GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
13:06 May 2, 2011 |
English to French translations [PRO] Government / Politics / expression | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Selected response from: Marion Feildel (X) Türkiye Local time: 03:54 | ||||
Grading comment
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
3 +3 | basé sur le fait d'avoir ou non des enfants |
| ||
3 | fondé sur si on a éduqué des enfants |
|
Summary of reference entries provided | |||
---|---|---|---|
parenting = having children (here at least) |
|
Discussion entries: 6 | |
---|---|
fondé sur si on a éduqué des enfants Explanation: Sans plus de contexte ... |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
basé sur le fait d'avoir ou non des enfants Explanation: Also, the Bill predicates a status change to s. 6(1)(c.1) from s. 6(2) status on whether or not an Aboriginal woman has children. For the first time in the Indian Act's history, one's specific entitlement to Indian status will depend in part on whether one has children, and more specifically whether one has non-status Indian children. Status has always been determined based on one's parents. This new section would now put the focus on the status of one's children. This is absolutely ridiculous and completely unnecessary in order to achieve the goal of addressing the inequity between the descendants of Indian women versus Indian men. Reference: http://www.equalityrightscentral.com/canada_equality_rights_... |
| |
Grading comment
| ||