Now that the Supreme Court of Canada has replaced the “community standard of tolerance with a harm-based test”, let’s hope the approved-list-of-shrubbery-and-house-colour “planned community” question is soon put to the courts.
I for one, can’t wait to see the restoration of our constitutional right to store a vehicle on blocks in the front driveway.
George, where does that URL say that Canada does not have a Constitution? The text at that URL says:
made up of unwritten and written acts, customs, judicial decisions, and traditions; the written part of the constitution consists of the Constitution Act of 29 March 1867, which created a federation of four provinces, and the Constitution Act of 17 April 1982, which transferred formal control over the constitution from Britain to Canada, and added a Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as well as procedures for constitutional amendments
Doesn’t sound like nothing to me. Just because the Constitution is not contained in one single document does not mean that it does not exist. You do not understand.
Legal perversion may or may not prove to be a good thing .. but it’s oh so European .. so for canada .. it sends da right message ah?
And Paulie .. this ruling hurts me .. it makes a mockery of the relationship between a man a women especially if they have children.
If one wants to be lustful fool, one can do so in private without telling anyone with others of the same ilk .. until you take the wedding vows. Or are those vows meaningless now. If so .. why would anyone bother? Marriage and family have become nothing more than domestic economic units with a few tax advantages.
Why are so few people having children? .. Perhaps when a society becomes redundant and a parody of itself .. it simply begins to suicide in slo-mo.
Human society is obsolete as I see it. We are squabling over our fascination with genitalia.
Monkies are fascinated similarly .. I have observed this at the zoo.
Devolution are us.
Thanks Pierre.
What is not written? What is a custom? What is not confusing? Whose tradition? – is good maybe for 4 grade country ….not for first…..maybe first nation? ha I cannot join so i will be 2 nation ….with thoughts ….is it in constitiution? Can a thought be in?
George, I don’t understand your sentence. What are you asking?
From Wikipedia:
“A codified constitution is one that is contained in a single document, which is the single source of constitutional law in a state. The classic example of this is the Constitution of the United States. An uncodified constitution is one that is not contained in a single document, consisting of several different sources, which may be written or unwritten. The Constitution of Australia is an example of a constitution in which constitutional law mainly derives from a single written document, but other written documents are also considered part of the constitution. The Constitution of the United Kingdom is an example of an uncodified constitution which consists of both written and unwritten sources and has no single written fundamental document.”
Really, I’d think sometimes some of you people could be bothered to look these sorts of things up for yourselves.
Vit,
Why bother .. we have you.
Vitruvius
speak about Canada.
thickslab….tell me what is not written ? haw i can find that? – one example….should I go with more ? ?
Canada, George? Well, gee George. The following, George, are the first the paragraphs from the current article at Wikipedia:
“Canada is the second largest country in the world in terms of area, extending from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean and northward into the Arctic Ocean with claims extending to the North Pole. The northern-most country on the mainland of North America, Canada has land borders only with the United States.
“Governed as a parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy, Canada is a federation of ten provinces with three territories. Initially constituted in 1867, the country’s constitution was patriated in 1982 from the United Kingdom.
“Canada’s head of state is its monarch, currently Queen Elizabeth II, who is represented in Canada by the Governor General, presently Micha�lle Jean. The head of government is the Prime Minister, currently Paul Martin; his minority government recently lost a vote of non-confidence in the Canadian House of Commons, which required the dissolution of Parliament. A federal election has been called for January 23, 2006.”
Vitruvius
I know that. But I would like to known the “unwritten part of constitiution” and customs and the other things that are parently the part of “canadian constitution”. Why? i like to know when sameone says is in constiution I can go and check it.
You can’t George, not even in the United States of America. As much as I respect that document, it has no application in practice until interpreted by jurisprudence. So if you want to understand a constitution, you can’t just go look it up. It doesn’t work that way. You have to consider the nation’s history. And that’s where the unwritten constitution comes in.
While I certainly prefer the single source constitution, no constitution is just the words themselves.
thanks Vitruvius.
Is not the time to make one?
What, during an election 😉
It occurs to me that constitutions don’t tend to get written from scratch except as a result of upheavals. After that they tend to evolve. That’s what’s likely to keep happening.
Why can’t you guys just be positive and support the PM on this one
Duke–you have said it all–we are a devolving nation. As for the Constitution–what a farce. Either it is written or it is not a Constitution–if a group of 9 unelected people can dictate what the Constitution really meant, how ludicrous–it means nothing–as Martin stated–it is a living tree–barf–trees also get bug infested and dry rot–that is what Canada has become.
