Leafless

Huh? How does SSM do that? I didn't see any relevant support in the link you provided to support your claim that "Homosexuals are responsible for a much larger percentage of child abuse". Care to be specific? "Huh? How does SSM do that?" http://www.hatecrime.org/subpages/hatespee...elycameron.html http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/...ity/ho0075.html "I didn't see any relevant support in the link you provided to support your claim that "Homosexuals are responsible for a much larger percentage of child abuse". Care to be specific?" http://www.traditionalvalues.org/urban/one-a.php

You describe Paul Martin as a great finance minister. Kindly explain how he 'accomplished balancing the books'. Kimmy on the barbecue?

I think SSM encourages paedophilia. Homosexuals are responsible for a much larger percentage of child abuse, on a proportional basis, than heterosexuals. http://www.preservemarriage.ca/eng/links.htm -------------------------------------------------- Of course separation of church and state, pertaining to the functional operation of government in the U.S. is adhered to. But nevertheless U.S. presidents participate in Christian public and acknowledge God as being supreme and is an important factor in maintaining U.S. patriotism and providing the moral in helping keep their country strong and free. ---------------------------------------------------- SSM could be a threat to younger people by providing a twisted alternative, SSM or simply the homosexual lifestyle, to a group that that does not have the ability to create or sustain a functional country on their own, a lifestyle that is viewed as corrupt and against the very concepts of human nature, pertaining to the views of most civilized countries. I personally find total incompatibility, concerning most interest between a homosexual and a heterosexual and they probably feel the same. If forced to react with a homosexual, say in a place of employment and a situation developed solely on personal incompatible homosexual/heterosexual views, yes, I would feel threatened concerning the security of my job. SSM could be threat also if for instance I objected to having an SSM couple living beside me whereas I could be forced to move, as I personally strongly disapprove of this type of lifestyle.

The U.S. certainly does support Christianity and this is reflected through patriotism towards the country in which U.S. presidents make reference to God in reference to keeping the country strong and free and in public prayer. This motto is even printed on their money "In God we Trust". What God do you think their making reference to? Liberals in Canada do shy away from any form of reference to God which IMO weakens society. But I firmly believe the Conservatives will support Christianity as time progresses. Did you catch Stephen Harper and his family singing "God save the Queen" at Remembrance Day ceremonies? What God do you think Mr. Harper was referring to? A referendum is not an election and the Liberals have created a dysfunctional political system by implementing the 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms and "appeasing 22-23% of the population and catering to their interest in a place called Quebec and interest of Aboriginals and now homosexuals. What else do the Liberals have intentions on making 'distinct'? What is next on the Liberals 'distinct' agenda, legalizing bigamy, bestiality, paedophilia? The Liberals are collecting a diverse assortment of political allies and forcing other political parties to follow suit. We are in drastic need of referendums covering major issue's as the liberals are out of control pertaining to the recruitment of certain groups in an unjustifiable and corrupt manner. In Canada equality is dictated mainly by the Liberals and has destroyed the dynamic democratic image of Canada to that of a socialist nanny government while protecting and covering up its main objective, being 'advancing the political interest of Quebec'.

If you had any balls you would be addressing the topic and not this heterosexual poster. Obviously you don't. Only a homosexual would post the type of post you did trying to belittle, embarrass and intimidate in a truly homosexual fashion.

There really are no realistic answers at the present time when world air pollution increases proportionally to ever increasing world population. Mandatory birth control would make more sense to me rather than waste tax payers money buying useless carbon credits. I think supporting the Conservatives clean air bill attacks the countries most important form of pollution, smog. Turning a blind eye to developing nations and their pollution does not make sense.

The legislation doesn't force Christian churches to conduct ceremonies and marriage isn't the exclusive domain of Christian churches. The government has the right to affirm any relationship it sees fit and bring it under legal protection. Many gays and lesbians are Christians. Some are Conservatives as well. I doubt this an attack on your Christianity. Your church can practice its religion free of government interference. The government unilaterally, without the input of society, has a right to implement and force a diverse lifestyle on majority Christians? I don't think it does without the approval of a national referendum on the issue. Christianity in general does not promote homosexuality especially the largest denomination being Roman Catholics, nor are most homosexuals Christians, as they are rejected by the church and most are atheist. But this raises an interesting question: Can homosexuality be considered a cult in which in turn rejects the teachings of Christianity and therefore be harmful to organized society? This in turn must mean the government does not recognize Christianity as binding force necessary to promote a healthy, moralistic society necessary for the development pertaining to an organized society concerning traditional beliefs. I wonder if federal governments negative views will have a demoralizing effect on religion that is the binding force of society resulting eventually in a major breakdown regarding morals, law and order and respect for government itself? I think allowing diversity only creates more diversity which greatly desensitizes mans ability to distinguish right from wrong. Can society handle this sort of ongoing pattern of diversity that swings greatly away from traditional aspirations? I don't think it can as evident from the level of corruption and illegal acts increasing across the country.

