Leafless

thelonius You wrote- " And you get to your choice at census time if you wish your taxes to fund seperate or public schooling." Catholics and francophones do not fund their own schoolboards. This was the old way years ago. All Ontario tax payers fund all school boards and this is why the United Nations found Ontario discriminates in 1999 concerning funding Catholic schools and of course public schools but not other denominations. Official multiculturalism has opened a can of worms and questions why funding is not available for all denomominations. This is why I say it is better for the public to fund only public schools in the majority language. The Charter should be re-written as it guarantees to many rights with the burden placed on the provinces rather than the federal government.

Melaine You wrote- " If there can be Catholic schools, why shouldn't there be Muslim schools." I have come to the conclusion there should only be public schools in Canada as with multiculturalism, denominational schools are becoming a devisive issue as well as problamatic and expensive. Catholic schools have existed since Roman Catholics are the largest denomination of Christian faiths in Canada and exist as they represented a national identity at one time prior to Canada becoming officially multicultural. But even in Quebec where there was a very high prorportion of Roman Catholics school boards and schools have been replaced from denominational to linguistic (French) due to a Constitutional Amendment in 1997 allowing this. But in Ontario for instance a province that is not officially bilingual, francophones have been successful under minority rights to pursue French Catholic school boards as well as French Catholic schools in which all Ontario tax payers pay for this privledge. Obviously all linguistic minorities and religions cannot have their own school system as the cost would be prohibitive. I am surprised that there has not been more oppositon, an outcry and demostrations to our Charter (minority rights) and other sections that are placing unreasonable financial and discriminatory costs and on the provinces to support all aspects of Federal Charter rights which in fact the feds should be responsible for.

Article-Ottawa Citizen-Wed.Jan.18/2006, Pg.A3. "PSAC urges members to vote Bloc" There were no articles on line concerning this topic, when I checked. The federal government as created minority rights that has resulted concerning federal employment "official bilingualism" within federal entities. Most of us are aware of the large over represented bilingual postions within the federal government mostly occupied by francophones a lot of them from Gatineau, Quebec. The Bloc is a federal Party that supports separation and supports policies in the interest of Quebec. What is happening in Western Quebec, Gatineau is that the Bloc is advocating policies supportive of public service employees (many Quebec francophone) on issues such as anti-scab legislation and in fighting changes to the principle of merit hiring proposed by the Liberal government. (further protect francophone employees) This has resulted with the PSAC ACTUALLY endorsing Bloc Quebecois candidates in the national capital region ridings of Gatineau, Hull-Aylmer and Pontiac. these Bloc candidates Alain Charette, Emond Lapointe and Richard Nadeau who have a realistic chance of being elected. I refer to this as a nightmare scenario when especially francophone federal public servants can stoop so low to actually support and vote for a separtist party with no or little concern and dedication that their employer is a national federal party supported by the tax payers of Canada. It seems the separatist party the Bloc is working it's way into the confines of our federal system with all this started by the Liberals and their Charter that imposes the type of rights that should not be allowed to take over or control our federal government and shows the charter is badly flawed and dangerous.

BubberMiley You wrote- " You should recognize, that while you are free to practice your religion you should never be allowed to use that to oppress others." You continually use religion saying it oppresses and conveniently omit that there are other factors that constitue an organized society with these factors closely associated with law and include differentiating between good and bad, moral and unmoarlistic behavior. For instance prositution and homosexuality is legal in certain countries but this does not make this type of behavior good or a moralistic thing and is deplored by many who might think you are infringing on their rights with the type of vulgar behavior that induces depravity and degrades a civilized society. In Canada we are a democratic country and the government of the land must stand up for majority rule in a capitalistic defined country as we are not all employees of the federal government with most of us working for private industry and living in private dwellings. Unless the federal government wants to care for us all , provide employment, shelter and all the other fringe benefits found in a communist country it must allow majority rule who decide what the laws are and what is socially acceptable. If you have trouble understanding me I will tell you loud and clear I do not support multiculturalism or so called minority rights which in my estimation is destroying this country at a rapid rate.

BubberMiley You wrote- " too many people are interested in religion only because it facilitates their feeling superior to those who are not interested; this is common from the Christian Right to al qaeda." Now I don't know how Christianity in the Western civilized world compares to Al Qaeda a group who justifies terrorism concerning disturbing religious believes. But you included an interesting phrase " feeling superior to those who are not interested." Based on this, you feel inferior because families or individuals feel they might need or do need spirtual guidence concerning a relative harmless religion as what Christianity offers in order to add a little more meaning and direction in their lives? What you say could be true that some individuals don't need religion, but those that do you label as being or thinking their superior because in their own minds they look down on members of society that think their FREE to do whatever they please out of the confines of what most people would consider an action or event that works against common good values and morals. We have laws in society some enforced by law and others by members of social institutions that form the basis for a controlled civilized society. From what you said it proves that religion is necessary for the preservation of society for without it we could be in danger of an out of control moralistic free fall resulting in a dysfunctional society. The loss of a national religion due to lack of government support is on the same level as a country that lacks a military. In Canada's case we can hopefully rely on the U.S. in the time of extreme need. But without government support concerning a national religion, who have Canadians to turn to for values and moralistic support that initially helped build Canada. No one, and that is what the danger is when led by a government like the Liberals who don't want to offend no one but allow others to offend Canadians and their majority national religion. What we need in Canada is leadership reflecting Canadian values to ensur our social institutions will continue to provide the type of base necessary for a civilized lifestyle.

betsy It is now Tue. Jan.17/2006, 11:37A.M. EST and no sign of any bomb. I think the only bomb is the one between M.Duffy's ears. He can't believe the Liberals are going down the tube. He was also a B.Mulroney die hard. One of the last who could not believe Mr.Mulroney was politically finished. Remember those swollen watery eyes.

BubberMiley You wrote- " I think leafless is the perfect example how it is difficult to be moral With religion." Well Bubber religion IS regarded as a moral practise. Now come on tell me so is swap clubs, polygamy, secularist, SSM etc. Social institutions make society work and the big ones are families and churches and universities. Society is an institution instilled with morals and values and that's part of the reason why Mr. Martin is going to lose this election is that he is drifting away from supporting Christian inspired values and morals. No one wants a pagan for PM.

Can we be moral without religion? This is a dumb question and the answer is NO. Simply ask any secularist where society would be to-day with the absence of religion? Gosh, good question and a question no body can answer. Fact is is we probably would still be partially organized groups of roving murderous animals with no other purpose than to kill for food, kill each other and copulate for no specific reason other than enjoyment. Of course secularist know what morals are because at one time before becoming aduts they were taught morals and the difference between right and wrong and these teachings are attributed mainly to Christianity in the Western world. This is the ONLY reason secularist would be able to teach morals because they know currently WHAT THEY ARE but with the progression of time morals will soon be forgotten with the absence of religion just as parenting as been forgotten with so many parents that they cannot even feed their own children. The definiton of father and mother is fading. In fact kids are becoming street kids at an earlier age than ever. It's a fact, plain and obvious religion is necessary for the preservation of civilization.

Brian The parts of the Charter that are the most troublesome are rights pertaining to schools, provincial powers and linguistic rights which means the whole Charter would probably have to be scrapped and have provinces responsible for their own human rights code. The role of the Senate I think should be re-adjusted to be responsible for minor issues only and major issues subject to referendum only at every federal election. Corruption and discrimination is presently built into our present system and Mr. Harper if elected will inherit the mess and will have to carry on accordingly to Liberal tradition. Major changes are needed to prevent in my view a fragmentation of Canada due to weak leadership and the government to do this would certaintly be self defeating and probably contribute to it's demise.

The Senate acts as a safety valve the same way the NWS clause is supposed to do but both have failed either controlled by patronage or by the PM himself to control and manipulate whatever way he wants to steer or drive the country. Our Charter should be rewritten and the only system that works in a capitilistic democratic country is unfortunately majority rule all other systems are subject to corruption. If Martin or anyone else wants to play the equality game let them provide government jobs and housing for the population of Canada.

Flashman You wrote- " Some of our institutions and ideas are still developing and are world models." Would you care to elaborate? You wrote- " We don't have a history or aspirations of empire or world domination." Your right there, we in fact don't even have a functionable military so you can forget about world domination. But maybe some Canadians might think anti-Americanism is a tool and weapon to humiliate and embarrass the U.S. to agree with Canada's socialistic republic point of view from everthing from homosexuality to the soft shoe shuffling on the exaggerated equality bit which all Canadians don't believe in regardless. But empire building--trust me you can depend on the Liberals for that one building on a defective Charter to create a society that has never been successful --anywhere in the world and is begining to show serious cracks and badly discriminates , something it was designed to prevent. Speaking of empires , we evolved from the British Empire in which they won this country. We have a vibrant history involving monarchies. You should be proud of Canada and the U.S. and you should research Canada's history and you will find at one time Americans and Canadians were British. Very little separate Canadian and American culture.

Paul Martin and the liberals should be charged with potentially enciting the ingredients to induce a revolution playing with a clause that was put there as a safety valve. This person is plain dangerous.

Kula You wrote- " What scares me is a prime minister that would hand over the power of 35,000,000 Canadians to 9 judges." What scares me is that these UN-ELECTED OFFICIALS (judges) out of the nine, five were hand picked by the Liberals.

