RB

I think otherwise Coulter makes some valid arguments only she never cushion what she says - then it is mostly offensive material

driving is a privilege, you have to use your brain when you drive and be responsible, which coincides with drinking & sex and being irrational but the values of Canadians have changed, a recent Maclean's poll suggested 90% of Canadians are less likely to approve of premarital sex this was compared a while back to 77% if anything everyone is getting busy and they have no energy left for sex, this is a likely reason to table to raise the age also Canadian adults are not having sex, here is the statistics 24% have sex weekly 20% several times a week 12% monthly 2% daily What's happening with 76% Canucks - no sex?? I like this reasoning best for raising the age of consent that teens are becoming more and more sophisticated and making smarter choices by limiting themselves to a few or none

way to go Brazil 2:0 @ 67 minutes second half

Regional Profiles from stats Canada Invitation extended: Come live in Toronto folks! Toronto is the economic capital of Canada The Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is one of North America's fastest-growing economic regions. Covering more than 7,000 square kilometers, the GTA consists of 25 municipalities and four regions with a total population of 5 million. With a work force of approximately 2.9 million people, more than 100,000 companies, and a gross domestic product of U.S $109 billion, the GTA is Canada's undisputed business and manufacturing capital. The GTA includes area codes of 416 and 905

I feel strongly that government must continue to support abortion as a health service. If you start thinking that conception means life then the moral line of thought would be a criminal thing to encourage abortions. But, from statistics over 80% of children are raised by their mothers whether they become divorced, are single parent. Its hard to imagine a young women struggling with life to make ends meet financially heads off to try her darndest to adopt the child, that was suppose to be aborted. Females can also make logical choices. What I mean is that if government do not continue to support abortion it will result in continually hardship for women. Plus it you really wanted to save money, it is more cost effective to have an abortion, than to support the child and mother on welfare.

well, all weekend I was very clued in with my games. First rounds I was crossing my fingers for the US team But, now I am backing England, they won today over Ecuador, Beckham scoring their only goal. I mean truly you could see besides being the captain that he was a motivation for the players, they did a lot better when he was out in the field. (well, truly I was surprised to see the ethnic representation from Ecuador, I was expecting sort of more Amerindians kind of folks) and so I wondered about their history I watched Netherlands and Portugal playing with spite, lots of yellow and red cards and badly behaved boys Anyway if England loses to Portugal - I am a Brazilian fan

“women are cool” but not to the extent that they cannot sustain or support themselves even when they are jilted and in their 50’s. I suppose I was encouraged to give women the freedoms they deserved. Isn’t that what women are fighting for all the time? The fact that feminism started the ball rolling to get women paid work opportunities and made head way giving them equal social status in economics and politics. So I of course balked at the notion that it is considered a victory that women still needed to attach themselves to some man for total dependency armed with the law on their side. The Supreme Court ruled that emotional pain suffered must be compensated. What trauma! and how distressing for the lady! I question of course why all people cannot take responsibility for their own actions and for themselves. At what point can you manage on your own? Just makes you rethink the context of marriage. Men, of course, agree to take full responsiblity to cherish the person they marry for life. It is ironic that women are the ones who demanded divorce to be rid of the fools, yet, they can’t seem manage on their own.

Gary Leskun walked out on his wife of 20 years who had borne him a child and contributed substantially to his financial well-being He attempted to halt spousal support because his ex-wife did not try hard enough to self support herself and become self sufficient "The Supreme Court of Canada will rule today whether a man who was found to be "carrying on behind his wife's back" must continue spousal support payments"

those flags will hurt someone for sure I mean how are folks able to control so many flags on their vehicle to start One fellow was literally poking his head and hands though the car window and high flying a flag that mostly covered the car - it is dangerous

