I agree with you completely. However, I do not believe special compensation should be awarded residents of any country that do not speak the host nation's language except in the matter of the law. For instance, if you are brought up on legal charges, then you should be afforded council that speaks your native tongue (for fairness under the law). Now that does not mean that if I am a small business owner and I wish to employ only Spanish speaking people that I should not be able to do so or if I go to the grocery store and don't speak English that a Spanish speaking employee cannot assist me only that employers should not be forced to hire foreign speaking employees.


>As far as I'm concerned, language is secondary. Nobody really needs to speak English in order to live according to the laws of the land. There are lots of interpreters around. Sure I think if I were to move to a non-English speaking country, I'd make an effort to learn the language, but we get a lot of elderly folks who really may no longer have the capacity to learn a new language easily. If someone comes here and speaks Chinese or whatever, and can get along, their language is the least of my worries. I just think everyone should have to abide by the same set of laws and should have the right to expect those laws to afford them the same protections as everyone else.
>
>>And the language?
>>
>>>>>>The basic idea is to solve certain conflicts according to the religion of the people involved, which seems a good idea in principle (Christians being able to apply Christian laws, etc.).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The protests have been mainly because Sharia can conflict with women's rights. But the proponents of allowing Sharia for Muslims say that that will not be allowed. In other words, it seems that the applicaton of Sharia would be limited.
>>>>>
>>>>>A good idea? Not here! Separation of Religion and State (here called Church and State) is a basic idea of democracy. Practice religion at home and Mosque, Temple, Church, not in the Courts. Stoning someone, even though it is OK in the Bible and Koran, is still a crime in any modern country, including Bolivia. Unfortunately not in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran or Nigeria.
>>>>
>>>>Well, I think that many people are fond of their religion, including its laws. Now, I wasn't exactly suggesting that people should be stoned, and I don't think the Canadian law - if it is ever approved - would go that far.
>>>
>>>If they want to live under their own religious laws, then why on earth would they move to a country that is governed by secular laws? I know Canada can be a bit of a patsy sometimes, but this idea of, "Let's move to Canada and once we're there, we'll get them to change all their laws to accomodate us." is starting to get me down. By all means, I want others to come and live in Canada. Diversity really is the spice of life, but I'd appreciate it more if they could please see their way clear to accept the laws of the nation they've adopted.