Pebbles Take

Sunday, November 12, 2006

More Nation Thoughts

If recognizing Quebec as a nation in the Constitution has no legal implications, why are people so adement about it?

If it does have legal implications, what are they?

Does this infer groups rights into our individual rights constitution?

If it has torn the party so much, do we really want to subject the country to it?

Are Acadiens a nation?

Newfoundlanders?

PEI'ers?

Will this create two classes of provinces? (those whom at one point were independent from eachother, and ones created from parts of federalized Canada ie Alberta, Saskatchewan vs all others)

If it ain't broke don't fix it?

Why isn't anyone challenging Charest to sign the constitution?

3 Comments:

  • I laugh at this suggestion about making Quebec a "nation."

    We all had our chance during Meech and Charlottetown, and that was simply to recognize them as a "distinct society."

    Why now are Liberals all on board, when they were the biggest opponents of Quebec signing the constitution in the first place?

    It is to laugh. Brian Mulroney had this one in the bag, and your boy Rae supported it 100%. Why not now?

    By Blogger Dark Blue Tory, at 4:21 PM  

  • Interesting question about Charest.

    By Blogger robedger, at 5:44 PM  

  • Acadians present themselves as a nation. Have a look at the flags of the francophonie displayed here: http://www.caslt.org/research/francoflags_fr.htm
    Note that there are no NB, NS, PEI francophonie flags. Instead, there is one flag called Le drapeau national des Acadiens. Acadians view themselves as an ethnic nation whose people are spread over different provinces (and countries).

    By Blogger Loraine Lamontagne, at 2:54 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home