It seems to me that either any religious group of sufficient size should be allowed to have a separate school board or that none should.
I think the answer is that none should just because it is the only fair response that is really practicable and because I haven't heard an argument so far that has changed my mind.
The problem for me now is who the hell to vote for. Should I vote for the entire Green platform because I agree with them on this one issue.
And as an aside this is why I can't get excited about electoral reform which I see as an issue about party politics that does nothing to improve my representation as opposed to parliamentary reform where in my opinion the democratic deficit could be better addressed.
And as another aside I can't say that I "saluted the good burghers of Hérouxville as cultural heroes" but rather wondered at your condemnation of their display of xenophobia when it is such a common characteristic in human culture.
As another aside I sent an email to Stephen Taylor yesterday asking for his opinion on the Skeena-Bulkley Valley issue.
He acknowledged receipt and says he will get back to me.
I posted the same question on an SDA user tips thread with no replies so far.
Your post--and the response--have been duly noted, doug.
I think the issue is complicated by the fact that our Constitution enshrines the Ontario separate school system for Catholics, so it isn't up to the Ontario provincial legislature to remove that right. Absent a constitutional amendment, the issue is whether that right remains for that one group as an exception to the rule or whether it is extended to other groups.
It's my understanding that this Constitutional amendment is fairly easy to get--Manitoba already did, for example, and I believe Newfoundland as well.
Sections 93(3)&(4) outline the procedure to be followed when a provincial legislature decides to make a move to affect "...any Right or Privilege of the...Roman Catholic Minority of the Queen's subjects in relation to Education."
The province of Manitoba used its similar sections - 22(2)&(3) - to abolish full public support for its Roman Catholic schools. Section 179 of "The School Act of 1890" reads, in part: "In cases where...Catholic school districts have been established...such Catholic school districts...shall cease to exist."
To this day in 2007 the so-called "constitutional guarantee", section 22(1), for the full public funding of Roman Catholic schools in Manitoba remains in the Canadian Constitution, but Roman Catholic schools in Manitoba today receive the same portion of government support as any other approved private school. The Constitution did not need to be changed, Manitoba did it all by itself - read all about it in the history books. Ontario could do exactly the same.
Renton Patterson, President
Civil Rights in Public Education, Inc.
H/t The Daily Dissidence.
Very interesting-I did not know that. It appears that Newfoundland made a change only after a referendum took place:
http://www.canadiana.org/citm/
th...tution16_e.html
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