Eriond You wrote- " What do you think the perfect Canadian stae would consist of?" You must be joking? After 133 years of Canada being labelled a country, we still have third world problems here and are still not unified. Therefore I would say the perfect Candian state would be to create the true status of a country and a stable Constitution before proceeding any futher.

Who cares if the Conservatives win any seats in a province that treats Canada like a foreign country.

tm-12 You wrote- " It shows positively I think that at least some people can put humanity above politics." I think it shows the U.S. stands up for it's allies even though Canada refused to to be an ally concerning help required when asked by the U.S. involving the Iraq situation. Shame on this bigoted country.

Rovik You wrote- " And it seems Harper is standing by him" News reports have it Harper is not standing by him. Harper cannot legally make him step down. It is to late to replace him. Harper has asked him to step down voluntarily and the choice is his. If he wins Harper will not allow him to sit as an MP until his legal mess is cleared up.

August1991 I,ve always liked the U.S. and and anyone I know feels the same way. In fact we think of the U.S. as an arm of Canada or big brother-little brother relationship. In most part anti-Americanism comes from Quebec who sure likes to trade with the U.S. but on the other hand feel their not leaders and unique like Quebec thinks it is. And from new immigrants who dragged their politcal baggage into Canada along with their anti-U.S sentiments. You wrote- " Why is it English Canada right wing is defined as pro-American and Left wing is defined as anti-American." This basically stems from the fact right wing always or most of the time supported U.S. initiatives while Canada's left wing support's European ideologies and therefore is seen as anti- American, which they are as Europe in all practical respects has NO political or important trading influence on Canada. You wrote- " Why is it bad, if Americans refuse to buy our lumber but also bad if Americans want to buy our water." I thought they are buying our lumber and a fortune in related paper products. But water in Canada is a resource politicians always treated as 'sacred' and said would never be for sale--that's why.

fellowtraveller You wrote- " the electorate of Quebec are aware of the real politik of strategic voting. It is not a Constitunial issue, but a practical matter." The real problem fellowtraveller is that the Liberals through many years of poor, weak leadership and PM's from Quebec has sold the ROC down the drain so Mr. Trudeau's francophone friends would not have to be assimiliated. This is not only my view but the view of many Canadians. I simply want my language English protected and left intact and not abused by federal government meddling to force me to speak a language I will never have any use for especially concerning gainful employment in my own province where the majority is English speaking. I want and demand Charter protection.

speaker You wrote- " If Quebec were not a province then the Constitution we have would be somewhat irrevelent." Quebec has used the NWS clause 16 times and is a province that supports separation. The federal government has allowed blatant discrimination of English Canadians causing an exodus of English speaking Canadians from that province and has allowed prime ministers from that province to further the cause of Quebec supremecy concerning anti-Canadian and undemocratic movements against Canadian unity and it's ideoligies. Quebecers DO NOT believe Quebec is a province but is a nation and this as been proven time and time again by ignoring the polical advances from leaders of national parties not from that province and by advancing the cause of Quebec nationalism. Quebec is NOT the wealthy province you describe it to be. The wealth in that province has been created by Canadian tax-payers through the manipulative tactics of the federal government mostly from prime ministers originating from that province and did not accomplish any degree of wealth utilizing their own resources and their own language. The Constitution is a joke, does not work and Paul Martin is proving this by trying to acquire a stranglehold on constitutional powers to prevent parliament from ever changing previous constitutional rulings concerning so called minority rights. It's time the English protect their rights.

Hicksey You wrote- " Do you really expect him to kep his promise." Ha-ha-ha- No way. This is just a Liberal lame attemp to control parliament with their Liberal stacked courts. But the joke is if the Liberals ever do muffle parliament they will also come up with 101 ways to prevent the provinces from invoking it also. It's sometimes hard to believe this is Canada.

eurek You wrote- " The clause should go but I don't know what the alternative could be since the SCC sometimes get it wrong." The clause is going nowhere! What has been proposed by Martin is scrapping it's use on federal level only so ther bad boy Conservatives or any other party in parliament can't dismantle Liberal legislation. Provinces can still invoke the clause, I guess that is if the feds let them.

No national party will ever make headway into Quebec unless the leader of that party is French and a resident of Quebec. Now we have had enough of that haven't we? It's all about nationalism in Quebec and as long as that line of thought continues (us against them) Canadian politics will always be dysfunctional and destructive. Hopefully the English will learn, someday.

fellowtraveller You wrote-"Votes" If that's the case the Constitution is a joke and should be scrapped.

Anyone see any of the new Liberal video attack ads? I just heard the audio portion on local radio...pounding drums sort of like a blend of a space odyssey,some cheap horror flick and something originating from the jungles of South America with anti -Conservative messages trying to arouse the minds and be the saviors of what they interpret as the poor uninformed, uneducated mindless Canadian. What crapolla!