John Oakley is seriously entertaining the question of whether Canadian judges should give those who commit “honour” killings a break because they have different “cultural practices” and may not be aware of our norms and laws; defence attorney Lawrence Ben-Eliezer thinks judges should take these differences into consideration because we have “multiculturalism”.
… read on.
Speaking of cultural sensitivity … an oldie.
Update: Cultural sensivity in Progressia is never a two-way-street.
Update 2: Wente
‘those who may not be aware of our norms and laws … should not be permanent residents of our country.’
Posted by: Mike McCormick at June 18, 2010 12:29 PM
Plain and simple. Well said Mike McCormick!
Good cut and paste Shawn. Thank-you.
I suggest these Judges do a nationwide tour of women’s shelters and talk to the Muslim women in them. The last Muslim women I talked to in one of these shelters had her neck broken by her husband. If it wasn’t for her five-year old son calling 911 she would not be alive.
This is the most ridiculous suggestion I have ever heard. Change the immigration laws to ensure that every immigrant must pass an exam on Canadian law – especially in respect to domestic violence – no exceptions. Might as well give them a green light for honour killings if softer penalties due to cultural competence or ignorance of the law is made law by the court system.
As I’ve stated before, the mention of cultural competence causes my blood pressure to rise, but I will say that healing circles do work and have done wonders for native kids who have committed minor crimes. They should never be used in cases where neglect leads to the death of children – I was horrified to hear that a healing circle was used in that case – that is not what they were meant to be used for. Now they have come into disrepute when they were actually helping many teens and preteens. I think a psychiatric evaluation is necessary before a healing circle can be recommended – they will certainly not help persons who have anti-social-personality-disorders or hard-core narcissists.
We could deal with this a lot better if we brought back the death penalty as the response of “our cultural values and traditions” when faced with murderers …our culture should resume hanging them, promptly.
Also, no government benefits of ANY KIND for the spouses and surviving children of such murderers; if they prefer, we will ship them back to Wackistan.
Finally, let’s STOP ALL MUSLIM IMMIGRATION. There’s NOOOOOOO upside for us.
NO islam – Know Peace
Know Islam – NO peace
How about we bring back one of our traditions and stretch their neck as a reward for honor killings. Liberal has become synonymous with barking mad.
Again, the Australian Values Statement since October 2007 for all entrants, both visa and immigrant, which must be signed, is
“I understand:
•Australian society values respect for the freedom and dignity of the individual, freedom of religion, commitment to the rule of law, Parliamentary democracy, equality of men and women and a spirit of egalitarianism that embraces mutual respect, tolerance, fair play and compassion for those in need and pursuit of the public good
•Australian society values equality of opportunity for individuals, regardless of their race, religion or ethnic background
•the English language, as the national language, is an important unifying element of Australian society.”
We ought to have the same in Canada and the US. If you reject our way of life, then, you are not admissable. There is to be no attempt whatsoever to bring your old rule of law, cultural mode etc with you – if it conflicts with our rule.
Multiculturalism is a disaster, setting up groups that are encouraged to live as isolate, non-assimilating adversarial groups. If you come to another country, you assimilate. Or don’t come.
In Canada, Harper’s new immigration law has included an outline of expected adherence to our values, but I think it should be for all visas, and that multiculturalism should be openly rejected.
Official multiculturalism in this country has been a mistake. You can’t serve two masters by holding one’s former culture in one hand and the national culture (such as it is) in the other. I also believe- quite firmly- that those who sing the praises of multiculturalism live insulated lives completely unaware of what some cultures entail or how they react with other cultures. It’s not simply about food (not that there is anything wrong with that); it is about mindsets and reactions (as we have seen with certain individuals deploring Western women’s ways of life). Furthermore, official multiculturalism fails to hold in account how people or cultures evolve. First and second generation Canadians don’t often behave the way their grandparents or parents behaved. Is the Quebecois or Acadian culture just the same as continental French culture? By insisting people adhere to older (even- dare I say it- more primitive) cultural practices, one could prevent the immigrant from assimilating to the existing national culture or developing something new. And it’s done in some weird, white guilt, childish way.
