Explanation:
translation = Why are religious and moral norms not coercible?
The relationship between religion and morality has long been hotly debated. Does religion make us more moral? Is it necessary for morality? Do moral inclinations emerge independently of religious intuitions? These debates, which nowadays rumble on in scientific journals as well as in public life, have frequently been marred by a series of conceptual confusions and limitations. Many scientific investigations have failed to decompose “religion” and “morality” into theoretically grounded elements; have adopted parochial conceptions of key concepts—in particular, sanitized conceptions of “prosocial” behavior; and have neglected to consider the complex interplay between cognition and culture. We argue that to make progress, the categories “religion” and “morality” must be fractionated into a set of biologically and psychologically cogent traits, revealing the cognitive foundations that shape and constrain relevant cultural variants. We adopt this fractionating strategy, setting out an encompassing evolutionary framework within which to situate and evaluate relevant evidence. Our goals are twofold: to produce a detailed picture of the current state of the field, and to provide a road map for future research on the relationship between religion and morality.

The constitution has been mentioned by many people so far. Sure. That does answer your question in a literal sense. However, which dictators throughout history have ever cared about the laws in their country?
Besides laws and the constitution, what many Canadians would be reluctant to mention is the fact that there are 38+ million people in Canada, many of whom are armed. The prime minister is just one person. Sure, they control the military, but Canada is huge! Armed civilians using guerilla tactics would be a serious challenge for Canada's military, even if they backed the would be dictator, which I think would be unlikely, especially by a majority.
Just to be clear to our southern neighbours, we don't need “the 2nd” to defend ourselves from a would be dictator. We are just fine. And we have lots of guns.
I dont understand the question. Im going to guess the party
Buddhism and Hinduism agree on karma, dharma, moksha and reincarnation. They are different in that Buddhism rejects the priests of Hinduism, the formal rituals, and the caste system. Buddha urged people to seek enlightenment through meditation.