Man, I wish we were like the Ukraine. Have you ever seen that episode of Seinfeld??? Anyways, gays don't really have a plan to destroy society. Why not give gays full rights, same as everybody else. I doubt we'll see gays taking over the world anytime soon. Really look at Tim Haggard was he a victim of the gay agenda to destroy heterosexuals. As well homosexuality is nothing new in western society. It's been around since the dawn of time. If two guys at the age of consent want to have sex, then go ahead as long as you don't do it in front of me. The only people that have destroyed marriage so far have been heterosexuals so that argument can be thrown out right now. What are your "western ideologies"??? I have posted several times what my Western ideologies are. But more to the point I believe in ideologies and basic values that have been supported by mainstream U.S./Canada since the creation of the countries. Two of these are capitalism and Christianity. It's all very simple and should be perfectly understandable.

No, no, no. The recognition phrases this week are: -'Long is the road that leads from home. ' and the reply is-- -'The cows reap what the farmer sows.' How is SSM supposed to actually accomplish that? Is SSM supposed to be stamped and approved by Christianity and mainstream Canadian society or is SSM actually an assault on heterosexuals and Christianity in an effort to promote a Godless pagan society, all part of the liberals master plan?

Why suggest elements of sadism and torture to eliminate Leafless by burning him and similar thinking people at the stake. Hopefully you are not related to an organization that begins with the letter j. A quick east way, as you suggest, if you were kidding, would be to simply zap the helpless victims with your hi-tech hand held laser gun, immediately immobilizing the helpless victims and transforming them into a cloud of water vapour. The suggestion of death though to permanently silence your opponents, is a good reason to be permanently banned.

Who is leading this master plan? The liberals with their 'official multiculturalism' and political fixation with 'political correctness'.

Russians oppose homosexuality also. Are they a conservative religious order?

Is this not the right, of the rights moral responsibility to society, to do so?

Isn't Scott Brison simply being a Liberal, the answer to your own question.

Leafless is getting better though. When he first joined this forum, he spelled like a retarded third grader. Some of my spelling may not be perfect, but trust me I've been psyched about quantum, physics, anti gravity and perpetual motion since I was six.

Homosexuality is not part of my Western ideologies. Liberalism is the cause of North America's immorality. Proof of this is the liberals fixation concerning implementing gay marriage in Canada, all part of their master plan on 'how to destroy heterosexual society'. I believe Western heterosexual society will wake up before it's to late and turf out forever all those heterosexual hating Liberals.

"‘Homosexuality is an anomaly brought to life by human immorality and viciousness. Though the rights of these people should be protected, society will regard them as renegades,’ people’s deputy Leonid Grach said in his interview to Kommersant Ukrainian issue published on Friday." --------------------------------------------- Wise assessment concerning homosexuals. To bad our politicians are not as intelligent. http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=2275

Kingston was the first capital of Canada as was: 1841-1843 Kingston 1844-1849 Montreal 1849-1865 Quebec City and Toronto 1866 Ottawa But the permanent home for Canada's capital was Ottawa due to excessive quarreling among contending provinces. LOL, if all provinces utilizeed the aggresive, disruptive, power seeking squeeze play on Ottawa like Quebec has, we wouldn't have a country. This is why it would not be unreasonable to implement a national referendum to establish factually, that rebel rousing Quebec should no longer be part of Canada as it has created dysfunctional federal politics, based on its idea of being a superior culture.