women are never able to play politics with the boys and even now will choose to be beautiful to fulfill some man's fantasy rather than think independent of men. If women were more independent, speculation of this sort is nil. the article is one classic explanation in its intentional misrepresentation to demise women to a lower status I think this sense of wanting a male child has no meaning in a scientific sense but only maintain the play of power and politics - girls don't usually fit into these category of politics and is excluded. Girls are by far smarter than boys. The daughters are usually the love of the father's live and like their mothers, the father entertains an insidious notion that female needs to be frown upon as deceitful, conniving, promiscuous with Eve like qualities. Another explanation is that perhaps girls can actually survive better than all males put together and fathers are worried. But, here is what is for sure, the males are heroes to each other, a father is the son's hero, so it is unforgiving to disappoint such a worship. Imagine, even god was modelled as a male. Men are always portrayed as strength, courage, fighters for their queens and kings, distinguished for nobility, and their sons simply gobble like turkey's around their fathers. Understand, the bond presence between father and son. A woman's presence in a marriage with a father/son relationship is secondary. How many times boys are reminded "don't be a sissy"

But sons keep families together. I never get this preference of boys over girls. Though my mom insists there should be a boy child. But at least her argument was to balance the sexes among other reasons. It is a silly mentality that simply emotionally tarnishes females that reads the link that girls are still not better than boys. I mean the stats indicated the female child contribute to the demise of the mother or parent relation. I simply cannot accept this thinking that females are less desirable than males

World Cup Soccer 2006 I mean I watch the games wherever I can, and also observed the folks in their display of pride and beating of the chest sentiments of their home country. Is it simply that folks have gone football frenzy? I just don't get the public assertion and ownership of someplace else, almost as if folks are just plain defiant and rebellious. I didn't see any American flag flying come to think of it. Is this the root cause of our problems of being proud Canadians. That people still believe they belong to some place else.

Is it because mom is loved best because mom love you best I mean dad's receive less cards for fathers day than mothers day. Dads get the privilege of phone calls, but it is a collect call, in fact collect calls are placed on Father's Day than any other day of the year. Look at this attitude, it didn't change: In 1900, fathers were never truly appreciated In 2006, fathers are never truly appreciated

I see the frustration and gather you are charging everyone and every code. So first off: Vacation pay explanation as it relates to ESA Vacation pay, vacation time - these are 2 separate issues. Well, an employee may be entitle to vacation pay but not vacation time - this naturally correlates with the period of work. An employee continues to accumulate credits toward vacation time during (as might be your case emergency leave). But, depending on your contact agreement, vacation pay is based on earned wages. For example employees would not earn wages during leave so would have no earning from the employer hence no vacation pay is owed. Now for emergency leave employees can be entitle to unpaid days in a calendar year but the employer must regularly employ at lease 50 people. If your contract says an absence qualifies a leave it is counted in your entitlement. Secondly: If you are exercising a right of unsafe working conditions under Occupational Health and Safety and you suffered reprisal then it makes sense to lodge a complain to Labor Relations. Plus there are stages of refusal of right to work. On the disability claims now Contrary, is filed under Workplace safety and insurance act and is a compensation system that deals with compensating and rehabilitating employees who suffered work-related injuries and illnesses. Non-occupational injuries or illnesses are not covered. Workload pressure would probably not succeed in case you wanted to know. There should be information on "labor market re-entry plan", where once the plan is put into effect it is unlikely to be revisited. What to note is that employers enjoy special protection from lawsuits. WSIA cover workers from these industries type: manufacturing, construction, hospitals, hotels, restaurants and theatres. If you were working in these industries financial, recreational, clubs, law firms, education, broadcasting stations dental etc. are not compulsorily covered.

In order to use the term "discriminate" intentional exclusion would have occurred. This is where the duty to accommodate originated. However, there are certain jobs that employers can discriminate but it carries bona fide requirements. At what point in employment are you asking to be accommodate: the interview is a tricky as employers look for a perfect fit. I'd say employers would find it quite difficult not to accommodate someone with disability because of this 3 part test from the Meiorin. They might meet the first 2. 1. demonstrate a rational connection 2. was adopted in honest and good faith believe 3. impossible to accommodate employees Anyway these statistics might tell you something: 1) only 40% of those disabilities secure employment 2) >70% women with disabilities have difficulties 3) as few as 2% of trainees are under public job training systems 4) only 6% of all persons with disabilities were accommodated Out of these having work most of them are in sheltered work positions It is better to try and change pubic policy, access to voluntary and private sectors and programs as a solution to help folks with disabilities.

