Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboy89
I don't care what a Cowboy said in 1960 or that historically the bars for citizenship were racist, sexist or otherwise. They objectively are not today. It's completely irrelevant for this discussion.
The current standards for citizenship are pretty universal and having somewhat of a higher barrier than PR status implies a permanence that makes a lot of sense to consider for alignment with making decisions in the best interest for the city, province or country. The onus should rather be on city council and those that support that viewpoint to demonstrate that they aren't and what problems they aim to address when they propose a motion such as they did yesterday.
|
It takes quite a bit of hubris to recognize that things in the past were obviously racist or sexist when viewed from today's lens, but then also claim that they are objectively not today.
The discussion is who should be allowed to vote.
6570 days old = eligible.
6569 days old = ineligible
Gotta draw the line somewhere...maybe that is optimal, maybe it isn't. Same thing goes for TFW vs work visa vs PR vs full citizen.