Saskatchewan’s premier says he’ll use the notwithstanding clause to override a court injunction that has paused the province’s new pronoun policy for students. But a professor says the clause is meant to be used as a tool of last resort.

    • Jason2357
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Huh, I had suspected a lot of conservative types see everything as a zero-sum game, but it isn’t usually presented so obviously.

      Clearly, this isn’t the case. Let’s say we delete the right to freedom of religion in the Charter, and ban Christianity from our country. No one has gained any rights. In fact, we all lose a right, even non-Christians.

        • Jason2357
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s a strange re-definition of a “right”. I guess if you re-define the word to encompass any sort of government power. Too bad we live in a world where words mean things.

            • Jason2357
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Okay, now your argument has officially gone off the rails.

              To clarify my point, governments don’t have rights, they have powers. The charter grants people rights. The notwithstanding clause gives the province a power to override a charter right. Exercising that power only ever removes people’s rights. And yes, the country can become less free if rights are overridden. Nothing necessarily “balances that out.” Losing charter rights is often a very bad thing, and even if it’s necessary in a particular case, everyone should be honest -it’s a loss of rights.