In other words...

[footfootfoot]

Somehow found this article, follow the links to the town's webpage and read the document yourself.

I've mixed feelings. About the document, not about women getting stoned in public.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070131/od_nm/stoning1_dc

"We wish to inform these new arrivals that the way of life which they abandoned when they left their countries of origin cannot be recreated here... "Therefore we consider it completely outside these norms to ... kill women by stoning them in public, burning them alive, burning them with acid, circumcising them etc."

[deadbeater]

The town have to denote that certain things are illegal in Canada. Nothing racist about that. And reading the article I noticed that the town and private businesses were accomodating to the immigrants in some instances. If the immigrant don't like some of the rules, as opposed to going to the airport, they should work on changing them.

Can we move to their nations and force them to accept free speech...oh.

[BigV]

Sure. It's difficult to comment further absent the actual rules. I think most of the ones described in the article are *already* covered. I mean, why make a rule saying stoning a woman is illegal, when murder and assault are already illegal? Such remarks do seem like piling on.

Where are the first principles? When we agree, there's no need for a rule, right? Like boys and girls exercising together?

Wait. Just re-reread the article and found the english version of the document. I think the authors of the document are possibly well meaning, but misguided. Come on. It's a statement, not a law. It's called "Standards". And it's in response to a poll of the "electors". Who is the audience here? It's *not* the newcomers. This is a bone to the voters. Newcomers sufficiently present in the 21 century that can make there way from "out there" to Quebec aren't stoning women. That's just a shot.

And the section about children being able to eat any food, and pork and beef and chicken being sold in the same shop, and no need to know about the source of the meat, what's that about? No halah shops? No kosher shops? What's the point?

That's my question. What's the point of this document? I see it as pure pandering. Yes, the elected officials are doing the will of the people. Great. But the people for whom these standards represent an obstacle are not going to see them before they get there, are they? And if when they get there, and bump up against these standards, what will happen? They will not have this little five page document rolled up and swatted on their nose, they'll have to deal with the laws that are already in place. "No, sorry, Mr New Guy, that woman doesn't have to have a man drive her about, she's permitted to drive herself." Or some such imagined conversation. Ridiculous.

To publish all the laws and standards of Municipalité Hérouxville would be a tedious task. The standards published above are just a sample so the new arrivals to this territory can clearly identify with us before making their decision to move here.

Certainly, being the elected members, we would give the new arrivals the assurance that the conditions that they have fled from in their country would not happen again here in our territory.. Consequently, the peace of mind that we live with will always be.

It must be very clear that any person or persons, groups legal or not that would like to modify our habits and customs or our general way of life cannot do so without going through a referendum process following all laws put forward by our towns and municipalities. These referendums will be at the petitioner or petitioner’s cost.

This is the conclusion to the document. The first paragraph positively exsanguinates the whole document. What is this, a warning? Please. The second paragraph is just as absurd. If someone's fleeing stoning, why would they want to continue it here? If someone's fleeing a society where there is sexual equality, why would they be reassured that the "conditions would not be repeated here"? And the third paragraph is just breast-beating. We have a way of making rules, and if you don't like the rules, you have to change them according to our rules for changing rules. Ok, but then why have the intimidating "at your cost" zinger at the end?

My vote: :thumbsdown:

[xoxoxoBruce]

The town Fathers (Mothers?) see what's happening in Europe and Canada, just as we have and discussed on this board. france, Germany, England, Netherlands.... they have all been pressured by immigrants, primarily Muslims to accommodate their lifestyle. Wasn't it Quebec where they demanded to try and punish fellow Muslims under Sharia law?
They see a Gym having to cover their windows because the Synagogue is offended? Give me a fucking break..... bullshit, that's outrageous.

So not wanting that same problem they're giving fair warning to everyone, they are not going to be oppressed by immigrants to their town. They are not going to change their lifestyle to suit others. Good for them, they shouldn't have to as long as their lifestyle is legal.

And the section about children being able to eat any food, and pork and beef and chicken being sold in the same shop, and no need to know about the source of the meat, what's that about? No halah shops? No kosher shops? What's the point?

Your mixing two statements but the point is the same. Supermarkets and butchers sell all kinds of meat and that they are not required to be ritually slaughtered. Restaurants and cafeterias serve all kind of food without imposing dietary restrictions on the patrons. If it offends you or your religion, go elsewhere because it's not going to change.

If someone's fleeing stoning, why would they want to continue it here?

Do you think these people fleeing stoning are coming to Canada to change their Religion, lifestyle and heritage in one fell swoop?
Get real, if that were true they wouldn't be having problems everywhere they go. They are fleeing stoning because they're not the ones doing the stoning, not because they're suddenly against it. That's why their demand for Sharia law in Quebec.

The town is drawing a line in the sand. They won't cave to the bullshit they see going on elsewhere and they are saying so up front. Good for them.

Frankly, I'm tired of pressing 1 for English. :p

[footfootfoot]

I just got a headache in my brain when I read the above two posts, I transposed BigV's reply w/ xoBruces and thought it was uncharacteristic of them both.

Haha.

I think it was primarily preemptive, and motivated by what Bruce referred to. Remember the flap in California when Vietnamese immigrants couldn't believe their great good fortune when they discovered that you could get dogs for free at the pound! (America she is a great country) Sorry guys, parties over them's not eating dogs, them's pettin dogs, now spit that out.

And I think it is most likely flavoured by all the problems they had when they had to accomodate all those tedious people who insisted on speaking English (Keep heading west, stop when you see water).

I am learning to habla so I'll be prepared for the next few decades.