More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays canadas charter of rights and freedoms
Canadian Charter of Rights
Essays canadas charter of rights and freedoms
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Canada vs Religion Rights of Immigrants
Vincent Massey (Governor General of Canada) once said,“Canada is not a melting-pot. Canada is an association of people who have, and cherish, great differences, but who work together because they can respect themselves and each other.” In other words, he describes how Canada is a very diverse place and how we should work together despite our differences in religion. Immigration poses opportunities for citizenship: for building a society in which all Canadians belong. Although, to what extent should immigrants continue to promote culture and religion? Some may argue that we need to put restrictions on promoting religion like the code adopted in Hérouxville; which forbade women from being stoned alive
…show more content…
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of Canada's constitution; the highest law in Canada. Therefore, it`s only proper we treat it the Charter to its utmost priority. That being the case, prohibiting others to practice or promoting their religion goes against one of our Fundamental Freedoms; freedom of religion. Section 2 of the Charter states, that you can practice your religion and declare them without fear of hatred and/or bullying. In addition, you cannot force another individual to follow the same religion a you; as that is assimilation. However, a tiny village in Quebec; Hérouxville was doing the opposite of this. For instance, Hérouxville was having a heated debate on trying to ban religious headgear like hijabs,taqiyya, and turbans. In either case, this is obviously unacceptable because it goes against the Charter. Furthermore, Hérouxville also adopted a peculiar code of conduct that forbade women from being stoned alive or burned with acid, along with other measures intended for newcomers. Forcing immigrants with other measures and basically assimilating them infringes section 15 of the Charter; being equality rights. Equality rights state, every individual in Canada is under and before the law. This means that they guaranteed equal protection, regardless of their race, gender, ethnicity, religion, age, and mental/physical disability. In summary, practising and promoting religion is protected under the Charter therefore, it's only right that it should be
Historically, Canada has held a world renowned reputation as nation with a magnanimous ideological approach to providing asylum to those individuals subjected to marginalization and persecution in their homeland – regardless of their nation of origin (Ismaili, 2011, p.89 & 92). Indeed, providing sanctuary to refugees who would otherwise experience significant hardships ranging from blatant discrimination and racism to torture and genocide, has very much become an institutionalized aspect of Canadian society. However, recent changes to Canada’s immigration policy delineated in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and Bill C-31 may have perhaps put this ideology in peril (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, 2001).
... presence of religious diversity amongst the multiculturalist scene, multiculturalism and its relationships to ethnocultureal minorities, Quebec’s reasonable accommodation as well as the overlap of Aboriginal and multiculturalism issues, require research and development. This speak volumes about Banting and Kymlicka, as it places their work on a larger spectrum that will one day be surrounded by other impressive works that may compliment or challenge their findings. Canadian multiculturalism is completely different than what takes place in different countries. It goes without saying that not every picture can be painted with the same type of brush because the world is not full of the same picture that has a white washed idealized understanding. With that being said, the problems in other countries are not inherent to the multiculturalism picture in other countries.
The “Sons of Freedom” are a small radical group that diverged from a religious sect known as the Doukhobors. This zealous and revivalist subsect evolved from the Doukhobors only to gain the government’s attention for their extremely radical acts. They have initiated bombings, arson, nudist parades, and hunger strikes, all in protest to the land ownership and registration laws of Canada. Such obscene and violent demonstrations have caused a great deal of conflict between the Sons of Freedom and the Canadian government’s legal system and have also generated much public resentment. However, should the State of Canada have imposed laws upon this minority group that blatantly conflicted with their religious beliefs?
Do you know that despite Canada being called multicultural and accepting, Canada’s history reveals many secrets that contradicts this statement? Such an example are Canadian aboriginals, who have faced many struggles by Canadian society; losing their rights, freedoms and almost, their culture. However, Native people still made many contributions to Canadian society. Despite the efforts being made to recognize aboriginals in the present day; the attitudes of European Canadians, acts of discrimination from the government, and the effects caused by the past still seen today have proven that Canadians should not be proud of Canada’s history with respect to human rights since 1914.
In legal theory, there is a great debate over whether or not law should be used to enforce morality. The sides of the debate can be presented as a continuum. At one end, there is the libertarian view, which holds that morality is an individual belief and that the state should not interfere in the affairs of the individual. According to this view, a democracy cannot limit or enforce morality. At the other end, there is the communitarian position, which justifies the community as a whole deciding what moral values are, and hence justifies using the law to enforce community values. For libertarians, judges should play a prominent role in limiting the state, while for communitarians, judges should have as small a role as possible. In between these two extremes sit the liberal egalitarians, who attempt to reconcile democratic decision-making about moral values with liberalism. The problem is made more complex when one considers that both law and morality are contested concepts. Two recent cases where this continuum can be illustrated are Canada [Attorney-General] vs. Mossap, and Egan vs. Canada. In this essay, I will attempt to explore some of the issues produced in these two cases. I will begin with a summary each case, followed by an analysis of the major themes involved. I will then place the issues in a larger, democratic framework, and explore the role of law in enforcing morality in a democracy. I will then prove how the communitarian position - as articulated by Patrick Devlin - supports the decisions given in Mossap and Egan, and how even the great proponents of libertarianism - Mill and von Hayek - would agree that the decisions were just. A conclusion will then follow.
But she wonders if there is something else other than the spirit of citizenship that could hold the Canadians together. Are there values commonly shared by the Canadians? Chong has found out solution for these questions, and she states, “What sets Canadian society apart from others is that ours is an inclusive society” (Chong, 2015. P. 8). Canadian immigration laws are forward-looking than many other countries, because the Canadian immigrants and the naturalized citizens enjoy status. Canadians understand the importance of “Unity in Diversity”. The inclusiveness is the bridge that connects the Canadians, and this bridge is tempered with the values like tolerance, fairness, understanding and
Our government’s predecessors have attempted to eradicate Canada’s first people, which is not only an insult to the indigenous people of the past, but to the present. This country did not start off as a joint endeavor of the two general groups of people that inhabited it during its birth, but decimation and forced assimilation of great traditions and people. The assimilation of a great culture, the destruction of oral histories, and the forced loss of language destroyed the chance trust. Only by teaching disgust towards that type of attitude and action, by not excusing it or attempting to justify, will begin a new age of
Ninette Kelley and M. J. Trebicock, The Making of the Mosaic: a history of Canadian immigration policy. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998). Immigration Policy in Canada: History. Administration and Debates. “Mapleleafweb.com.”
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is in place to ensure the citizens of Canada are protected from unreasonable violations by the government. When the assimilation policy was adopted there was no way to determine the far reaching effects that it would have on aboriginal children and their families. Over time societal views change and the policies are directly affected so this kind of human rights violation would be less acceptable. Challenging the status quo can bring about change and bring awareness to a topic that was often overlooked. In a nation which prides it’s self on being a multicultural mosaic, residential schools fuelled by policy, religious organizations and the public should be stricken down permanently.
“Multiculturalism” entered public speech in the late 1960s and early 1970s in Canada that focused on unique cultural diversity, nationalities, and ethnicity across the nation. Multiculturalism and Immigration are important factors in the development of Canada to attain a strong multicultural example of economic stability, social and political growth which leads to the emergence of Canada’s identity and culture.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians likewise of their gender, religious, spiritual and cultural views. Section 2 a guarantees the “freedom of conscience and religion”. This right allows individuals to practice follow there religious views and to practice them within the confounds of our society. If a section 2 A violation occurs that individual or group has the right to appeal the decision at various levels of the court system within Canada. There are tests such as the Amselem test to determine if the section 2 A is a reasonable infringement that had minimal impairment. Further a section a violation would have to pass tests outlined and created by the
Every year, over 250,000 people make Canada their new home. Attracted by its education system, economy and universal healthcare system, there are few other places in the world like it. All Canadians are guaranteed equality before the law and equality of opportunity, regardless of where they are from. However, some might argue that Canadian policy has not been put into practice as well as it should be. Is the concept of true equality a far-fetched idea? It seems that Canada has taken great measures to promote the integration of immigrants socially, but can the same be said for their integration economically? Politically? To judge whether or not Canada has been successful at promoting the integration of immigrants in these realms, a deeper understanding of Canadian policy must be considered.
Multiculturalism policy was first adopted in Canada in 1971, which reaffirms the dignity and value of all its citizens regardless of ethnic origins, race, religious affiliations, or language. Part of this policy, Canada confirms the rights of all the aboriginals along with the recognition of two official languages. Indeed, multiculturalism has great importance since its main purpose is to give equal treatment to all the citizens (Daniel, 2010). It ensures that all individual citizens could still maintain their identities, and have pride with their ancestry. Through this initiative, the Canadian government was able to give their citizens a feeling of self-confidence, making them more open to their diverse cultures. The multiculturalism policy
In regards to toleration, one can see that Quebec’s relationship between politics and religion is quite messy. It questionably attempting to eliminate a form of religious tolerance by passing this bill. In this case we can see how the government favors some religious institutions over others, by recognizing some as official and tolerating others (Kessler, 224). More importantly we see the government is barely tolerating this religious group (Kessler, 224). The Quebec government is attacking them, and infringing upon their rights to religious freedom and expression in public space.
It is without a doubt that Canada is considered one of the most welcoming and peaceful countries in the entire world. Individuals fleeing conflicts from different continents, on opposites sides of the planet, view Canada as a safe haven, a place to thrive, succeed, and safely live life to its fullest potential. Excellent healthcare, education, and proper gun control are just some of the many priviledges freely given to those who are lucky enough to call Canada their home. The Rights and Freedoms of Canadians are incomparable to those of individuals living in other countries, and with freedom of religion being one of them, it becomes crucial that we respect and show acceptance of different religions. However, it is saddening to see that in