Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!fred
From: fred@mnetor.UUCP (Fred Williams)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Re: The new equal rights rule and taxation
Message-ID: <530@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 6-May-85 15:20:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: mnetor.530
Posted: Mon May  6 15:20:15 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 6-May-85 16:30:54 EDT
References: <262@looking.UUCP> <610@lsuc.UUCP> <491@mnetor.UUCP> <1043@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 18

> 
> The point of this whole discussion is one I've made before: the intent of
> the Charter is to provide equality of opportunity, and to *prevent*
> infringing on people's rights. The fact that it occasionally causes us to
> have to provide services to people we don't like is just one of those things
> about pluralistic societies.

	I am well aware that the intent of the people who wrote the
charter was as you state, above.  The thing that I am trying to
determine is, "How well did they succeed?"  Does the charter
actually say that a court should use common sense in the event
that a case is found where applying the charter to the letter
would be less than sensible?
	Frankly, I think the charter was poorly written and suspect
that the main reason for it's existence was to get Trudeau's
name into the history books yet again.

Cheers,		Fred Williams