Denis,

>>Well, here in the States it wasn't the job of the government to protect the citizens from the marketplace though I can certainly see a place where it should protect citizens from other citizens. I do not see that it is the government's job to make sure people "continue to enjoy their lives" whatsoever.
>>
>>I have grave reservations about the government being smart enough to know which cultural 'pieces' to keep and which to discard. The next step will be the Committee on Acceptible Social Behavior which, say for example, will outlaw hot dogs since they are "American" and force restaurants to serve croisants. Just plain dumb.
>
>Do you have a problem because You think that this law is an anti-american law because americans mainly speak english? Be serious Doug you know as well as I that such a law about food would never happen. If you want to make comparisons do it seriously. Do you think that our language law is as dumb as making a law to prohibit eating hot-dogs? we're talking about preserving the culture of a whole province.

Fair question.. I don't think that this law is primarily "anti-American" as much as it is one based on a tremendous cultural insecurity. This has come from the French since the days of the Renassaince (sp?) actually. To be honest, for most of their history the French have taken a sort of obstreporous attitude towards the world, particularly the US. Check the voting history in just the UN for example and you will see what I mean. That is the soverign right of France to do this and I do not at all quarrel with them, as I do not quarrel with Quebec's soverign right to enact any laws it seems fit, but I still think it's counterproductive and displays that cultural insecurity as I mentioned before. So, I absolutely do not think that the law we are discussing is anti-American as much as it is we-want-things-our-way-regardless-of-reality. I apologize if that sounds harsh. Please understand that it is not intended that way but from my position it seems very much based upon a position that promotes its interests above the existing reality. I honestly do not think it will work for reasons already provided.

>
>
>
>>I do not think thsat your relatives should have to learn English - unless they choose to so do. You make their plight sound so bleak I wonder how they have survived for 80 years. <g>
>
>They survived because of laws that forced provinces to provide bilingual services all of those years. But nowadays some provinces are questioning these laws because they only want to provide services exclusively in english.

There will always be someone there to help them Denis, and you know that. French is not going to disappear as a language and to act as though it will so do is just plain silly IMO. I do not speak English because some law dictates it. I speak English because I choose to speak English and have no reason to speak another. On a personal note I have been seriously thinking of relearning Spanish - for the express reason that Southern California (where I grew up) now has a huge number of Spanish speaking individuals. But I do not expect California to mandate that I speak Spanish, nor do I think that it would be useful if they did. But, if I spoke Spanish better than I currently do I'd be able to expand my opportunities.

Other languages and cultures are not a threat - they are an opportunity - to learn new things, ideas, ways of viewing the world, etc...

Hope that helps.

Best,

DD