And why is there a need for such a hotline? If you see someone breaking the laws of this country, call the police or 222-TIPS. No one was advocating for this hotline but yet they brought it. How much will this hotline cost? WTF is a barbaric cultural practice and who gets to define it? So they lost because their hotline wasn't hip enough? Are you kidding me? This is not about any womans rights or honour killings. They needed a political wedge issue to divide up the votes in Quebec and they used this and the niqab issue. Thankfully they failed woefully. I have been in Canada for 20 years and have never seen this racial/ethnic/religious baiting politics before and I hope it's the last time we see this crap.
Sure, and honour killing and abuse is something that you want to call a "Barbaric practices" hotline about, instead of 911?
So if 911 could solve all these issues, would you two be in favour of abolishing women's helplines as well? Women's shelters? As for what is a barbaric cultural practice? You could ask the same thing about "What is discrimination?" "Who gets to define who has precedence in religious freedom vs human rights cases? i.e. the Human Rights Commission case a few years back of the Muslim barber who refused to cut the hair of a feminist lesbian" Also you could also ask "What is abuse?" If a wife feels threatened but the husband doesn't state a direct threat, things could get messy and we can argue until the cows come home"
And yes they got blasted by the media, not because the idea is "xenophobic" but because of the way they sold it. The name focuses more on the perpetrators than on the victims. Had they used more "progressive" language like I don't know "At Risk Victims Helpline" it would have been seen differently.
Wait a minute here - you seem to have left no room that women can choose to wear it on their own as part of their faith (which was the case for the women who went to court over the issue). We don't go about telling nuns that they should drop their headcovering and black smocks - because it is their choice. The important thing here is that the choice is not out of coercion. The comfort level of the majority of Canadians have nothing to do with it - considering the majority of Canadians a) don't consider it an issue of such import and b) have no issue with overarching legislation that dealt with it on a rights basis.
Agreed, as stated before the majority of Canadians don't consider it an issue of major importance. As for nuns covering their heads, that's a bad comparison because nuns take a life long oath of service to the church and in Canada they are (99.9 % of the time) not pressured, in fact I know quite a few families that have, in vain, begged their daughters not to become nuns. That's a stark contrast to women who wear the niqab, most of which are pressured to do so by their husbands and families. I'm sure there are those who do it by choice but is this what Canada is? A country that embraces segregation between genders? Whatever happened to equality of the sexes?
I wonder why they weren't mentioning their stellar economic record during the past 10 years. Anemic growth, huge deficits even though Paul Martin left them billions in surplus, added billions to the country's debt, and the country has gone through 2 recessions under their watch. Seems cutting taxes isn't the magic solution to every economic problem like they wanted us to believe. It's time for someone else to have a chance. They can go stay in the time out box.
I'm not a fan of deficits either but come on do you remember the political climate of 2008-09? The buzz words were "Keynesian" "stimulus" "short term deficits". It would have been political suicide for them to stick to their guns maintain a balanced budget as none of the other political parties had that on their agenda. They were all against budget cuts even if it meant a deficit. By the way, the Conservatives wanted to balance the budget this time around but it was the Liberals who advocated a "modest" deficit.
I don't know really want to get into a debate over the niqab, but I honestly wonder what part of "Canada is a free country" some people do not understand.
I also wonder what of part "Canada is a free country. And in a free country women must not be treated as thralls" most people don't understand.
Wow, you really don't understand why the CPC lost! I wasn't being serious with the "old stock Canadian" comment, but can you not see how being xenophobic and mean spirited hurt the party?
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...ir-identity-before-they-lost-power-hbert.html
Good article about how the conservative movement in Canada is failing.
Xenophobic for attempting to create a help hotline to prevent honour killing and forced marriages? I guess misogynists get precedence over women's rights but as long as they originate from a certain part of the world?
Nonetheless I can understand the "mean spirited" comment; I've said before that Harper has very little charisma and I definitely wouldn't want him as a boss as he known to be a micro manager but that doesn't make him a "racist". But just because somebody gets convicted for robbery doesn't mean he's a rapist, murder, child molester, puppy eater etc. In my opinion Trudeau won this election on image rather than being the better candidate. That and all the scandals that the Conservatives had.