What amendments were made, and / or what concessions were made that give Quebec any special status that the other provinces do not have? If Quebec has special status, why did Quebec not sign the constitution? Old federal and provincial human rights codes were pieces of legislature that could have been changed or repealled at any time by the federal or provincial governments. The Charter guarantees certain rights and freedoms which the federal and provincial governments cannot override or change without amending the constitution. Previously governments could have taken away many of these fundamental rights with very little effort. Having the federal government use both official languages does not have anything to do with Quebec per se. Is there something that the federal government has done in relation to this clause that you find offensive? The amendments to our constitution that give Quebec special status are all relating to the 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms' Sec.16 to 22. But language rights can be bounced or supported pertaining to Equality Rights, Sec.15. in other areas of society. Federal official languages of Canada are English and French. Since English is the majority language of Canada, charter legislation does little to advance English language rights nor does the government go out of its way to protect them, say in Quebec for instance but fanatically protects French language rights outside of Quebec. French rights as an official language is a different story. Quebec unilaterally designated it's language 'official in 1974'. This minority language is supported in the charter as an official language also. This gives Quebec and its french language special status over all languages in Canada including English that does not have it's majority language 'designated provincially official' in any English province in Canada. ------------------------------------ I doubt very much if under the old federal/provincial human rights legislation would at any time fail like you suggest unless you can prove otherwise. ------------------------------------ It is dangerous to have changing federal governments able to change or support its vision of what is right in the way of advancing human rights pertaining to culture without a national referendum. This is why existing charter legislation relating to language is seen by many Canadians as discriminatory.

Kingston was the first capital of Canada as was: 1841-1843 Kingston 1844-1849 Montreal 1849-1865 Quebec City and Toronto 1866 Ottawa But the permanent home for Canada's capital was Ottawa due to excessive quarreling among contending provinces.

Do you know Ottawa at all? Queen Victoria choose Ottawa as the Capital of Canada since it was a safe distance from Montreal and Toronto, who both at the time wanted to be the Capital of Canada. But she forgot about Hull, Quebec which was only a small town up until the mid sixties when the Montreal crowd began to move in to capitalize on the federal presence in Ottawa across the river from Hull, Quebec. Ottawa in the 60's-80's was like any other English Canadian city except for the fact Quebec began moving in on Ottawa demanding it be made bilingual since it was the Capital of Canada. This is the same as someone who works at a lower level position simply to get his or her foot in the door to work to a higher level position. And this is what Quebec has done to Ottawa along with the Liberals and that was make the federal government a sub-servant or lackey to the French Quebec government. The amazing part is the English authorities in Ottawa did little to prevent or stop this French intervention. Queen Victoria never realized such an occurrence would take place and if she recognized this fact she probably would have designated Kingston as the Capital of Canada and in turn Kingston would have received little attention from Quebec since it was a lot further from the Quebec/Ontario border.

I really don't know how being handicapped to this extent as anything to do with this topic. What we are talking about is a cultural issue. This cultural issue reflects a smaller cultural group trying to manipulate the standards a cultural majority is supposed to enjoy by forcing disguised discriminatory 'federal official standards' to accommodate their minority position language which is outside of discriminatory federal control.

I don't have a link. I have a Concise 'Oxford Dictionary' and there is no plural of else as a word that stands alone as else's. What you are describing forms an 'idiom'. Why don't you ask GREG for a position as a 'word cop'. We are off topic and I will not be entertaining your word fun any further. G'BYE.

Did Quebec not start the ball rolling concerning this issue? http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...272&k=27794

Ottawa is looking for a new police chief. Questions concerning whether or not this new police chief should be bilingual have been discussed among city officials for many months, with the net result that NO, in fact it does not matter if the new police chief is bilingual. That is until to-day, when media noticed the police chiefs job vacancy advertisement in the Ottawa Citizen, Wed. Nov.15/2006, page C-10. Included in the job description was the requirement stating "You are fluent in both English and French to a level that satisfies the Police Services Board." The French population in Ottawa is low and this bilingual requirement will have will have a detrimental effect on the quality of job applicants. Mostly those who normally would be qualified for this position would come from English provinces in Canada and cannot speak French. This is another blatant example how the influence of the federal government and their 'official bilingual policy' in the federal public service and 'official languages which really means NOTHING in Quebec 'but the rest of Canada' is supposed to embrace 'French' as if it was the official language of all Canadian provinces which it is NOT. Ottawa radio stations have been trying unsuccessfully to track down the person or persons responsible for this advertisement but to no avail. It will be interesting to know how a majority English city like Ottawa can allow a French minority to manipulate an important position like this, which in turn could be highly detrimental to Ottawa's English population if an under qualified candidate is chosen based on his or her ability to speak French.