Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

Any bad news for McGuinty....is good news for us

twodogsandacat
September 10th, 2005, 12:02 AM
Dalton McGuinty and Michael Bryant are the idiots that bought BSL to Ontario. When it is repealed they also must be. In the next election I will seldom mention the words dog or BSL. Instead I will use articles like these to discredit them.

Learn about all the issues that can be used against them...then play both sides.

************************************************** *********
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1126216214747&call_pageid=968256289824&col=968342212737

Sharia protest gets personal
Demonstrators criticize McGuinty
Threat to women's rights feared

KERRY GILLESPIE
QUEEN'S PARK BUREAU

Protestors who oppose the use of sharia law in family arbitration have accused Premier Dalton McGuinty of being naive, desperate for votes and of putting the lives of Muslim women in danger.

"You do not deserve to be called a leader or a statesman. All you want to do is win the next election," Tarek Fatah shouted outside Queen's Park yesterday.

"You support sharia and ... it's my daughter who will suffer," said Fatah, a member of the international campaign against sharia court in Canada, which organized the event that drew 300 people.

Smaller protests opposing a proposal to formalize the use of sharia law in Ontario took place in cities across Canada and European cities including Amsterdam, Paris and London. In Montreal, about 100 people turned out in the rain.

Most of the protestors want sharia, and other religious-based legally binding arbitration used by Jews and Catholics, banned.

Since December, the government has been sitting on a report by former NDP attorney general Marion Boyd. It recommends keeping religious arbitration, including sharia, as an option to resolve family matters, such as divorce and child custody.

Earlier this week, McGuinty said: "Whatever we do, it will be in keeping with the values of Ontarians and Canadians," and that women's rights "will not be compromised."

Protestors called his words naive. "You have to live there to understand," said a woman who spent 30 years in Iran where sharia law is used. "Women are miserable ... it will be the same here."

Attorney General Michael Bryant said he knows women are worried, but says it is unnecessary.

"There will be no binding family arbitration in Ontario that uses a set of rules or laws that discriminate against women," Bryant said in a statement yesterday.

The government has not given a date for a decision, beyond saying it will be "shortly."

Sharia is already legal in Ontario, as long as both parties agree to it and the arbitrators' decisions don't violate Canadian law, said a spokesperson for the attorney general's ministry.

Sharia and other religious-based arbitration has been covered by Ontario's Arbitration Act since 1991, he said.

Because of concerns over the expanding use of sharia law, Boyd made recommendations for some changes to protect the rights of vulnerable women. But critics say it's not enough.

Writer and activist June Callwood said talk of legitimizing sharia law is respect for multiculturalism gone wrong.

"Stoning women is outside the limit of respecting multiculturalism and sharia law also ought to be outside the limit of respecting multiculturalism," Callwood said.

There are many different interpretations of sharia, but most people agree it favours fathers for custody of children and men over women in matters of divorce and inheritance.

twodogsandacat
September 12th, 2005, 05:41 PM
So Dalton McGuinty in a move that is being highly criticized announces yesterday – to only one news source by the way – that all religious tribunals will be abolished in Ontario. By announcing it to only one news source he shows that he is uncomfortable with it. Do you feel that pain Mr. McGuinty….that’s because you just shot yourself in the foot. Granted it’s a no win situation but it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy. Well actually it could – Michael Bryant.

Here’s where it gets good. They couldn’t reject Muslim religious tribunals and allow those of other faiths to stand, as surely in a court case it would be seen as a bias against Muslims – so they ban them all. Dalton McGuinty has just made himself and Michael Bryant – the enemy of the Jewish faith. Looks good on you Dalton but it looks even better on Michael Bryant. I wonder if Bryant is sleeping on the couch tonight.

Like I said it couldn’t happen to a nicer schmendrick. Look for my editorials come 2007 written under the name Goldstein.

http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/politics/news/shownews.jsp?content=n091259A

twodogsandacat
November 23rd, 2005, 04:59 PM
This article at Canadian Jewish News confirms that members of this particular group may not be giving their vote to the Ontario Liberals very easily in the next election. It's nice to have this particular organization on the anti-Bryant anti Liberal side. Although the issues are different there are some common points too.

Notice the statement regarding lack of consultation, it sounds familiar doesn't it? The kicker here though is that Bryant's wife is Jewish and he has done everything but convert to Judaism which may of helped to get some votes from members of this organization.

"Because sharia was at odds with modern values, they took it out on the Jews. What other confrontations will occur? This could be the beginning of a backtracking on freedoms.

“I don’t want to be alarmist,” he said. “But will the government’s clampdown on religious freedoms put a crimp on Jewish freedoms as well?”

http://www.cjnews.com/viewarticle.asp?id=7869


New Ontario bill partially strips beit din’s powers

By RON CSILLAG
Staff Reporter

Concerns that changes to Ontario’s arbitration system would spell the end of legal backing for rabbinical courts in the province were allayed somewhat last week with the introduction of a bill that would remove only family law from the purview of the beit din.

Jewish community leaders say that at first blush, the much-anticipated bill seems to allow beit dins to continue hearing the bulk of their usual caseload – chiefly commercial disputes – and will result in only “minimal” changes to their workings.

In fact, community officials say the proposed legislation would still permit a beit din’s non-family cases to be legally bound by the provincial Arbitration Act and thus enforceable in a secular court.

And they’re not ruling out the possibility of rabbis still being able to arbitrate family disputes.

