parking outside her home was a violation of her human rights.Earlier this year an Ottawa woman claimed the lack of
And we all thought: Finally, something significant to memorialize in the Canadian Museum for Human Rights.
Thankfully, there is no limit the number and type of human rights complaints raised that could, under certain light, be considered frivolous.
Here are a couple of things people have recently claimed as human rights:
- a woman's right to get a haircut
- an elderly driver's right to basic insurance premiums
- the right to have a nude painting of our prime minister not exist.
Here's the latest to that list.
A Toronto man has filed a human rights complaint after students were forced to sing O Canada a cappella.
The National Post reports that Kevin Morrison called the Toronto Catholic District School Board's decision to remove music from its morning anthem "prejudicial and discriminatory."
The reason for removing the background music goes something like this: Kids should learn to sing the anthem, not just listen to it.
The argument against it goes something like this: It isn't working, and it is awkward.
It should be noted that Morrison is in the process of attempting (again) to become a school trustee. Also noteworthy is the number of iconic Canadian totems he mentions in his argument against the a cappella anthem:
From the Post:
You can't take the maple leaf off the flag just because you think maybe kids will learn better with it being missing. You can't take beavers off of nickels; it's a Canadian icon, you can't mess with it. You can't go and rewrite the Constitution just because it suits you. You can't do that. Why can you change the anthem?
The good thing about Canada is we have patient, reasonable tribunals to slog through and consider the merits of such complaints.
[ Related video: Our national anthem in the various languages of Canada ]
The great thing about Canada is … wait, I'm confused. Is it the nickel that is considered a Canadian icon, or is it the beaver on the nickel?
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario will need that point clarified before they hear this case.