OT: USA

Nancy Young said:

One city here did that to cries of racism blah blah blah ... well, let the
people who think that such a bad idea go over to city hall and pick up
their CofO (don't ask) and other paperwork to sell a house and no one
understands what the hell you're looking for. Not acceptable to me.
I'm right behind the law that said, you want to work for the city, you
have to be able to communicate in English.

My boss and I were talking about attempts at "politically correct,
inclusive" legislation in the US (he's a US citizen, but also holds
Israeli citizenship, where he was born) and he argued a pretty good
point - okay, he's a litigation lawyer and arguing is second nature:

Say, you're part of a large migration of, say, Christian USAians who
emigrate to, say, Pakistan. You demand that English speaking teachers
be on hand at your children's schools, voting initiatives also be in
English, drivers' instructions/tests be in English, governmental help
lines/offices offer a "press 2 to hear this message in English," your
girls and women not be forced to cover their hair, legs, arms...well,
you get my drift.

IMHO, if you emigrate to another country, you are assuming their
culture as yours. Otherwise, find a country more to your cultural
liking.

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd
AAC(F)BV66.0748.CA

"If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

-- Duncan Hines

To reply, replace "spaminator" with "cox"

Ken Davey said:

The USA would love for those wrong thinking individuals to attain power.
This would make it much easier to subjugate the rest of Canada to their
(USA) rule.

Ken, were you brought up in a cave? How could you get such a supid
idea any other way?

sf said:

Ken Davey said:

The USA would love for those wrong thinking individuals to attain power.
This would make it much easier to subjugate the rest of Canada to their
(USA) rule.

Ken, were you brought up in a cave? How could you get such a supid
idea any other way?

Then there are a lot of other Canadians who were also brought up in
caves. Many of the Canadians I know here in Central America harbor the
same feelings Ken does towards the US. Dislike and outright animosity
of the American government by Canadians is more widespread than many
Americans would like to admit.

SD

SD said:

sf said:

Ken Davey said:

The USA would love for those wrong thinking individuals to attain power.
This would make it much easier to subjugate the rest of Canada to their
(USA) rule.

Ken, were you brought up in a cave? How could you get such a supid
idea any other way?

Then there are a lot of other Canadians who were also brought up in
caves. Many of the Canadians I know here in Central America harbor the
same feelings Ken does towards the US. Dislike and outright animosity
of the American government by Canadians is more widespread than many
Americans would like to admit.

How sad.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

As long as we're on the subject of speaking English in America:

Quoted message said:

ASSMILATE and MELT in to the country.

"meld into the country" would be correct. Not melt. It has nothing to do
with "melting pot".

Quoted message said:

mistake of stoping a non english speaking motorist

"stopping a non-English speaking motorist" would be the correct way to write
this.

Where were YOU in high school, when English was being taught? Jerking off in
the bathroom?

Doug Kanter said:

In any big American city, you might be enlightened if you could walk into
the kitchen of a restaurant and meet the soux chef or saucier - two

LOL...I had to read it twice to see if you really said, "Sioux chief."
That would be "sous." ;-)

N.

"Nancy1" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Doug Kanter said:

In any big American city, you might be enlightened if you could walk into
the kitchen of a restaurant and meet the soux chef or saucier - two

LOL...I had to read it twice to see if you really said, "Sioux chief."
That would be "sous." ;-)

N.

Damn....my weekly typo, and it was a real beauty. :-)

RJ said:

Dimitri said:

I too am behind the laws that require English proficiency - However, many years
ago some of the immigrants wanted so desperately to "Americanize" that they
denied their American born children of their roots - and cultural heritage.
Also not a good thing. I would much rather have baklava as my roots than Oscar
Mayer. LOL.

Dimitri

Roots and culture will only carry you so far.
We see the ( extreme ) effect in Canada with Quebecois.

"When in Rome, do as the Romans do"

<rj>

Special cases make bad law. Most French-Candians outside of Quebec (and
most inside or else they would -be- separate) are happy to be both
French and Canadian.

My

Dave Smith said:

Dean G. said:

Quoted message said:

Roots and culture will only carry you so far.
We see the ( extreme ) effect in Canada with Quebecois.

Actually the Quebecois and the original poster share much in common.
They want other people to learn their language and conform to their
culture. Odd, when Americans do it, we are criticized (rightly so in
this case), but the Quebecois are given far more lattitude. Both the
original poster and the Quebecois are insular, racist, and intolerant.
Both deserve criticism.

The Quebecois should not be confused with the rest of French Canadians which make up a
significant portion of the population of New Brunswick and pockets of French Canadian
settlements across northern Ontario, and in most other other provinces. Most of them
are bilingual or uniligual English speakers. I have a lot of French Canadian friends
who are quite antagonistic toward Quebecers. I can't help but agree that Quebecois
tend to be insular, racist and intolerant.

A good part of Southern Ontario, also.

