Letters: Pronoun debate sparks human, transgender rights issues

Article content material

As a girl who’s transgender, the usage of the however clause in legislative issues has stirred a profound concern inside me.

As an grownup with a few many years extra life expertise than the youngsters straight affected by this laws, I  the implications of such potential actions are deeply disconcerting.

Article content material

It prompts me to ponder what could be the subsequent step. Will I, together with numerous others, witness the erosion of the rights we’ve diligently fought for?

Article content material

Since Sept. 28, I’ve categorical my apprehensions in emails to MLAs and the media. It isn’t an endeavour pushed by mere impulsivity, however fairly a conscientious effort to voice issues and take part within the democratic course of.

Using the however clause raises questions concerning the preservation of particular person rights and the potential ramifications for marginalized communities. It’s a stark reminder that even within the twenty first century, the battle for equality and understanding continues.

As we navigate by way of unsure occasions, open and respectful dialogue should prevail.

Within the face of legislative selections that would influence lives considerably, the decision for inclusive, knowledgeable discussions turns into much more important.

It’s my hope that the issues expressed by many, together with myself, shall be met with considerate consideration and that the democratic values we maintain pricey will information us towards a future that respects and protects the rights of all people.

Reann Legge, Saskatoon

Moe, Legault singing the identical tune

Saskatchewan’s response to Quebec is commonly destructive:

Article content material

Article content material

“Quebec will get no matter it needs from the federal authorities.”

“They’re making an attempt to ram French down our throats.”

“Quebec shouldn’t be in a position to block pipelines that might get oil to tidewater.”

Generally, we sound jealous. “We must always have the identical provincial autonomy as Quebec. We’re distinctive too.”

But Premier Scott Moe appears to be on the identical web page as Quebec Premier Francois Legault in the case of making separatist noises and pre-emptively utilizing the however clause to override the Constitution.

In Quebec’s case, that is most clearly evident in Invoice 96 on language, and Invoice 21 on faith. Each clearly violate the Constitution.

The Trudeau authorities, as is commonly the case, has issued weak statements condemning the discriminatory legal guidelines however has truly finished nothing. Federal Conservative chief Pierre Poilievre has indicated his help for Legault’s use of the however clause. He’s unlikely to do something, both.

The Constitution is certainly one of our strongest unifying paperwork. Politicians appear intent on dividing fairly than uniting; the however clause offers provincial leaders an choice to fracture the nation.

Article content material

The cliché about lacking the forest for the timber applies. If we spend all of our vitality on particular person points — or new irritants like Legault’s tuition hikes for non-residents —we’ll miss the largest query.

Are we a nation that’s happy with its values, or a disparate assortment of provinces that may take away no matter freedoms provincial governments select to assault?

David Steele, Regina

Shield us, please

Concerning final week’s throne speech: Who will shield and defend us from Scott Moe?

Ken Selinger, Regina

SHARE YOUR VIEWS

The Chief-Submit welcomes letters, which ought to embrace the author’s title and telephone quantity.

Submissions shall be verified and edited earlier than publication. We publish the names and neighborhood of all letter writers.

E mail: letters@leaderpost.com

Ship to: 300-1964 Park St., Regina, Sask., S4N 7M5

Article content material