It should never be about age but who can do a good job for the country, whether they are competent or are they hired, appointed or promoted because they belong to some old boys network - politics is a male dominated environment The statistics have shown that in politics the older you are the higher the rank so a bit tricky for younger people to reach new heights

injusticebuster I am sorry and sympatise with your condition, and also about your difficulty accessing the rewards you seek. I sincerely hope you do continue to manage your stresses, as you seem to read on bi-polar disorder. But, this forum is a perfect place to draw attention to some of the real issues as hand and share your experience with us. You had mentioned accommodation in one of your writings. You said you worked and I gathered quit, or dismissed from your jobs. So here is my take on accommodation. There are no set rules of how diligent an employer must pursue its duty to accommodate a disability. What I mean is that scope of the duty to accommodate a person is what must be considered and the exact scope is still unclear in some areas. Under s.17 of the Code the employer may require an employee with a disability to perform duties that are essential. For example: if the job requires you to drive to customers to their sites on a daily basis, then essential means a drivers license. However, if customers usually show up at your site and only occasionally you go to their site, then you can be accommodated. Well, if an employer can map out "essential" to the point of undue hardship (mean they won't lose their business) then accommodation is carried out. Employers are required to test disabled people to determine if their disability affects their ability to perform work. Essex Police Services Board v. Exxes Police Association gives guidance on how far an employer must go to accommodate a disable person. Employees have an obligation to cooperate for example: responding to request for medical reports say to support absences. Salim Al-Saidi and Brio beverages Inc. case in point showed that employees failure to comply with company's absence policy led to the Alberta Human rights Tribunal to find that despite a disability the employer did not discriminate when they terminated employment. Most good companies have guidelines on how to treat accommodation request.

I will of course respect any woman who wish to exercise their preference usage of Ms or Mrs I never liked the Mrs. and was always uncomfortable, luckily I don't have to be addressed this way any longer. Not that it matters anymore, it was ironic that the university hyphenated my name and I adopted its usage but also they addressed me as Mrs hyphenated-name to my dismay. I don't like Mrs usage because: - First it is an extension of Mr - Second means mistress and carries it own connotations - Third it advertises as in the marketplace a marital state - Fourth men are using women to promote their own name e.g. Mrs. Smith oppose to Ms. Smith Few very socially conservative females in politics insist on using Mrs - but of course it dies in the business, just as Miss is dying I mean if you want to encourage sexism Mrs should have been for married men, that is their natural extension Mr for single mean Mses for married Miss for single women

I have not encountered these problems at Pearson, always glad to be home on arrival, taxi always around etc. I was never delayed without cause, and nowadays you have to plan for some delayed time because of those security checks, even if you are Canadian. Good news, Pearson now needs a greeter for officials. I found if you arrive late despite some protest they always give in - its a damm fine airport

In fact, I insist that a puritan state exists until marriage. Currently greater that 70% of teens have had oral sex or such, the stats goes up if college kids were questioned. Besides the pop culture, and finger pointing to capitalism promoting free sex it is my thinking that folks are confused and allow free accessibility to their bodies before marriage - the "in" thing to do gets promoted. Sex it seems is some socially sanctioned deviant behavior that brings the rebels of children to their knees, an ironic reason I think why sex is rampant outside of marriage, and in my view IMMORAL. Did the children figured that the economic dependence of females on males in the past was seen as analogous to prostitution and wanted to reverse this shift. yes? Ideally we would like men to be domesticated with sex inside marriage, like no more excitement of gazing longingly at other females. Anyway, there is some confusion as to how to behave now that females are liberated. I mean females are already very late in their discussions with the word "sex". It is a reality that women sexual life is greatly obscured by lack of sex vocab. In essence men and women just do not speak the same sex language. Here is what I mean, I don't believe the young ones grasp what is meant by being a free woman or a free man. Free woman used to mean a woman with a reputation and a free man meant noble being without any restraints. Nowadays free for women means "cool" but is also analogous to lack of modesty and lost of respectability because "free" is common "property" like free sexual access to many sexual partners and lack of responsibility for consequences, free for men means you, you and you without restraints. The meaning of being a free man had never changed but becomes more enticing, like now, it gave many other new possiblities for the taking. Look, all people have the right to self-possessed their bodies and to withhold or give their hearts and romance at their will. This is the agenda that should get promoted for girls, as their personal freedoms with higher rather than lower moral values. Because I am a female I believe we must continue to empower girls to make their choices independent of the demands of being socially cool. Plus we can forgive men as the source of problems because girls can set standards of excellence and assigned privileges for men to be associated with themselves. Marriage should be viewed as sacred thing. Good grief, I think men have tainted women by compulsion.