Just my thoughts.
Official multiculturalism in this country has been a mistake. You can’t serve two masters by holding one’s former culture in one hand and the national culture (such as it is) in the other. I also believe- quite firmly- that those who sing the praises of multiculturalism live insulated lives completely unaware of what some cultures entail or how they react with other cultures. It’s not simply about food (not that there is anything wrong with that); it is about mindsets and reactions (as we have seen with certain individuals deploring Western women’s ways of life). Furthermore, official multiculturalism fails to hold in account how people or cultures evolve. First and second generation Canadians don’t often behave the way their grandparents or parents behaved. Is the Quebecois or Acadian culture just the same as continental French culture? By insisting people adhere to older (even- dare I say it- more primitive) cultural practices, one could prevent the immigrant from assimilating to the existing national culture or developing something new. And it’s done in some weird, white guilt, childish way.
Just my thoughts.
All us rednecks out here are behind the return of the much maligned “the bitch deserved it” defense.
Unfortunately,the only way that there will be any outrage is if an actual redneck uses that as a defense.
There is only one solution, and it is very simple. Ban all Immigration by all Moslems, no matter from where they come.
re:Conductor banned from wearing crucifix necklace
I have an idea. If they are saying that wearing crucifix on chain is prohibited because wearing chains/necklaces is prohibited then why should he not pin the crucifix to his cardigan or shirt? In very prominent place. Now, if they say he can not do this then he has good reason to go to court. !!!
What do you think?
I don’t think this is so much a case of “ignorance of the law is no excuse”, but “contempt of the law”.
These people have zero interest in Canada’s history, functioning and culture; why are they allowed into the country? Oh yes: “we need immigrants to make the country work”. Indeed. Do we need THESE types of immigrants? Let them fester in the 3rd world squats from whence they came: it will be better for both countries concerned.
“Can’t say that justice for the two Homolka’s was equal. Id like to hear a feminist defence of that”
Well, you missed it. They rallied behind the monstress and cast her as bernardo’s “victim”; she was psychologically and physically “forced” to participate in the torturing and murdering of the two kidnapped girls, and not a willing participant at all.
I wonder how rational thinking women cannot view these supposed “womens’ groups” as vile hypocritical stains on the idea of equality and opportunity for women.
mhb23re
at gmail d0t calm
“I wonder how rational thinking women cannot view these supposed “womens’ groups” as vile hypocritical stains on the idea of equality and opportunity for women.”
Because there’s money in it?
Posted by: Osumashi Kinyobe>
Well said!
I believe most people have a hard time discerning the difference between racism and anti-multiculturalism.
They are not mutually bound.
Saving ones culture or way of life may be viewed as nationalistic pride, but there is no real correlation with race. Why should some nations be denied that privilege because they are indigenously a majority white nation? I include North America because although the lands indigenous peoples were non white at the time of colonialism, the “Nations” and infrastructure we enjoy today were primarily built by its European founders. Including all law, medicine, social programs, education, manufacturing, etcetera….. Granted so called “white’s” did not do this completely alone, certainly with labor, but the Liberal elite has chosen to demonize “whites” as some evil anti-human that has no right to be proud of its ancestral accomplishments.
I live in a neighborhood of a variety of races. All of whom are second, third generation or more Canadian. All enjoy the benefits of these founders. There is harmony and friendship because all have a common ground as Canadians even if there are slight ideological differences. What does destroy a nation faster than a socialist activist president is a nation that divides it’s identity through islands of distinctive cultural differences. Especially when those cultural differences are passive aggressive towards the host culture and as far removed as the proverbial alien on the moon. This is the nightmare that political correctness has wrought on western nations. No different than the collapse of Rome, that grew decadent in it’s wealth, weak and bankrupted in it’s foreign policy and suicidal with it’s mass influx of foreign born captives, including culturally diverse immigrants from occupied lands.
With Rome the Christian “pests” rose to the top, with modern western culture it will be something far less passive, which is the global norm – today and throughout history.