From: dbowman@gorgon (Don A. Bowman)
Subject: Re: Individual Rights ARE protected in the Canada Clause
Organization: University of Waterloo
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 22:08:35 GMT

Robin Collins (robinc@bnr.ca) wrote:
: In article <BvGBE2.4LI@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> dbowman@shade (Don A. Bowman) writes:
: >You're not committed to collective rights at all? You don't think that we
: >should do something to equalise rights of, say, children? women? natives?
: >disabled people? Why not? Yes I understand that they are all still Canadian,
: >and protected under the Charter. I believe that we also need to do more for
: >some of these groups to make their rights equal to ours. Its fine to say we
: >have gender equality, but as long as women only earn 70% of men for the same
: >jobs, they need something more.
: 
: What are you saying here? What have "collective rights" got to do with
: equalized rights? Equal rights for all ARE individual rights, not "collective
: rights". Collective rights are where individual rights do not apply.
: I don't know where individual rights should not apply, do you?

Collective rights are on top of individual rights. The problem is not
that a few women are unequal -- the problem is that almost all women
are unequal. The best way to fix this is with collective rights.

: 
: I support equal rights for all women, children, natives, etc etc.
: Gender equality is not about equal rights, it is about denigrating
: equal rights. It says that SOMEONE will decide for all women (etc etc)
: how they should vote, or be represented (ie by gender, etc.)

Gender equality does not say that all of the same gender will have the
same brain. It doesn't say that SOMEONE will decide for all women. I
know Judy Rebick claims to speak for all. Gender equality means that
we should attempt to treat the entire group <women> with the same
respect we would the entire group <men>. By extension, any member of
the group <women> would be treated with the same respect.
: 

: How about letting women (etc etc) decide individually for themselves
: how they want to vote. If women want to vote for men, it is surely
: their individual right to do so. If not, so be it.

I'm all for that. Thats what they do now. Nobody can decide who you
vote for. With a secret ballot, no-one even has to know.

: 
: I oppose unfair payment to women for equal work (and I hope you extend your
: argument to Mexicans too...) We should have laws against discrimination.
: (The percentage is closer to 60% than 70% by the way.) If certain jobs are 
: undervalued  and are paid lower wages than others, 
: I suggest that the employees organize themselves and fight 
: for higher wages. That's how it's been done in the past.  

You suggest employees organise and fight COLLECTIVELY. Yeah -- I read
it right. You think its ok to bargain collectively for collective
rights, but that collective rights are bad? This is a major
contradiction. You're arguing against yourself here.

: 
: But how would you force employers to pay Mexican labourers the same as
: Canadian labourers (and I think they should.)
: 

Forcing employers to pay Mexican labourers so that they have the same
buying power is I presume what you mean. That is a job for the Mexican
government. Yes, I think that is a good idea. We shouldn't simply
exploit the Mexican people to make ourselves competitive.

--
Don Bowman                (519) 744-6154     dbowman@zeus.uwaterloo.ca
Newsgroups: can.politics