.I remembered very well when I was a teen which is why I can make judgements moral and all. The fact is if you guide kids in the right direction with the right information, they can make their choices correctly. Kids are not ready for sexual relations, intercourse or whatever. My believe is that if the kids are frenzy then teach them to masturbate, take them to some activity, a gym and have them work out for 3 hours, - that will teach to release all those pent up energies, let them play chess for an entire day that'll teach them to be little masters. Plus they will do better in school being fit. I mean why should I compromise and support disapproving behaviours? The expectation of a child is not to be liberal as they can with sex oral or otherwise. Plus I believe sex belong in marriage. However, situations like Clinton-Lewinsky situation ("I did not have sexual relations with that woman...") have a lot to do with the perception of sex with the kids. First, oral sex is not really sex. I mean the youths are taking sex to mean penetration of the vigina.

We have applied for permission to climb Mt Everest 2009, I think for now safely to camp 2 or 3 - I believe it is a personal feat one sets out to accomplish, hopefully that you will be successful but also knowing the dangers that is involved, knowing that it proposes to be a very selfish venture, everyone to take care of themselves. The consolation is that perhaps you have a group a people whom you know....being alone is no fun at all. Inexperience is one thing, lack of training is another. This is why folks should be serious in the lots of time invested in training, money involved with climbing, so might put some safety net on and invest in a guide who supposedly points a right path. No one should be allowed to take such a "literally" heavy burden of being a being a defeated hero on their shoulders that are already weary. My thing is people take their risk with every advanced climb and they will be silly not to calculate their probability of return. Everest is the ultimate climb. The question I ask is are you ready? and is this the right time? Then you stake the chances to your demise.

I will not watch more of this terror - first I am a softie as I could not even handle the documentary shown on TV - second because my kid and I were in the area a week prior to the bombing - we only went back last year for some closure, plus we were in London the day of the bombing, then we were in Lyons with their riots - these evens are much too overwhelming and bigger than the terror it feeds, but it affected me personally I think at least with the film I get to choose not to have this kind of experience

I was working at a company a few years back and ran into alcohol dependency with one of the workers. The worker was suspended for 2 weeks without pay for drinking on the job and on the premises but also because being alcoholic is considered a disease, the company paid for treatment/counselling for this person until we were comfortable that it was safe for him to return to his job, also we had to accommodate him during the period of treatment sort a baby-sit. It is very hard to substantiate firing an alcoholic unless you have assisted them to the point of failing profits of the company. On the other hand companies can test for drug or alcohol dependency and would fall into a category of "medical examination". Of course you must qualify that this testing is essential to the job duty. The bad news is there are very limited jobs that can be legitimize for people to take drug test - which gives lots of leverages for lawyers exploit.

Since you brought up education and labor I refuse to believe that our Canadian education system is churning out successful entrepreneurs in every group of people. First, clearly the Canadian school system has blatantly failed the immigrant population. Now, we can also blamed groups for being retarded, even though we would like to think our education system should be the fastest route from exclusion to full participation in the labor force. For example, how many Indians, Chinese, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians are found working in the current Conservative government, then how many more are found at the top of the corporate hierarchy. Would you agree then that the education system in Canada and the US is built and designed for one model of people? and that this system of democracy is literally failing others and letting them fall on the wayside. I mean we are selecting what is educable and molding them to be sufficient in government and business and can proudly announce we are doing better that other countries. The education system is intolerant when you compare it to the market place. Recall some outrage for this example, reducing LSAT for blacks is injustice. How many blacks are lawyers?