Posted by: sleepyoldbear on: 16 April 2008
“I am a Canadian,
a free Canadian,
free to speak without fear,
free to worship in my own way,
free to stand for what I think right,
free to oppose what I believe wrong,
free to choose those who shall govern my country.
This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.”
* Prime Minister John Diefenbaker, July 1, 1960, House of Commons
* enshrined in the Canadian Bill of Rights
21st Century version -
“I am a Canadian,
A Canadian,
Free to speak and to worship to whatever extent Human Rights Tribunals consider should be allowed;
Free to believe in accordance with my conscience so long as I keep quiet about it;
Free to stand for whatever Political Correctness says is right;
Free to choose members of Parliament who pretend to govern my country;
Free to hope that the Supreme Court judges will not over-ride too much of what my Parliament enacts;
Free, for the time being, to sigh whenever I read the laughably named Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”
Wow, yeah. I like that. Would make a good tattoo for sure. Still waiting for a Latin translation of sinner and believe, as in I am a sinner and you should believe. Just in case anyone reading this knows Latin and would be willing to help me out.
Kudos to Observer.
Thanks Bear. I think we may have done this before.
I wonder where the passion went in this country? One would think that this could be made into a fantastic election issue.
How about a platform based on free speech and property rights? Since the law in this country has been migrating from precedent to statute as a basis why would we not want to protect these things? I suppose they would not sit well with the left’s fascism light that P.E.T. so lovingly gave us.
I want my country back.
Stillman, I nominate you for the job. Harper can’t be trusted, since he doesn’t even allow free speech in his own party.
I would not be a wise choice.
Stillman, I don’t know you well enough to say I’d vote for you, but I think I could respect you. I lived in Ontario for part of the Common Sense Revolution, and while I disagreed at the time with much of what Mike Harris, at least he did what he said he would do. There was no doubt of what you were voting for, he followed through, and he got re-elected.
Stephen Harper, on the other hand, has hardly done the same. He gave a solemn promise to a war veteran’s widow that if elected he would immediately extend benefits to all the widows. Apparently, in the Harperese language, “immediately” means after 3 years (and only if you hound him constantly), and “all war widows” means only those on the Guaranteed Income Supplemement. He promised to clean up corruption, but it turns out he cheated on election spending, when Elections Canada investigated he sued them, and now part of his defense is that all parties do it. Wow, what a strong defense, we’re only as bad as the Liberals.
He promised to give MPs more freedom, but none of his are allowed to speak without clearing it with him first. He promised they would be allowed to vote with their conscience, but when one did, he was kicked out of the party. He broke the Atlantic Accord, which was his idea in the first place. He promised more democracy, but has concentrated more and more power in the PMO.
And mind you, he has done all this while in a minority government. How would he behave with a majority? So if I’m ever going to vote for a conservative, it won’t be for Harper. Stillman, what’s your platform?
[...] Prime Minister John Diefenbaker, July 1, 1960, House of Commons * enshrined in the Canadian Bill of Rights * Via [...]
[...] John Diefenbaker, July 1, 1960, House of Commons & enshrined in the Canadian Bill of Rights. Via Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Steynianism 42.0No Fascism [...]
[...] Prime Minister John Diefenbaker, July 1, 1960, House of Commons Enshrined in the Canadian Bill of Rights [...]
[...] Prime Minister John Diefenbaker, July 1, 1960, House of Commons * enshrined in the Canadian Bill of Rights * Via [...]
16 April 2008 at 23:25
Nice quote, too bad its not worth the paper its written on. Perhaps it is time to put these ideas into our constitution. The Bill of Rights is merely a piece of legislation that can be rescinded by any government without the blink of an eye. In fact if one so wished the arguement could be made that it could be removed simply because we already have the Charter, which I believe supercedes the BoR anyway. A nobel sentiment for sure but Diefenbaker really should have pressed for this to be an inalienable document with some teeth. Certainly would have saved you some cash, cash that could have gone towards your big red truck, oh and the Rav is red….I like red.