<BR/><BR/>Consider that Harper has talked of reopening parts of the Constitution of this nation for several other reasons. {In particular devolving more powers to the provinces, and the favourite hobby horse of "property rights".<BR/><BR/>It's not terribly difficult to see Harper trying to slide in a small amendment that specifically defines marriage at that time.<BR/><BR/>In case you weren't aware, lovely people such as <A HREF="http://www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=81458" REL="nofollow">Bishop Henry</A> would love an amendment of that nature. (and are apparently lobbying in that direction)<BR/><BR/>So technically Harper hasn't "lied" so much as omitted the truth. I'd still call it deceptive - but I'll put pretty damn good odds that his tactic on Marriage will be amendments to the constitution - with the incentive being given to the provinces in the form of greater powers being devolved to them as part of the package.<BR/><BR/>- No I'm not paranoid - I don't trust any these buggers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6708375.post-1137866919736020562006-01-21T13:08:00.000-05:002006-01-21T13:08:00.000-05:00Reminds me of a song:What, never? No, never! No, n...Reminds me of a song:<BR/>What, never? <BR/>No, never! <BR/>No, never? <BR/>Well, hardly ever!Cathie from Canadahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11418899090537597360noreply@blogger.com