Pauline Marois has apparently taken to vlogging (on YouTube, no less, which doesn’t have a French Canadian version). In this video from a few days ago, she talks about how Jean Charest should accept the PQ’s proposal to amend the Quebec charter to include:

  1. A guarantee of equality between men and women, which is already there last time I checked.
  2. A guarantee of separation between church and state, except of course when it comes to having symbols of the One True Religion in the state’s legislature
  3. A guarantee of the Ultimate Supremacy of the One True Language to the exclusion of all others, even though we live in a country which has a law kinda saying the opposite

She also name-drops the Mouvement Montréal français, which I guess shouldn’t be so surprising, but will probably hurt the PQ later when the MMF inevitably says something outright racist.

6 thoughts on “sovereignistgirl15

  1. Marc

    And it’s Pauline’s proposals that will cause more and more people to leave Quebec. The MMF should rename themselves Le Mouvement anti-anglais de Montréal. Like the OLF, seems it’s only English that bothers them. I guess the slew of uniligual Arabic signs on the eastern part of Cote-Vertu doesn’t bug them.

  2. AngryFrenchGuy

    1.Equality between men and women was added to the Québec Charter of Human Rights on June 10th, the very day of your post. The last time you checked was apparently the first time.

    There’s actually been a debate on that issue for months in the French papers. You know, debate, exchange of ideas, discussion of facts, that thing the rest of us do while the Gazette blames everything on the PQ.

    2.Your sarcasm is justified on this one.

    3.The Official Languages Act applies to the Federal government period. Constitution 101.

    These are things we talk about in Québec ALL THE TIME! There is no justification for someone who claims to be informed to get those wrong.

  3. Fagstein Post author

    The Charter, Chapter 1, Par. 10:

    10. Every person has a right to full and equal recognition and exercise of his human rights and freedoms, without distinction, exclusion or preference based on race, colour, sex, pregnancy, sexual orientation, civil status, age except as provided by law, religion, political convictions, language, ethnic or national origin, social condition, a handicap or the use of any means to palliate a handicap.

    “Sex” is listed there, and has been since the beginning.

  4. Fagstein Post author

    My point is, like the Equal Rights Amendment in the U.S., this is wholly unnecessary because an anti-discrimination provision is already in the charter.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *