Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

[font=Arial] [/font] Morning Derby

Regarding the "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" comment. Okay, I don't think I would have a huge problem with Gays getting married and being given the same rights as straight couples, BUT I do not think that they should be raising children! Whether you want to admit this or not...men with men and women with women is NOT the norm! And to even compare what a child would go through interms of teasing because his name was Moonunit as compared to him/her having Gay parents is just silly

Think of it this way, a child goes home and says "oh there is this kid named Moonunit that just joined our class, he/she is having a birthday party can I go?" The parent would likely think, "well that is a strange name, but sure you can go"

NOW, same child goes home and says "this kid named Joe/Sally just joined our class and guess what he/she doesn't have a mommy/daddy, he/she has two daddies/two mommies instead, can I go to their birthday party?" I KNOW that most every parent would be concerned over their child being at that child's house for fear of WHAT they might see. (i.e. hugging, a little kiss etc) I know I would!

If you ask any parent, "would you care if your son/daughter said they were Gay", most would answer "no I wouldn't care, as long as they were happy" and if you asked those same parents "if you had a choice of them being Gay or Straight which would you prefer" MOST would say "STRAIGHT". Just because of the fact that Straight is considered to be the norm and is what is most accepted by society. And as every parent, we want our children to be accepted and embraced by society inorder to lead full and productive lives.

That is my opinion.

   

Good afternoon Canadiangal.

I compared them because you said:

Name teasing can be fundementally devestatiing to a child because it is a direct attack on everything they are. The truth is that kids will find any reason to "single out" the weaker memebers of the pack. Kids won't think to tease or hate kids of gay parents unless they are growing up in that type of environment.



Define normal? What about kids being raised by single parent? A few shorts years ago it wasn;t the norm and almost every study done has shown that the single parent home is a factor in children doing worse then their peers. In addition, gays already have the ability to have children and ther is nothing the Gov't can do to stop it. It is also a red herring because gays adopting children and marrying are mutually exclusive in this context.



It used to be not letting your kid solcialize with "people not of our race" or "people not of our faith" or "beneath our class" Those sound pretty horrible to eh? The same reasons they defended those ideas are the same you use to defend your stance? Making 2 kids suffer because you have a personal problem with gays and despite what you think you actually do.



Lets ask those same parents if they would choose to have a boy or girl. The choosing you speak of is just an aspect of the hopes & dreams that all parents have for their children.



You are entitled to your opinion. The discussion at hand is not whether you approve of it but whether the Gov't should legislative it.

I don't like to see guys making out in public, hell I don't want to watch anyone making out but it doesn't threaten me to see it. In my experience , the vast majority of people who "don't want children exposed to gays" are the same people worried that "they might catch it" or that "it might rub off on them".

   

Someone said that all politics are local, so if these are the topics that are important to you, that's the standard that you will use to grudge the candidates. You're right that I have no right to dictate but you must admit that they are not the biggest problems Canada faces. These are the popular "talking points" taken right from the Fiberal song sheet.

I'll state my returns to these matters, but I'd rather wind them down because they deserve, and probably have, threads on their own.

I'm going to lump my response to abortion and SSM together because the answer is the same.
I realize that both of these might be a minority position but I believe that Canadian voters have the intelligence and empathy to see through the issues. I trust the collective wishes of Canadians more than I do the direction of our leaders.
I have no problems with women having abortions. Rather an abortion than an unloved, unwanted child. I have some reservations over late term, it's frequency of use, and the sticky subject of under what conditions does the state pay for this, but those are side issues.
I have no problem with SSM, and the terminology is really not a big deal either. I believe that the main CPC party beef was this was pushed through using appointed judges, instead of through a democratic process.

On both of these issues, you've tried to corral me into you're in-tolerant religious based stereotype model. On neither of these issues, does God or his spokesmen instruct me, and I believe that most Canadians are the same. There is no vast Canadian version of the moral majority for you to rail against.

Health Care:
You must admit that the Liberals are sending mixed messages. There already is a 2 tier system in Quebec and BC yet they keep saying that this does not exist. The system is also costing more money every year with less people paying for it, so we had better look at alternatives soon. Any time this is brought up, the shrill of "American style" label is brought up, effectively stopping discussion.
I don't have a problem with private competition as long as it does not denigrate the public system. Other countries have better, more efficient service and we should keep an open mind instead of whistling through the graveyard.

Closer/lesser ties to the US?
Do you refute that anti-American plays well in the east? It plays well with some folks here in the west too, so maybe it was unfair to isolate one coast, but it definitely does play well in Quebec. I'll leave Iraq and our participation in UN missions aside because that's really a part of our foreign policy.

As a liberal, you might not be aware of what that term means because it involves such confusing and inconvenient issues like principals. Foreign policy is a set plan, not Chretien or Martin holding a finger in the political wind to decide which way garners the most votes. This is the leadership and vision that you hinted the Libs have shown with SSM and abortion. This leads in perfectly to the state of our military, who are a tool of a foreign policy. If there is no direction, how can we expect the tool to remain sharp

Military: The Cons were in power 12 years ago. If you're saying that the 4 years of Con rule wrecked the forces, then we really have nothing more to talk about.
Do you acknowledge that most of the spending is suspiciously close to election time? You can't expect the military to immediately ramp up 5000 new people when the system has been starved for years.

Clean air & Water are a shoe-in for the greens but it's a motherhood issue. No party has a war on the environment and the best we could expect would be solid support of the agencies that monitor such. Personally, I'd rather the provinces got to keep more of their own money so they could use that money as they saw best.

Once again we see the leadership questioned. Once again I must point out that the liberals didn't like anybody from the CPC. Except for some obvious plants and dinosaurs like Joe Clark, the CPC party is happy with Harper. This is simply a tactic meant to stir up dissent.
If any leader needed replacement, it would be Paul Martin, but I don't hear the same questioning. Why is that? Is it because the PM holds such power that no one dares to stand against him? Is that a good thing? Sounds more like Zimbabwe than the Canada I grew up in.

One again, there is no deal.

   

[font=Arial] [/font] Hi Again Derby

K, I don't have a problem being friends with Gay people, cuz I have Gay friends. BUT, I have also let them know that I am uncomfortable with them being touchy feely infront of me...I am sorry, but it makes me uncomfortable and I get embarrassed I also get embarrassed if my straight friends are all touchy feely with their spouses/partner. I don't like public displays of affection period, I think there is a time and a place for everything and out in public there is no need to be "sucking face" so to speak But I will be honest, I can handle my straight friends being affectionate infront of me WAY MORE than I could handle Gay friends doing it.

As for the Government having a say in who gets married and who doesn't, I don't think I agree with that either....so let me guess I now have a problem with 4 of the Conservatives issues right?

I can't say I would never vote NDP or even Liberal for that matter, but as it stands today the Liberals won't get my vote. I don't like the leader and I think that there is a few other bad apples in that party that should be removed. NDP, well Jacky boy is too much of a wimp in my eyes, I don't think he has what it takes to run this country.

   

I don't believe I stated what you believe but mearly what I believed to be the reality to opposition to these subjects. In addition, I think you will find that those oppossed do so on religous grounds.



There is no vast liberal conspiracy either but you rail against them.



No, SSM and abortion are not the greatest problems we face but they were a major factor in the CPC defeat. You may not want to admit it or don't believ it but its true. Callings us "Fiberals" just make my point for me and ends your streak at 1 day.



The mixed message they are sending is that they are reaasuring people that the introduction of gretaer access to private care does not destroy ou cherished universal healthcare but only supplements it. As for a 2 tier systems, perhaps you would care to fully explain how that is true and how in scope it may be.



And who's supporters are crying that? It was the Liberal policies towards supplementary healthcare in the private sector that cost them the support of the NDP. Their version of healthcare and the CPC's are polar opposites. An interesting point: On SSM & abortion you rand the CPC) stance seems to be "let the voters decide" but in terms of "private healthcare" you favour implementing it over the shill cry of "American sty;e" by the voters. While I will freely admit that the majority of Canadians hold many misconceptions about the subject they are still the voters who want to decide and I don't think a majority favours anything more then sparse privatization.



Done slowly and allowed only in specific areas it wouldn't. Flipping a switch from public to private will do exactly what people fear as trained medical staff leave the public sector for private positions at a rate the public sector cannot replenish. That is the fear and it isn't completely unfounded.



With Quebec it is the seperatists who are the "anti-American" voices. I think they do it in order to deliberately incite "anti-Quebec" sentiment in Canada, stress between the east & west and stress between the US & Canada in order to further their goal. I also believe that the "anti-US" sentiment is much more "anti-bush" then anything else.



The CPC has changed its stance onissues because of political winds as well and they are a young party. Funny how when a party actually listens to the people it is "holding a finger to the political winds". We've all seen harpers leadership and if he had it then the CPC would have more support then it does.



4 years of con rule? If you think they were only in power for 4 years then we have nothing to talk about. Try September 17, 1984-June 13, 1993 for Mulrooney and add in Kims token term. Our military has been in a slow decline since 1960 and if you don't think the PC were responsible for a good portion of that then you are simply wrong. As already stated, when the current Liberals came to power Canada was in no financial shape to rebuiuld the military. They had to choose between doing a ton of things and fixing the deficit/debt. They made their choice. Lets examine this scenario. Our military in sparkling shape but our country >600 billion in debt with no end in sight.



Suspicious? Not at all and you would not think twice from saying the same if it were the CPC doing it. There is no shame behind them using money earmarked for debt reduction to lower taxes in order to garner support. CPC promises of tax cuts are no different then Liberals giving tax cuts.



Ensuring no money gets used for the environment.



Considering that the info on disent is coming from your own party I doubt your assesment is correct.



No its because the voters still support him.

Canadiangal wrote:



Fair enough but again the issues are legality versus personal comfortability but you address that here:



I'm sure Ridenrain will tell you that the CPC is not "against" gay marriage, just that they call it something else because "marriage is between 1 man & 1 women" something I equate with having "white" bathrooms & "coloured" bathrooms". Still I'm glad you recognize the difference between having a personal problem with something & the Gov't legislating it.



Vote green!

   

Lucky he only counts for 1 vote.

   

[font=Arial] [/font] Morning All

I think this being "politically correct" is getting REALLY out of hand

On the radio this DJ named John Derringer mentioned that mostly all of Toronto public schools are banning any reference to Christmas or any religious hymms to do with Christmas in their classrooms

Is Canada now becoming a country that condones censorship???

I can't believe that the parents of these children that go to these schools are NOT standing up and fighting! Can you imagine what would happen if little Ahmed went home and said "the school says I can't pray to the East at 2 pm anymore"....Holy crap, they would be picketing and saying racism etc!!!!

I think Canadians are getting way too passive, maybe thats why the last Liberal leaders have been able to get away with the crap they have gotten away with!!!!

   

Yep Yep and so true, castration at birth seems to be the way in Canada.

   

Be careful with big words like that. 'Political Correctness' isn't censorship. It's just another way to impose the views of other upon the masses, and the biggest mistake toward the opression of the Canadian tradition of politeness yet.

   

[font=Arial] [/font] Hi Dr.Caleb;

There is "being polite", then there is being "pussyfide"

I am NOT against anyone elses customs, beliefs. Practice your religion, practice your customs, that is your right, BUT don't try to tell me that by me practicing mine "I am making you uncomfortable" OR "you don't want your children exposed to them". If you want to behave that way, then maybe we should all start saying "don't wear your religious scar on your head to school" or "don't wear your turbin"!!!! How long before we had a major protest on our hands????????

It is my belief that immigrants should realize and accept the fact that the majority of Canadians celebrate Easter, Christmas, Halloween and WE ARE NOT GOING TO STOP because you come here and don't like it!!!! They should be told, "hey you don't have to acknowledge our customs/beliefs, but don't biatch about them either!" If you don't like it here, then go back to where you came from.

   

I agree totally. If you talk to new immigrants, you'll find most of them are all good with the fact they have stepped into a different culture, and have no problem with that culture being in their face, so long as it's not forced on them. It's the born and bred Canadians who insist that we're getting in other people's faces, and that this part of our culture is somehow offensive to new Canadians. These are the people that are opressing Canadians with their 'political correctness', not the new Canadians. Those, like the ones who suggest blather like 'Holiday Tree' that can walk east till their hat floats.

   

Ridenrain...I have a question.

Why refer to the Liberals as Fiberals? I don't see any Liberal supporters calling the Conservatives the ConArtatives or something like that? All it does is alienate any Liberal voters?

On another note, is anyone going to volunteer for their local candidates? I'm going tomorrow...Hopefully Belinda won't be representing me much longer.

   

Unfortunately for the First Nations the Europeans didn't practice what you preach.

I refer you to my previous post, please follow the instructions and THEN start bitching about people trying to ban christmas, halloween etc


http://www.canadaka.net/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=9903

   

TheGup.

Someone else started that and it sounded appropriate so I continued it. When a party gets caught so many times, what else should I call them?

I've heard the CPC tarred with every possible comparison, from religious right, neo-cons and Bush-lovers. The CPC is always on the defensive with the main stream media and the easiest way to get a story published is to say something bad against Harper or the CPC.

As for offending or alienating Liberals, Don't they read the paper or watch the news? If the party that I liked was being dragged through the muck every day, I'd first see if the claims were true, then ADMIT the problem, then work to solve it.
I'd have some respect for them if they had a policy or a stood on a principal. but so far the only, underlying drive is "get elected at all costs".

   

[font=Arial] [/font] Evening Ice

Let me start my response by saying "8 MINUTES TO THE NO CONFIDENCE VOTE!!!!"

Now that being said (or should I say screamed), have you ever heard the story of the immigrants that refuse to sing our National Anthem because it is not their home and native land???? Have you heard the part about them wanting the wording to be changed so it can be more "user friendly" for everyone????

I will bitch about this topic because I had a grandfather in the war that lost half of his stomach to mustard gas, I had two uncles serve in the war and one is still emotionally scarred today because of what he went through....so you see...I had loved ones fight to defend this "Oh Canada!" LONG LIVE THE MEMORY OF THE HIGHLANDERS!!!!!

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next