Leafless

Why do you find it so hard to understand that most native Canadians (Christians) are not overly religious nor do they believe in all aspects of their faith, but simply follow it since it supports family and society in general. Do you actually think your the only one intelligent enough to reason on the basis of science?

What a farce! First Mr. Graham says the federal government has no jurisdiction in the affairs of municipalities concerning bilingualism. Now he favours tying federal university funding to bilingualism but yet has no legislative authority to do this. He cites the Official Languages Act preamble," there are whereases in terms of promoting both official languages. This is the part what I hope to do", he says. The only trouble is, when you are out of the confines of federal authority, federal 'official languages' are no longer OFFICIAL but in fact OFFICIALLY NON-EXISTENT provincially speaking, except in the case of the single province New Brunswick which is 'officially bilingual'. IMO Graham Fraser is acting in contempt of provincial language legislation which is a under provincial jurisdiction and not federal. It seems Mr.Graham has trouble understanding Canada is 'nationally speaking' is NOT officially bilingual and federal authorities outside of the confines under it's federal jurisdiction have no business favouring, tying university funding in provinces to the federal wish dream of making Canada 'officially bilingual'. http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/s...b92a&k=7952

THANK GOD!

This has got to be the joke of the year. Newly appointed language czar Graham Fraser has slammed Ottawa for not embracing it's responsibility as the nations capital by being more "welcoming" to francophone's instead of adopting a "resistant attitude towards their demands. Firstly, Ottawa the Capital of Canada at a federal level already overly accommodates francophone's to a level best described as discriminatory to English majority of residents of Ottawa and for that matter English majority residents of Canada pertaining to federal employment. Queen Victoria made Ottawa the capital to accommodate the federal government and make it the home of federal government. Undemocratic decentralization by federal Liberals destroyed this title and moved a substantial number of federal departments and entities to Quebec removing significant federal importance as Ottawa the Capital of Canada. Secondly, the city of Ottawa has an extremely generous bilingualism policy (albeit discriminatory since there was never a municipal referendum to decide this) something regardless the neighbouring province and city of Gatineau, Quebec does not have and for that matter anywhere in Quebec has a bilingual policy. Thirdly, Ottawa private businesses employs many bilingual Quebecers co-operating with the city's bilingual policy. In Quebec you will be hard pressed to find private employment for any kind of bilingual employment for a English mother tongue bilingual Canadian. Graham Fraser is unilaterally placing all the responsibility concerning English-French relations while totally ignoring Quebec's responsibility to the English. He also neglects the fact the city of Ottawa is like any other municipality in Canada and residents of Ottawa have NO official responsibility towards accommodating any culture just like Quebec has no official responsibility to accommodate any other culture but THEIR OWN. http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/s...cfc&k=68233

Is that like a choice of being robbed and anally raped or coming over and having a few beers while we watch the game? "I'll take anal rape for 500 Alex!" Fabricating quotes now Dancer--that's not part of my post. I do notice however rectums and $9.95 books of power words seem to be right up your alley.

The most primitive tribe worships some form of God. With no knowledge of the outside world it appear primitive tribes including most other humans worldwide are dependent on a God for salvation. Those who assume religion is not a necessity and God is a folklore hold these brave assumptions in the safety of large groups (society) along with man's advanced technology. This country was built on Christianity and I doubt would exist in it's present form in the absence of Christianity. There comes a time in every one's lives when all the education, all the computers, all the technology in the world won't help you one bit when the time comes to sign off or exit this place we call Earth. The facts are, most people belong to some form of organized religion, for spiritual leadership to support the human spirit and mental well being. Just think of it for a moment as to whom you rather primarily put your faith in, organized religion or someone like Dancer?

And what part of that isn't sexuality....? Or do you think sexuality is a verb? The primary focus is pertaining to religion not sexuality. I'am simply reaffirming 'sexuality' is not an issue.

What this women is doing as nothing to do with celibacy being deviant and unnatural. What she is, is the next thing to a Nun, except she is still a lay person. If she wants to devote herself to God, that's her business and really does not hurt anyone. Congratulations! Her sexuality is her business and it doesn't hurt anyone.....lets see if you can extend that open mindedness to everyone .,......... This is not about sexuality but rather a total absence any kind of physical sexual relationships or sexual acts on her part. Open mindedness pertaining to perverted sex in a law-abiding society should be limited to what all society considers 'normal sexuality'. Legalizing perverted sex only advances moralistic decay and degradation of moral values which could and has the capacity to eventually incapacitate society.

Residents of Labrador won't be getting all that FREE Liberal anti-Conservative propaganda anymore. Hopefully the tax-payer funded CBC will be next. You want to watch your brand of political propaganda, YOU PAY FOR IT and stop forcing all Canadians to pay for Liberal anti-Conservatism propaganda.

What this women is doing as nothing to do with celibacy being deviant and unnatural. What she is, is the next thing to a Nun, except she is still a lay person. If she wants to devote herself to God, that's her business and really does not hurt anyone.

