Ulysses And The Sirens

The myth of Ulysses and the Sirens is an excerpt from Homer’s Odyssey in which Ulysses commands the crew of his ship to plug their ears with wax and bind him to the mast in preparation for the evil temptation of the Sirens. Even though it is uncomfortable for the men while they are resisting the seduction of the Sirens, it is rewarding in the long run. Some people may argue that this myth is an accurate representation of he affects of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in modern day politics. Ulysses is setting reasonable limits to his freedom for the purposes of the greater good, similar to the purpose of the charter. In extremely simple contexts, yes the constitution can effectively be modeled by the myth of Ulysses and the Sirens. Yet this

Politics is a very broad and obscure institution within society. Essentially humans are self-governing in the sense there is no higher power telling us what is right and wrong. This makes governance difficult because there is no sound evidence proving that one human knows better than another and is therefore worthy to mandate an entire society. In the myth, Ulysses knows what is in store for him as he heads out to sea; alternately, we have no way of knowing what we should be preparing for. Consequentially, we create a charter containing reasonable restrictions to our freedom, in hopes to mold a functional society. The purpose of the charter is to increase awareness of rights, raise the level of public deliberation and institute a national identity (Waluchow, G. Huscroft Judicial Review and Constitutional Rights). The myth of Ulysses and the Sirens is too explicit to truly model reality and include all the purposes of the charter and different situations we may face. In account of this, we have an entrenched charter covering all areas of Canadian

The charter was made as a moral guideline for human life, not a convenience to the time period it was created it. The charter being somewhat ambiguous, judicial review has been instated to keep it in line. Judicial review “is the power of courts of law to review the actions of the executive and legislative branches” (legal-dictionary). Judicial review helps the constitution stay persistent and current to suite today’s society while still respecting the entrenchment of the charter. Arguments against judicial review state that judges are legal experts, not moral experts (Waluchow, sept 26). Well really are they not the same thing? Law is directed by morality. For a people to be experts on law, they must also be experts on morality. Judicial review is the perfect merger between an entrenched legislation and modern day circumstances. The constitution allows for consideration and judgment by society, which promotes progress. People have an actual say in their lives and are able to make their own choices, avoiding a totalitarian