So if the right is ticked at The Charter for making its institution of choice, marriage, non-exclusive and the left is ticked at The Charter for making its institution of choice, health care, non-exclusive should everyone be ticked off or should everyone get with the program?
Canada's Favorite Blog
Almost Famous
Articles
- Articles for the sister station, A Good Beer Blog.
- Pick any day's tunes as heard on CBC Ottawa's All in a Day hosted by my personal emailing buddy, Brent Bambury. You won't find a better music selection on radio anywhere - certainly not on the deeply dowdy CBC.
- Another plume catches my eye.
- Stuff less serious than Stuff.
- From Jan to March 2006, I tried a group humour blog with others on the subject of Canadian politics. It did not last but the posts were worth keeping. #16 was banned. There were no comments. It was at www.shadowcabinet.ca.
- Some writings and other junk of little real interest unless you like law or are a Crow.
A display of hideous graphics focused on the goal of figuring out where the smokestack I can see to the south is sitting.
Comments
David Janes - June 9, 2005 8:35 PM
We should _always_ be (civily) fighting about this stuff and what it means, especially when the what is in the charter is up against legislation, parliment, conventional wisdom, etc.. I think the courts having been pretty good about understanding that these things aren't academic or functioning without reference to the society it's being implemented in.
Hans - June 10, 2005 9:48 AM
I vote we get with the program! We might need a better title for it, though, than "non-exclusivity"... hmmm... freedom of choice, freedom to choose, live and let live, maybe....
SayNay? - June 11, 2005 3:08 PM
Shouldn't the Supremes have been asked to rule on whether the "exclusivity" of the definition of marriage violated the Charter, before "we get with the program"? I know, this sounds like a broken record. But again, it's a bit bizarre, that this super-group, the only one who can sing that massive Canadian hit "Stop, In the Name of Rights", was never asked to cover this tune.