Could it be they are paralyzed with fear. Free democratic societies are not controlled by Muslim rule or religion or Muslim anarchy. Immigrant anarchy should be dealt with in a severe manner including police using weapons and government issuing deportations. Send these troubled people back to their uncivilized, exclusive, politically religious countries.

We're dhimmis in our own home. Not only that Muslims are anti-nationalistic, along with Quebec who only believes in Quebec nationalism. The problems this country faces with Canadian nationalism and patriotism makes Canada a non-unifying force directly caused by weak, poor leadership. This is the cause of havoc in the way in the way of cultural concerns and in turn affects and splits the country on important issues. http://www.zawaj.com/editorials/nationalism_ahmed.html

While negotiating the terms of 'settlement' with Arar and his legal team it would be self-defeating for the Canadian government to issue an apology. No lawyer/lawyers acting for the government would accept Arar's statement that he would not use a government apology, if offered today, to effect a more substantial monetary payment. Would you? Arar is suing the government for hundreds of millions of dollars. How many millions he will be offered, along with the 'apology' from the government, and how many millions Arar will accept, is the question. I think an apology ranks second on Arar's Agenda. It may rank second but it's deserving. A pay out doesn't automatically preclude a published admission of guilt in my books. Says who? This country is definitely becoming pro-immigrant, anti- Canadian and no way Will President Bush allow his country to be seen in that light. This running to President Bush political facade WILL BACKFIRE, making Canada and PM Harper look the whining complainers they are.

Nor was he assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. THAT is a more important difference to note. He was detained in the U.S. and they deported him back to his country of birth Syria for security reasons. The laws in the U.S. are a reversal of 'innocent until proven guilty'. The point I find difficult is how the Canadian government is suppose to protect someone who is also a citizen of Syria who's laws are totally different than Canada's that include according to Mr. Arar, torture. Why would Mr.Arar retain citizenship to a country that could be and according to Mr. Arar was a danger to his well being.

No, this policy does not stop you from speaking English or French. What this policy does is demands and forces the majority of unilingual English speaking tax paying residents of Ottawa to become bilingual in order to gain employment in most part, all levels of government and in most PRIVATE industry in Ottawa. Bilingualism in Ottawa has been encouraged with UNJUST and discriminatory federal initiatives (since it's out of federal jurisdiction) promoting federal style 'official bilingualism' it has jurisdiction under in it's federal entities but not provincial. This is a direct conflict of interest on the federal part as well as federal patronizing on the part of the mayor of Ottawa who supports federal Liberals and the Liberal premier of Ontario pertaining to a Ottawa's bilingualism policy. It's hard to acknowledge or understand that governments allow Ontario's French Langage Services Act to flourish under the UNBELIEVABLE conditons concerning NO ENGLISH or BILINGUALISM LANGUAGE POLICIES whatsoever or ANYWHERE in Quebec.

Please show me where I said that?

'Language Fairness' a non-profit organization lost it's battle against Ottawa's bilingual policy. http://www.languagefairness.ca/ Regional Senior Justice Monique Metivier has dismissed the legal challenge brought by Canadians for Language Fairness. The decision found that the city's bilingual bylaw and policy are valid and constitutional. IMO this is a horrible undemocratic decision against the majority English speaking residents of Ottawa, Ontario. This bilingual policy in Ottawa has resulted in almost the same degree of 'official bilingualism' has the federal version of it's discriminatory 'official bilingualism policy'. Not only is Ottawa NOT 'officially bilingual' the province of Ontario is NOT 'officially bilingual'. The citizen's of both the city of Ottawa and the province of Ontario have been dealt with in an unconstitutional manner that does not reflect the provincial rights of the citizen's of Ontario that have the legal right to decide on the language of their CHOICE. In fact tax paying residents of Ontario have the legal right to make English the official language of Ontario but were NOT given the opportunity to do that, in order to protect majority English access to jobs in that province as well as to protect English employees with municipal employment. This is absolutely shameful and the federal government should hang it's head in shame as to not prevent this unconstitutional manoevre especially when Quebec is the leader in linguistic oppression and discrimination. http://www.ottawasun.com/News/OttawaAndReg...956101-sun.html

Your interpretation of Canadian nationalism is different than mine. Nationalism is simply a more intense feeling of patriotism and they are both created like I mentioned previously from (in this North American country) majority Christian nationalism and democratic federal support. You are incorrect, despite what your think....... Nationalism Patriotism Your version of Nationalism is best described here My Concise Oxford dictionary says the definition of nationalism- 1. a patriotic feeling. And the definition of a patriot- 1. a person who is devoted to and ready to support his or her country. What you are quoting pertaining to racism is more directed to the antics used in Nazi Germany. In other words you are also insinuating the U.S. is racist I gather. I thought I was refering to you Your directing your twisted analogies in the wrong direction and to the wrong person. I'am not the one supporting racist policies, I OPPOSE them.

