 Toews says Bill 18 might go against Supreme Court rulingProvincial Politics | 207118 hits | Mar 10 6:17 pm | Posted by: Curtman  Steinbach MP Vic Toews has weighed in on a controversial provincial government bill that would ensure gay-straight alliance clubs are allowed in Manitoba schools if students want them.Commentsview comments in forum You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
Steinbach MP Vic Toews said that Bill 18 could go against a Supreme Court ruling that restricts provincial governments from defining what constitutes hate.
That was his statement regarding the bill at a press conference on Friday.
Some people living in Steinbach have spoken out against the bill. They argue it infringes on their right to support schools that reflect their religious values. A local pastor even delivered a Sunday sermon calling on people to fight against the bill.
Vic The Dick is defending family values again?
Looks more like an observation than a judgement.
Toews said as a federal minister he can't take any legislative or other action on Bill 18, but he does not support it because it infringes on freedom of religion.
"If the provincial legislature does not amend Bill 18 to address concerns of faith-based organizations, schools and communities, the only remedy may be an application to the courts to decide if the legislation is compliant with Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms," Toews said.
If faith based organizations don't like it, they can tell the province to keep their funding. The public schools could put it to good use.
I'm curious how Vic thinks the charter of rights and freedoms gives religious biggots the right to quash a student support network.
Religion wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't always doing so much harm.
Good luck wasting tax payers money on that one. Maybe they should have brought someone out to fight this who didn't sleep with his teenage babysitter.
The bill says that if students at a school want to start a support network for gay students, the school cannot stop them from doing it.
I'm curious how Vic thinks the charter of rights and freedoms gives religious biggots the right to quash a student support network.
Let's see. You go to an institution that expressly states they follow the doctrine of a church. You go to said institution anyway, and attempt to create an organization/club/student network that goes against the doctrine the institution believes in.
Yeah, I don't see why they wouldn't have a problem with. I'm sure religious schools don't support student clubs that praise atheism either.
Ahh, because atheism has certainly proven itself to be a beacon of tolerance, acceptance, and non-violence, right?
Ahh, because atheism has certainly proven itself to be a beacon of tolerance, acceptance, and non-violence, right?
Atheism isn't a club. It hasn't membership. It's incapable of proving itself a beacon of anything.
Let's see. You go to an institution that expressly states they follow the doctrine of a church. You go to said institution anyway, and attempt to create an organization/club/student network that goes against the doctrine the institution believes in.
Don't you think it's time to change that doctrine?
Let's see. You go to an institution that expressly states they follow the doctrine of a church. You go to said institution anyway, and attempt to create an organization/club/student network that goes against the doctrine the institution believes in.
Don't you think it's time to change that doctrine?
That's up to them. They just shouldn't do it on our dime. There should be no govt funding for any religious school. Except it would be fair to give parents vouchers I guess, if their child isn't in public school. But those vouchers should be pretty minimal.
Vic The Dick is defending family values again?
I think Gunnair was right. He was speaking to the bill.
Because Vic knows nothing about family values.
Let's see. You go to an institution that expressly states they follow the doctrine of a church.
You go to said institution anyway, and attempt to create an organization/club/student network that goes against the doctrine the institution believes in.
Yeah, I don't see why they wouldn't have a problem with. I'm sure religious schools don't support student clubs that praise atheism either.
First off, they're kids. So it's not actually their choice, legally, to attend these insitutions. They are not necessarily going there because they support the church's values. They have to attend school, and maybe their parents are forcing them to attend a religious institution. Lord knows, the Catholic school kids I knew growing up weren't thrilled with the idea.
Secondly, I'm not sure what the other religious texts say, but the Bible explicitly instructs its followers to kill practicing male homosexuals. It's not much a stretch, to my mind, to allow for legislation to protect gays in a Christian environment.
Thirdly, the "institution" to which you refer is made up of people. Some of those people are the students. They should have a say.
That said, I find Bill 18 to be overly vague. "Diversity"--I know what that means in the activist sense, but not in the legal sense. Does that mean we have to respect the diversity of violent psychopaths?
When Church doctrine goes against the law of the land, which one should win?
Depends, is that "law of the land" respecting constitutional gaurantees of religious freedom?