Drea

That's not what I was saying. One can be spiritual without being religious. "God" can be considered an all encompassing idea, while "Jesus" is very specific for example. Spirituality does not have odd rules and dogma. I suspect that most people are spiritual but call themselves religious. Even those who follow very few of the rules (you know who you are ) consider themselves part of their chosen religion. In actuality those people are spiritual, not religious. What a person chooses to believe should not affect others around him/her -- those beliefs should be accepted as specific to each individual, not a set of rules for a group to follow and force (or intimidate) others into following.

I laughed, I didn't not "tolerate" her musings LOL -- I'll tolerate yours too! But I will not tolerate the head of a science dept or the minister of science being a religious person. Sorry but religion flies directly in the face of science. The two are not compatible. Now, if he would have said "I am spiritual" instead of "I am Christian" I would have no problem with it. Do you think we should teach "creation" as an alternative theory in the classroom? Is there any way to test the theory of creation? With a religious nut at the helm...would the textbooks that teach evolution have "theory" pasted across them? I believe anyone entering politics should renounce their religion (or at the very least keep it to themselves; like one's sex life, the "controversial bits" should be kept private.) They can still be a "spiritual" person, but should not belong to any specific cult. IMO anyway. Cheers!

So how did we get here on earth if you don't believe God created Adam and then Eve from his rib? Do you NOT believe (as a Christian you should really) that god created the heavens, the earth etc....? Any Christian I have ever met is certain, absolutley certain that god created this in it's entirety. One said to me one time (I laughed) "Do you think if you put all the parts of a car in a whirlwind that it would randomly create itself into a car?" She ain't no "evangelical" either, just your run-of-the-mill "Christian" who smokes and drinks and goes to church at Christmas and Easter.

Nope, all of them, not just the Tories. LOL If the minister in charge of indian affairs, for example, was a known racist should he/she hold that post? Science and religion are not compatible. Our science minister should not come into the position with a biased point of view. Perhaps someone with an actual science background would be more appropriate. Anyway, the government does not appoint ministers because of their knowledge or experience -- they either get appointed because of a friendship or maybe the gov't just doesn't give a damn who runs what department. The minister of highways should be someone that has never driven a vehicle in their life -- makes sense no? LOL

How true. Religious beliefs always need to be taken into consideration in my opinion. If the man believes that the world was created 6000 years ago, he is obviously the wrong person for the job. If a person said "Zero does not exist, there is no such thing as zero because zero is nothing, the only true numbers are 1 through 9" -- should that person be hired to manage the finances?

Yah sure I've known people who have been in the sentencing "circle". It is not a punishment nor a deterrent. Looking into yourself... is that punishment these days? Delving into your past to find out why you turned out to be such a shitty person... is that punishment these days? Pffft. Cirle PLUS five/ten years maybe. Heck he can "circle" all day every day -- in prison. We need to quit coddling ALL criminals. Including those whose ignorant actions cause death. If he were driving vehicle and killed his two kids, he would be charged with vehicular manslaughter. He gets a pass because he had no control over his drinking? Pffft.

so if a white guy had negleted his children and they died... it's okay that he goes to prison, but not okay for the native? He KILLED his children due to HIS own NEGLIGENCE! It is HIS fault they are dead. He should be charged with manslaughter at the very least. People want to give him hugs and kisses and a "hot sweat" and say he'll be "all better". Pfft. Those children will never be "all better"... Throw the loser in prison. Let him have nothing to do but think of his henious crime for the rest of his life.

I was referring to THIS post... which was in response to BC Chick saying "his type"... and I said "his type" does not mean his "race" but his politics. Geeez Kimmy... we all know you have more intellect than that... what gives?

"his type" isn't race based. All kinds of people are uneducated rightwing rednecks. Apparently BC04 is a black man. But not an educated liberal black man. A redneck, guntoting, baggypants wearing black man probably walks around saying "Yo Yo Mofo" trying his best to fit in with the young.

so I guess, for you religious freaks... that removing all religious reference would be deemed "impossible"? In my opinion it is the wisest option. Yet it is dismissed. You people are simply crazy. Mass psychosis I guess. *shrug*

Doesn't work... next day logic just seeps right back in -- impossible to fight it unless you just stay high

Actually he's not... he's one of you guys! Read the very faint type in his sig line.

I'm not here to be a faithful, loyal, and obedient citizen either! I'm here to enjoy my life; work, raise a family and have some fun. I love this country, yes... but it is not my "reason for being", it's simply where I live. Because I want to live in a nice, peaceful place I like that my country has (for the most part) fair laws that benefit all citizens. We live in a beautiful country with a great government (no matter who is "in"). We are all basically ok aside from the latest economic downturn. Few of us live in poverty with no real hope for the future. Immigrants leave their home, not because they want to "rebuild it" somewhere else, but because they want to make a better lives for themselves. Perhaps we need to make it very very clear that no religious laws will be permitted nor recognized as valid. Religious references need to be completely removed from all government institutions so that one religion cannot say "but that other religion is represented, we want our gobbledeegook there too!" This would remove the threat from laws being enacted that do not benefit all citizens.

Every day? Why every single day? When something is repeated over and over and over and over again, it becomes rote and means nothing. Saving it for special occasions makes more sense and gives it more meaning. I still get goosebumps and sometimes even tear up when I stand and sing O Canada... but I would grow weary of it very quickly if I had to sing it every day.

Don't know Muddy, and don't care. Like I said, centrists are cheering regardless of how "rightwing" Obama is in relation to Harper. He's left of Bush and that's all that counts in my opinion. I have nothing against Harper personally. He's just a guy doing his best to twist himself into a pretzel trying to please both the far right and the far left. Governing from the centre.... ignoring the panicky bleating from the fringes... is the best policy. Seems the Liberals are the smartest in this regard.