I will not respond to your post on this topic again. You are a trolling, flaming arrogant smart ass that has the same type of characteristics as the province you come from. If Quebec's FRENCH language is so much in demand, why is it your premier CANNOT generate enough FRENCH jobs in your province so as other Canadian provinces wouldn't have to support Quebec. Why force your Quebec ideologies on other provincial provinces that don't harbour Quebec's dictatorial offensive and discriminatory racist policies or Quebec's Nazi style ideologies? Doesn't Quebec and Quebecer's have any pride? Many Canadians are sick and tired of being run over by a FRENCH MINORITY and aspects of immigration that are out of control.

Mahar Arar WAS NOT found innocent in a COURT OF LAW but rather innocent from the results of a LIMITED inquiry. Please recognize the difference.

When I speak of multiculturalism, Iam referring to 'official multiculturalism policy' that includes more importantly Charter Rights like I explained to you previously. All Charter Rights are dictated and some invented by the government which were never ratified by the tax paying citizens of Canada. The federal government of Canada and the individual provinces has an obligation and duty to protect human rights in Canada on an individual basis should not, unilaterally dictate rights to the masses without democratic approval. Canada to-day has developed into the the country it is to-day because of: (a) The Queen ( The BNA ACT © Democratic Government (d) Christianity It would be foolish of you to even suggest that without the above factors Canada or even the U.S. would even exist. For the charter to override my democratic and Christian rights with federal government DICTATED rights directly abuses my many democratic and Christian Rights pertaining to my religion that this country was founded on and further developed to where it was prior to the introduction of the Charter in 1982. Again, it is dictated federal government Charter rights that directly discriminate against my rightful democratic and Christian related rights pertaining to multiculturalism. There was never a NATIONAL REFERENDUM to establish the acceptance of the Charter but rather the Charter was ratified late in the evening at a hotel by possibly inebriated Canadian premiers who DID NOT represent my, or other Canadians objections and ratified a document that clearly consisted of the biased views and biased opinions of a single political party.

Ok, care to show me where you "supported" this view: "multiculturalism is fanning the flames of bigotry and racism by allowing so called minorities to advance their cultural and religious claims." ? I'm not even looking for a source to back you up, I'm looking for any reason WHY you think multiculturalism is fanning the flames of bigotry, a simple argument to back up that view (or any other views you haven't backed up) will suffice. The original quote of mine was: "This is about how official multiculturalism is fanning the flames of bigotry and racism by allowing so called minorities to advance their cultural and religious claims. I thought multiculturalism is suppose to be the answer to 'eliminate' bigotry and racism, to even the odds, not advance it." Firstly 'official multiculturalism' is advanced and protected by Charter Rights. Gays, ethnic immigrants and Quebecer's are all minorities protected Charter Rights. Gays have capitalized with federal government INTERVENTION to obtain their so-called rights at the expense of heterosexuals and especially pertaining to traditional Christian beliefs. Immigrants utilizing their language with no intention of seriously learning the major languages of Canada threaten Canadian nationalism and Christian beliefs including a certain religion that advocates against religious freedom in Canada and even threatens Canadian nationalism with national political instability. Quebec has capitalized tremendously with the federal government of Canada and the Charter expanding Quebec political ideologies with rights that discriminate against Canadian nationalism and Canadian freedoms. These rights place great importance on Quebec's language and culture and discriminate and promote national political instability rather than protect Canadian nationalism and Canadians as a whole. Canadian nationalism is a product of Christian nationalism, Christianity and traditional federal government support similar to other democratic countries like the U.S. Charter Rights protect Freedom of Religion which includes Christianity, Christian nationalism and Christian values that has been abused by the Charter which no longer reflects or defends the religion of the majority, Christianity. Thus the reason for the 'quote' defended by a flawed, biased, discriminatory and racist promoting, our Canadian 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms".

Your interpretation of Canadian nationalism is different than mine. Nationalism is simply a more intense feeling of patriotism and they are both created like I mentioned previously from (in this North American country) majority Christian nationalism and democratic federal support. You are incorrect, despite what your think....... Nationalism Patriotism Your version of Nationalism is best described here My Concise Oxford dictionary says the definition of nationalism- 1. a patriotic feeling. And the definition of a patriot- 1. a person who is devoted to and ready to support his or her country. What you are quoting pertaining to racism is more directed to the antics used in Nazi Germany. In other words you are also insinuating the U.S. is racist I gather. Obviously you posses anti-nationalistic trends for whatever reason as Quebec is extremely nationalistic.

The original topic originates from a newspaper article. Are opinions related to the article against forum rules? If you object to an opinion, counter it or correct it from a qualified source. I have done this many times. If you cannot do this then it is clear you object to ones right concerning free speech. If you or others feel that I'am not allowed to express opinions that virtually everyone does around here including yourself, without a qualified source to back up your opinion, please feel free to report the issue.

It sounds like you object to a lot of conventional authority. Objecting to conventional authority pertaining to what?