My French-Canadian S.O. (res. Welland, ON) thinks that "Quebeckers"
"talk (French) too fast." and mostly uses English, though she does yell
at the kids in French.

alsandor said:

Paul M. Cook a écrit :

Quoted message said:

Who says? Say whatever you want. Actually I believe it is the christian
extremists who were decrying the use of Happy Holidays. They insisted on
Merry Christmas. Despite the fact that Christmas and its traditions were
all borrowed from the Pagans.

Actually, the Romans were not pagans. They believed in deities.
Although commonly used to mean polytheistic religions of ancient
Europe, paganism is originally a latin term referring to "paganus", an
adjective originally meaning "rural", "rustic" or "of the country". In
other words, not "ciuitatus" or "of the city". The Romans from whom we
hold the dual feasts of Sol Indigetis and Saturnalia were residents of
Rome. The feasts are found in the calendar of Numa Pompilius, second
legendary king of Rome and successor to Romulus, who instituted a
calendrical reform. So, the feasts in question are "ciuitati" and
therefore cannot be "pagani".

First, Pagan != atheist, believing in dieties has everything to with
being a pagan in the current sense ( a non Christian believing in the
"old" gods).
The current usage comes from the early church when the old Roman
religion still survived outside of the city.

pavane said:

"Dean G." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Actually the Quebecois and the original poster share much in common.
They want other people to learn their language and conform to their
culture. Odd, when Americans do it, we are criticized (rightly so in
this case), but the Quebecois are given far more lattitude. Both the
original poster and the Quebecois are insular, racist, and intolerant.
Both deserve criticism.

You must not forget that the original incorporating document
of Canada, the British North America Act followed by all
versions of Canadian constitutional documents have enshrined
the biculturalism and bilingualism, not to mention differing legal
and educational systems as part of basic Canadian law. This
is definitely not the case in the US but is definitely the case
in Canada. The Quebecois are literally guaranteed language,
educational and legal rights in the Canadian constitution. Big
difference from their Southerly neighbors.

Just because something is legal does not make it moral. In the US,
there were laws that supported slavery, and these laws were wrong.
Enshrining them in the law did nothing to change the fact that they
were morally wrong. If this is the only difference you can give between
the Quebecois and the Americans, then I was exactly right.

And your "bilingualism" is red herring in the case of Quebec. Canada
may be officially bilingual, but Quebec is clearly not. French is the
official language of Quebec, not French and English. The Quebecois are
also quite ardent in their enforcement of their languge rules. It is
not a tolerant or sympathetic legal act by any stretch of the
imagination. Fortunately, the majority of Canadians are far more
tolerant than the Quebecois.

Dean G.

Bob Terwilliger said:

Dean said:

I personally revel in the opportunity to be a heathen
running amok once a year, despite my advancing age.

Same here, but I do it on Halloween.

Bob

That's fine with me, but I'll just call it Samhain. Mostly, however, I
am relegated to the task of watching over the younger ones as they run
amok. They deserve a chance every now and then as well.

Dean G.

Seamus said:

RJ said:

Dimitri said:

I too am behind the laws that require English proficiency - However, many years
ago some of the immigrants wanted so desperately to "Americanize" that they
denied their American born children of their roots - and cultural heritage.
Also not a good thing. I would much rather have baklava as my roots than Oscar
Mayer. LOL.

Dimitri

Roots and culture will only carry you so far.
We see the ( extreme ) effect in Canada with Quebecois.

"When in Rome, do as the Romans do"

<rj>

Special cases make bad law. Most French-Candians outside of Quebec (and
most inside or else they would -be- separate) are happy to be both
French and Canadian.

Why not just "Canadian" ??

Must we all be hyphenated ?
<rj>

Quoted post said:

Seamus said:

RJ said:

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:38:59 GMT, "Dimitri" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>I too am behind the laws that require English proficiency - However, many years
>ago some of the immigrants wanted so desperately to "Americanize" that they
>denied their American born children of their roots - and cultural heritage.
>Also not a good thing. I would much rather have baklava as my roots than Oscar
>Mayer. LOL.
>
>Dimitri
>

Roots and culture will only carry you so far.
We see the ( extreme ) effect in Canada with Quebecois.

"When in Rome, do as the Romans do"

<rj>

Special cases make bad law. Most French-Candians outside of Quebec (and
most inside or else they would -be- separate) are happy to be both
French and Canadian.

Why not just "Canadian" ??

Must we all be hyphenated ?
<rj>

We travelled through Quebec this summer on our way to Prince Edward
Island. It's bad politics that, across Canada, with the exception of
Quebec, our road signs and signs on Government buildings are
bi-lingual. In Quebec, French only. We didn't feel welcome in this
part of OUR country.
Sharon

"biig" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

We travelled through Quebec this summer on our way to Prince Edward
Island. It's bad politics that, across Canada, with the exception of
Quebec, our road signs and signs on Government buildings are
bi-lingual. In Quebec, French only. We didn't feel welcome in this
part of OUR country.
Sharon

Now you know how WE feel, listening to the moron on the White House
attempting to speak without a script. :-(