Well isn't that rich, coming from you... You may want to take your own advice... women's bodies are none of your business so you should stay out of it! Currently there is no one to step up, no "Palin" to rally the right in Canada. Awwww too bad.

Problem is that "better" is a subjective term. Like "butter is better than margarine"... it is an opinion. Some would think that our lives are terrible... all we do is earn money for more and bigger "things". This may not be "better" in someone else's eyes. So no, we are not "better", just "different".

Sorry to have offended your fragile senses... won't happen again. So throughout history (in your opinion) when women had no choice but to stay home .... they were "dominant"? Okey Dokey. Being a stay at home wife was not "easy" generations ago... wringer washers, cloth diapers, baking from scratch... seriously, back in the "bad old days" being a stay at home wife/mother was darn hard work. Today however... automatic dishwashers, disposable diapers, cars, muffins at the grocery... seriously a stay at home wife today has absolutely the most cushy "job" possible. Why do you have a problem with equality? Shouldn't the couple decide what roles are right for each of them, rather than society telling them what they should do? I have an equal relationship. Hubby has now gone back to university (at age 45)... he can only do this because his partner is a feminist who planned ahead and got herself a good career. If he were with a traditional woman he would have no way to get out of his current job as she and the kidlets would be entirely dependent on his income. What would he do? Let them starve while he changes careers? LOL As a feminist, I made sure I had an education and a good career for myself. Turns out now that it wasn't just good planning for me, but for my hubby as well. So suck up your anti-feminism and pay for the woman you so desperately wanted to be "traditional". I'll be laughing all the way to my joint bank account.

Link please. Besides erradicating an entire religion (which is unfortunately impossible) ... how does one change this? "But MY religion is good!" you lament. If Fundamental Christians had their way, and North America had no secular population, we would be ruled by the extreme Christian doctrine. Just like Iran is ruled by the extreme Muslim doctrine. The lack of a secular population allows the fundamentalists of a religin to flourish. If no one is saying "no, let's look at this another way" then there is no free thought, no freedom to not be a fundamentalist. Personally, I feel no need for religion and can't for the life of me, understand why anyone would oppress, or other wise harm another person "in the name of" any "philosophy". It's mind boggling! Gaaawwd I despise religion and how it warps people.

I have no problems. Hubby and I cohabitate. I make the same amount and contribute the same amount to our mutual family account. If we split, I get half, he gets half. Fair, don't you think? I would like to get married officially some day... but it's not a requirement for us to feel fully committed to one another. Just never got around to getting married... happens. So in your view having children is sinful, hedonistic, greedy and selfish unless one has stood in front of an "official" and said vows? You "born again" or sumpthin'? Bullshit! TRADITIONAL women marry "up" because they are trained that they are helpless waifs who need a man to earn the bucks. What game? And no, it is not better to stay at home. Nor is it worse. Circumstances are not all alike in all famillies. A man should make sure he is marrying (or cohabitating) with a woman who won't be dependent on him for life, should something happen. My advice to young women is make sure you have a career to fall back on (even if you decide to stay home while the kiddies are little) because you never know what the future may bring. Feminists want equaltiy, not a goddamn handout. Only traditional women in traditional roles are dependent. Hey if you want a dependent woman... you just might get one... for life no matter what. And that, is your bed to lie in. *shrug* Me, if something happens between hubby and I... oh well, neither one of us will die without the other. We are both equally able to care for ourselves emotionally and financially.

Duh. I can't see anything wrong with needing to maintain the lifestyle that her and the children have grown accustomed to. Marriage is simply a piece of paper after ten years and three kids. It should be a moot point. They are, for all intents and purposes, married. Boys, boys, boys... listen up! DO NOT cohabitate or marry a woman who has no earning potential of her own! Find a woman equal to you so that if something goes wrong she will not be dependent on you for the rest of her life. Or be prepared to support her no matter if you split or not. Trust me on this boys... having a stay at home wife may seem ideal, but you are taking a big risk.

But Doctor! Surely you jest! You MUST be a welare recipient... you advocate pot to be legal!!! Only deadheads smoke (shhhhhhhhh!) m-a-r-i-j-u-a-n-a after all. Damn you sinner! Off with yer head! To the pit of hell for you! ...Harper is a Dodo bird very very soon -- Dr. G, we can be really thankful for that. The conservatives are losing ground all over the world. 2012 will usher in a new enlightenment of socialism and humanity where all people, regardless of colour, religious affiliation, or lack thereof, will no longer be divided as a species. Either that or the rightwing nutbars will start a world war in order to usher in their much anticipated "army-geddon".

LOL and two years later, I still see no harm in ingesting marijuana. There is no reason for it to be an illegal substance. Numerous studies have been done; it's time to take the profit away from the criminals and let people purchase and use it at their will. Government is all about money, so I just can't understand why they haven't jumped on this. It would be a huge profit maker for them. Tax the shit out of it... at least the money goes to the public coffers, rather than to the criminal.

First time I've ever seen right winger admit that. Thanks. Most rightwingers think like Ann Coulter... That the US is so big that they don't "need" Canada. Nice to know it's recognized that they need us just as much as we need them. While the right and the left may have "breakdowns" because of the newly minted Black/sorta socialist President, the centrists are cheering. Today is a great day in the USA! Thank you US citizens, thank you for Obama, thank you for your hope and optimism. Cheers!

rotflmao. Gosh Darn it anyway! Any man who thinks Palin is a "good politician" is thinking wrong-headedly. (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) My Dad loves her, thinks she's the greatest thing since Laura Croft. He's 80 y.o. so he's excused. He plays Tomb Raider and just loves to watch Laura's braid bounce up and down. Bounce Bounce Bounce, innit fun to watch "tough" women in action?