What Jewish activists are lamenting, though, is the process that led to the changes. They say they weren’t consulted, and they’re now calling for public hearings on the bill.

The proposed legislation came two months after Premier Dalton McGuinty’s surprise announcement that he would scotch faith-based arbitration.

“There will be no religious arbitration in Ontario,” McGuinty told Canadian Press on Sept. 11. “There will be one law for all Ontarians.”

His move capped two years of often acrimonious debate in Ontario over a proposal from Muslim groups to set up tribunals similar to the beit din that would employ sharia, or Islamic law.

Jewish leaders and rabbis had feared the government would strip beit dins of the secular legal authority they have had since the Arbitration Act was enacted in 1991.

Attorney General Michael Bryant sounded a similar tone to McGuinty’s when he announced in the legislature last week that “when it comes to family law arbitrations in this province, there is only one law for Ontario – Canadian law.”

Bryant said any agreement involving family law based on religious principles would amount to “advice only… it is not enforceable. It is legally irrelevant.”

Jewish officials are taking the government to task for not consulting religious groups.

“From the beginning, we were very concerned with the lack of communication between communities that are affected by this legislation and the government. That has not changed,” said Mark Freiman, honorary legal counsel for Canadian Jewish Congress, Ontario region .

Freiman said he hopes the government will send the bill to public hearings “to address this egregious lack of consultation.”

CJC Ontario region’s executive director, Steve Shulman, who attended a technical briefing on the bill last week at Queen’s Park, said it looks as though only family law will be excluded from the beit din’s legal purview.

Rulings in other cases involving business, landlord-tenant and private disputes will continue as before and would still be enforceable in a secular court, Shulman said.

He said there are “a lot of good things” in the bill, such as a call for the licensing of family law arbitrators and for divorcing couples to get independent legal advice before entering into an arbitration agreement.

But “what’s not good is the process. Stakeholders were told after the fact, [and] we’ve asked for that piece of legislation be sent to committee so the lack of consultation that occurred be redressed.”

The CJC, he said, will seek a balance between protecting the rights of women with their right to voluntarily submit to religious arbitration.

Because the proposed legislations stipulates that family-law arbitrations must be based on Canadian or Ontario law in order for their rulings to be enforced, the nature of the beit din’s decisions, and possibly its procedures, will have to change, Shulman noted.

Rabbi Reuven Tradburks, secretary of the Toronto Vaad Harabonim’s beit din, agreed that the “vast majority of cases will still have the force of law.” The beit din will be “minimally affected” by the proposed changes.

The Toronto beit din hears 25 or 30 cases a year involving commercial, business and labour disputes, but only two or three annually on matters arising from divorce, such as division of assets and child custody, Rabbi Tradburks said.

He stressed that any changes will not affect the granting of gets, or Jewish divorce decrees.

He said litigants will still be free to go to a beit din on family disputes if both parties consent. But if the government’s amendments are enacted, divorcing couples could end up in secular courts appealing beit din decisions they didn’t like, or ignoring them altogether.

The CJC’s Freiman said the regulations will have to be studied in greater detail, but he’s not ruling out the possibility of a beit din still ruling on family disputes.

“It could be that [rabbis] will have to become members of a recognized arbitrative association, or complete courses in Canadian law.”

What worries Rabbi Tradburks are the “much broader implications” of the government’s actions.

“Because sharia was at odds with modern values, they took it out on the Jews. What other confrontations will occur? This could be the beginning of a backtracking on freedoms.

“I don’t want to be alarmist,” he said. “But will the government’s clampdown on religious freedoms put a crimp on Jewish freedoms as well?”

babyrocky1
November 23rd, 2005, 05:12 PM
Oh oh... how are we going to fit all of our allies in the "All Candidates Meetings" LOL. Didn't consult with them??? whod a thunk it????

twodogsandacat
November 23rd, 2005, 05:15 PM
Oh oh... how are we going to fit all of our allies in the "All Candidates Meetings" LOL. Didn't consult with them??? whod a thunk it????


I think we need a bigger hall. Get there early.

Also if he's ever stupid enough (and he is stupid so you never know) to go on 'Legal Briefs' again we may have to share our time. Sharing is good. The more reasons he gives people to kick his a$$ to the curb the better.

babyrocky1
November 23rd, 2005, 05:17 PM
I heard his pudginess talking about doing this....I dont know what the point of it is...if problems can be solved in the community, all the better, Its not like they deal with murder charges??? Is he concerned that his lawyer friends might not be getting thier due??? I din't hear what the motivaiton behind this new leg. is.

babyrocky1
November 23rd, 2005, 05:19 PM
I think we need a bigger hall. Get there early.

Also if he's ever stupid enough (and he is stupid so you never know) to go on 'Legal Briefs' again we may have to share our time. Sharing is good. The more reasons he gives people to kick his a$$ to the curb the better. Actually I think Lauren H. is now banned, banned, banned, ! And the list keeps growing.:D

seeker
November 23rd, 2005, 06:09 PM
Actually I think Lauren H. is now banned, banned, banned, ! And the list keeps growing.:D


I love it when I can sense a Liberal losing sleep:thumbs up

twodogsandacat
November 23rd, 2005, 07:59 PM
I love it when I can sense a Liberal losing sleep:thumbs up

I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the Bryant house.

Daughter: "Daddy, why are all Mommy's relatives mad at you"?
Mrs Bryant: "Because your daddy's a moron honey".