“Either it is written or it is not a Constitution.”
Honestly, George, now you’re just being stupid. You have shown absolutely zero understanding of anything we’ve tried to point out to you. Go read a book and come back when you’ve learned something.
Scott
Yes why doesn’t your buddy Brison bring up that
age of consent disparity. Clearly against the charter
Ha Thickslab
just trying to fit in!
But still Zimbabwe has signed constitution.
… and the UK doesn’t. So what does Zimbabwe have to do with anything.
You’re an idiot and a troll. Vitruvius and I have tried to explain things to you, but apparently you’re too stupid. Go to a library.
just fit in – looks like i succeceded.
You made my day!
George,
I think you misunderstand what is required for a legitimate Constitution.
Constitution literally means “body”. It is called this because it lays out the form or body of the government of a state.
Thus, a state can have a constitution without having a single word of it on paper, so long as a set of rules or understandings as to how the state is governed.
The English constitution, of course, is not written. most of it’s rules and understandings developed slowly, often as the result of seemingly insignificant events. Fundamental ideas such as the separation of powers or the prohibition on cruel punishment were never laid down, but they were understood and honored over time. At it’s hard to argue with the results: the worlds longest-functioning democracy.
Contrast this with the Soviet Union, where the constitution was set out in detail but was, in the end, a sham.
Even the most elablorate written constitutions reference unwritten principles. The American constitution would be meaningless without judicial interpretation of the 1st and 14th (for example) ammendments.
An example of an unwritten principle in a written constitution: find me the part of the BNA Act that sets out the powers of the Prime Minister. It DOES NOT EXIST. Do we still deny that the PM has some constitutional duties and authority?
Besides, even the most detailed constitutions must, to some degree, be framed in general terms; they can’t cover EVERY contingency! So unwritten principles are needed, at very least, for interpretation.
The provable harm based test is invalid as it is intangable in present sense….one cannot guage the “harm” done a community by constant degenerate bahviour until we see what effect it has on minors a generation later…justice tests must be as swift as the justice our charter rights guarantee….it is a fundamental breech of justice to have to wait a generation before a legal tests can determine if a personal or majority standard is correct.
Frankly I think her nibs Queen Bev Of Pincher Creek has come right off the rails and needs to be slapped back to reality….she is NOT the dictator of my community’s standards…she will get an eye opener when more people like me force our local governments to ignore these insane ultra vires Bench edicts from a self-styled judicial aristocracy.
Queen Bev of Pincher Creek has downed the Jonestown punch of malignant elitism and donned the cloaks of a ringwraith….This is no longer “justice” this is vice regal decrees.
WL,
Excuse me, but why on earth does the “community” (read: GOVERNMENT) get a say in what happens between consenting adults in a private establishment?
I resent the imperialism of judges as much as you do, but this time they got it right. Keep the government out of people’s private lives unless they are hurting each other.
Everyone who went in there knew exactly what they were getting into; and everyone who doesn’t like it (myself included) doesn’t have to go.
P.S.
This isn’t to say our “age of consent” laws don’t need rethinking. But the events in this club were between adults.
PMPM must be on the verge of getting the punt by Pope Benedict the whateverth.
trivia question—- when was the last time Canada had a non-Catholic prime minister???
cal2: Kim Campbell.
slab
have a beer and popcorn. classless. priceless.
George, I don’t get it. Kim Campbell is the last non-Catholic Prime Minister Canada has had. Before that, it was Lester B. Pearson. This is easy to confirm in a Google search.
According to Elections Canada, in their last annual filing, the Liberal Party of Canada was $34,818,257.32 in debt, by way of 13 bank loans.
If you review the published fundraising activities of the Liberal Party, they reported $1,702,974.83 in fundraising in the first quarter of 2005, which still left them $33 million in debt.
The Bloc Quebecois has more than $10 million in outstanding loans, mostly from the Caisse Desjardins.
The NDP has several modest loans outstanding, totalling a little more than $3 million.
The Conservatives are debt-free.
Some of the Conservative ads seem to have been made with home movie cameras. They might have had the media giggling, but the party laid off no employees during the holidays. They will enter the New Year with a full war chest.
Sheila Copps
Slab
it’s really your problem if you “don’t get it”.
George,
Humour me – what am I missing?