HOW MUCH LONGER CAN CANADA LAST LIKE THIS?

HOW MUCH LONGER CAN CANADA LAST LIKE THIS?

IN PURSUIT OF THE TRUTH - HTTP://WWW.CINOPSBEGONEBLOGSPOT.COM - WED. JULY 25/18

 

July 13, 2018 (REAL Women of Canada) LifeSite:

   Last month the Supreme Court of Canada decided in the Trinity Western University case that the right to freedom of religion, entrenched in Section 2 of the Charter,can be infringed by the rights of the LBTGQ community, which rights were read into the Charter by the Supreme Court in 1995. This was the most recent example of a troubling situation that has developed since the Charter came into effect in 1982.

 

    The court in the Trinity case concluded that the Law Societies of British Columbia and Ontario had the right to decide on the admissions policies of a private religious university in British Columbia that wanted to obtain accreditation for a law school. The law societies objected because of the university's Covenant that, among other matters, upheld that sexual relationship be only within marriage between and a man and a woman.

    The court concluded that the law societies were permitted to raise objections based on vague and undefined concepts "public interest" and Charter "values". As the two dissenting judges, these concepts are "entirely the product of the idiosyncrasies of the judicial mind that pronounces them to be so." These two concepts are subjective and depend on the varied interpretation on the varied interpretation of the judges and can now be used as justification to limit constitutional rights rights written into the Charter.

 

    This decision confirms that judges are making decisions that are changing the social fabric of Canadian society based on their own policy preferences. Example of other such decisions include: 1) the legalizing of prostitution, 2) the striking down of the abortion law, 3) the prohibition against physician-assisted suicide, 4) the right to strike granted essential services such as firemen, policemen, ambulance workers (which puts public safety at risk), 5) legalization of drug injection sites, 6) the redefinition and narrowing of the interpretation of pornography 7) and that sex clubs for couples and single individuals meeting each other for group sex ARE NOT ILLEGAL, NOT INDECENT. There have been many other decisions as well that have profoundly changed Canadian society.... It is whether nine appointed unaccountable judges should be making such decisions isolated from the public - the latter having no input into the formation of such public policy decisions....

 

    There is no longer any doubt that the Supreme Court of Canada are not impartial and objective, but are based not on law or precedent,but rather on the personal policy preferences of the judges. Former Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin admitted as such in the National Post (May 23, 2015) when she stated:

    "My job is simply to listen to what the parties have to say ... to think about is best for Canadian society on this particular problem that's before us, and give it my best judgment after listening to also, my eight other colleagues...."

 

    Under what authority do the nine appointed judges have the jurisdiction  to determine "what's best for Canadian society"? It is the responsibility of Parliament to do so. The Supreme Court of Canada has used the Charter as a tool to usurp the role of Parliament....

 

CRISIS CREATED BY CHARTER INTERPRETATION:

    The judges believe their role is to be social engineers and to change society in what they believe to be in the "best interests" of society.... Canadians should consider amendments to the Charter .... This will not be easy to achieve as Pierre Trudeau, creator of the Charter, ensured that amendments to the Charter will not be readily achievable.

Part V, S.28 of the Charter provides that an amendment to the Charter can occur if authorized by

(1) The Senate and House of Commons, and 

(2) 2/3 of the provinces that have in the aggregate of at least 50% of the population.

 

It will be a long journey to accomplish this, but we must start somewhere. We cannot allow ourselves to be subjected to the tyranny of appointed judges. Canada has come a long way from democracy  and this must change. 

George H. Kubeck