Back on track, unlike the federal Tribunal…
First: Some strong words from the Quebec legislature, or so Don McPherson of the Gazette interprets:
To hell with the Quebec human rights tribunal. And while we’re at it, to hell with the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.
That was the message of the Liberal government and the Parti Quebecois opposition this week when they reiterated their determination to keep the Catholic crucifix in the National Assembly, after the tribunal ruled it must be removed from the Saguenay city council chamber.
As was discussed earlier, the Tribunal had insisted on “neutrality” in all public proceedings. In its bizarre definition of “neutrality”, it forbade “abstaining completely from praying or displaying religious symbols”. It appears that only those religious that employ expressions of prayer or the display of symbols are to be barred from national legislatures. These Tribunals appear to be quite adept at state-sponsored discrimination.
But even more interesting, this is shaping up to be a collision of an unstoppable illiberal force (the human rights movement) and an immovable illiberal object (Quebec’s obsession with its identity). Fun times ahead.
Second: Once the Quebec human rights tribunal starts dictating religious practices in Saguenay’s town hall, the good people of that town unite:
Saguenay officials says a fundraising drive has pulled in $23,000 on the first full day of a high-profile bid to collect funds for its legal battle against those who want to stop prayers at council meetings.
All the credit to Saguenay’s council and especially mayor Tremblay for appealing this decision.
Third: You would think that business owners in modern Canada would know better than to invoke some archaic notion of “employer’s prerogative“. I mean, it’s almost as if some misinformed Canadians believe they have the right to property ownership or something. Preposterous.
Fourth: Who knew? Rich Mullin at cfl.ca reveals that the Ontario Human Rights Commission almost succeeded in destroying the Canadian Football League in the 1960s:
Of course, teams started to take advantage of this rule, so in 1965 number of Naturalized Canadians on each roster was limited to three. However, one player who was released due to this new quota went marching off to the Ontario Human Rights Commission, which ruled that it was unlawful to discriminate employment based on citizenship, threatening all roster management.
Fifth: The AODA (Access for Ontarians with Disabilities Act) website commends the Ontario Human Rights Commission for threatening the McGuinty government with complaints should it allow all municipal transit systems to grandfather in “non-accessible” buses. In the typical language of the inversion of rights, the site characterizes the purchase of a non-accessible bus as “creating new barriers against passengers with disabilities”.
Funny, I thought it was the disability itself is the barrier that prevents them from doing what able-bodied people take for granted. Silly me.