Michael Hardner

eyeball, I don't know if more control needs to come out of better monitoring, or if it's just better execution of existing policies.

Mr. C How about denying your children medical attention ? The right to take several wives ? The idea that women are unclean ? Are these 'western' ideas ? Should the religions that espouse these be banned from Canada ?

eyeball, It's odd to call it 'control' when we're talking about monitoring. Those are two different things. Unfortunately, the problem is that we can't discern an individual from whatever evil interloper you're against all the time. You seem to think lobbyists are a different species. In fact, they put on their solid gold and diamond encrusted pants one leg at a time as you do.

So if he didn't convert why is he being granted a Christmas carol ? Maybe the British think that Toronto is near the North Pole, and that Cohen is, by some twisted Anglophilic logic, a deep-voiced bohemian elf. I think that they, more likely, are trying to solidify their position (Since Dickens' classic is an English work) by making Canadian Christmas art look bad. God help us, every one.

Sorry, eyeball, but if you are let off the hook by being allowed to use cash, you know damn well that the shadowy hand will use it as well. Aren't you willing to do your part ?

It's interesting to see how the residential schools issue has been framed as a blight on conservatism. The truth was, the arch conservatives of the day wanted the 'red man' to wither and die. It was the progressives that wanted to help native Canadians through education.

If you replace all cash with the cheque and make it easy to sign from and to via thumbprint or saliva (you'll like that option) then we're done.

WHAT ?!? Sample lyrics: I'm sorry, but no.

Hi eyeball, I read the sources you cited here (Wikipedia pages) and although I think that these ideas are sound, they're not revolutionary, or evolutionary. I saw Paul Martin's name on there supporting the idea, so we're not talking about as big a change as I have scoped out in my first post. The idea, from what I read, is to create bottom line costing for all natural resources. In my mind, this should have been started at least 30 years ago. The fact of the matter is that the government doesn't care, in the end, what you do to "your" land and "your" air, which is ridiculous. However, money is still an anonymous agent that can fly in and cause bad things to happen, even with controls on our natural resources. Who fronts the huge investments required to bring harmful drugs into our society ? Who pays for all manner of unneeded and unwanted changes to our society - legal and illegal ? The fact is, we don't know. Sometimes, we can - after the fact - find bags of little green pieces of paper that "someone" gave to "someone" to make it happen but that doesn't help much. People forget that money isn't part of nature. It was designed and developed by people to fit one of the most natural needs there is - the need to trade. But the original attributes of money are gone now. You probably never see the actual beneficiaries from your cash transaction these days, assuming you did use cash. I'm proposing that all money have (like email) a To: and From: address. That would help governments, who are responsible for the creation of money, to track how well it's achieving its purpose. That's a bigger change than you're proposing.

Thanks, Auguste. I have been here for 5 years (in fact, hardly anybody here has been here longer than that - looking at the list there is Slavik, Moderate Centrist, Melanie and that's it for folks who are still here). I am convinced that this board has fermented and evolved into an incredible sounding board for political ideas. These boards are the equivalent of the political pamphlets and tough discussions that made early colonial America a successful democracy. They are no less than a salvation for democracy, if someone could figure out how to extend these discussions to the voting public. And I have changed immeasurably since coming here. When I arrived, I identified mostly as an eastern liberal type. After having read thousands of posts from conservative western types, I now identify as much with them than with my former group. When I go to dinner parties with my (100%) eastern liberal friends, I find myself disagreeing with the arguments that my worthy western conservative opponents have debated here. This tells me that western alienation is a very real thing, and that the liberal smugness that I argued against for years indeed exists and is a problem. What is important is 'principles', though, not identity. The more you debate principles and ideas here, the more you will recognize the vain arguments of geographical, occupational and personal identity. I have also read the same from other liberals. If you post and discuss regularly on MLW, you will find yourself informed in a new (and I think better) way than your friends who read the Globe and Mail, or Edmonton Sun.

Not only do the corporations save money on outsourcing, but American consumers save money. If you want to point to a conspiracy, you need to implicate anyone who has ever shopped at a WAL-MART to reduce their shopping bill.

Still, Scriblett, you're on shaky ground if you try to base an assessment of Islam on news reports regarding terrorism. The problem ISN'T numbers. The problem is cofactors.

More of Mr. Canada's typical sloppiness. Please, can we get some more kimmys and Arguses on this board ?

Kimmy, Your post is well thought out and I appreciate your concern. Definitely there are areas in which religious rights and individual rights come into conflict and you have highlighted these. Hopefully, you will see me defending Christianity now and again so that you can at least appreciate that I don't favour any particular religion.

Borg, Out of context ? You typed a few words of prose and concluded that the entire religion is to be feared. And now I'M to be feared. I support the constitution, and - yes - I'm sure the idea of freedom of religion terrifies you. Thanks for the book suggestion, but I've had enough of posters like you making stuff up, posting it as facts and telling me to go read a book.

Cop: "What happened to your business partner ?" Perp: "I shot him with my snub-nosed Presbyterian when I was cleaning it."

I don't determine that. If somebody says they're a Christian I take them at face value.

Mr Canada, here's your post again: You're incorrect - the average Canadian was more likely to switch to the CPC than the average evangelical.

The article mentions the numbers, and you're talking about the influence of Christians on the political process. It's in decline, relative to the whole of Canada, if you look at the numbers properly.

margrace, You're the other type of religious bigot that's on here - well placed with the many anti-Muslims, you will attribute murders that happened 1000 years ago to people who are doing good work today. It's quite shameful, and intolerant for you to do that.

Mr Canada, Thanks for your post. I do appreciate it. In fact, kimmy and I discussed this very matter above. Al-Banna spurned Western ideology as sinful. I equate this to what Amish and Orthodox Christians do. There is no link between following a sober religious life and espousing violence. If Al-Banna or any of these organizations encouraged violence and armed struggle then I would support your objections. Conversely, if anybody at the CBC ever decided to support a Christian fellowship (as they well should, now that they've decided to support other religious groups) then I would defend them against the inevitably cries of protest.

Mr Canada, In your usual manner, you misrepresent, ignore and misunderstand. As I have explained clearly, the original article is mistaken. In fact, the influence of evangelical Christians on the Conservatives is declining according to the numbers in the article.

Well, Lester, assuming you're Christian then maybe there is hope. I was raised to follow the golden rule, which I think makes the world a better place. If Mr Canada followed that rule, he would apologize for his many gaffes and false assertions.

Mr Canada, AlBanna is not the leader - he died in the 1940s. Again, you show that are a lazy poster and a liar. Admit your mistake please. There's no point in moving forward with these discussions if one party keeps soiling himself over and over and doesn't rectify the situation.

Actually, the sad thing is that Christianity is now only defended by false Christians such as Mr Canada - who puts forward any falsehood he can get his hands on and calls himself a Christian. It's no wonder Christianity is in decline when these are the loudest defenders of its virtues.