Michael Hardner

It's nearly the same thing, but not exactly the same. I'm sorry but you're just wrong here. Canadian Muslims have gone public in condemning violence. I have known second generation Muslim immigrants and there is no difference. I think you're confusing mainstream Christians with lapsed Christians. The Roman Catholic church has taken extra steps recently to remove gay priests. Most practicing Christians oppose homosexuality. The effect of Western thinking affects people who live within these borders more than you think. I have known mainstream Christians, Muslims and Jews that pay little attention to the rules of their religion. Islam is the dominant religion in an area of the world where there is little education, no freedom of the press, many other factors that hinder free thought. The mistake that most people make is that they evaluate the actions of protesters and so forth apart from these factors. If they take the culture into consideration at all, it is to blame the religion for the backwardness of the people.

That's a lot of people but in the context of the question it doesn't make sense. Why do so many come from Arab countries ? And the number could be 10%.

I guess public health announcements are a bad idea then ?

Thanks for the update Gunner... this is why I'm on here - to learn. I thought Harper was going to ban the last $1000 though. I think that the CPC's low budget and straightforward ads actually added to their appeal last time around, while the Liberals' glossy high money productions seemed excessive. ( To me, anyway. )

They may be a religious organization, but they aren't free to discriminate under the law. You have a point here. Unfortunately, this cause tends to be focussed on Christians, not Jews or Muslims who hold much the same views. If the RC church owns rental property, should they have the right to deny housing to gays ? How about denying housing to non-Christians ? That argument was also used against LBJ's Civil Rights Act in the 1960s. The argument said that if black Americans were allowed to go into any restaurant, the whites wouldn't go out to eat and the restaurant owners would go bust.

Geoffrey: The charter prohibits against discrimination against "other groups". That, obviously, is open to interpretation but homosexuals in society today are definitely a group that are discriminated against. It's within anyone's legal rights to appeal to the supreme court, so go ahead. That system doesn't work. Blacks were discriminated against in many ways until LBJ's Civil Rights Act was passed.

You are correct, Melanie. It's the same as Christians who protested The Last Temptation of Christ. EDITED TO ADD: Or for that matter, religious people of all stripes protesting the non-religious state's definition of marriage.

Well, I did read your post and I'm sorry but I don't see any link between Trudeau's push for official bilingualism (which was ostensibly done to counter against separatism) and unleashing an immigration policy with a secret agenda to distract the RoC away from Quebec. I know history but you have no proof of your belief. Your statement is quoted by you above. Here's what you said: "why are so many of these immigrants comong from troubled Arab countries?" You obviously didn't know the numbers and were just talking through your hat. I posted that it's 22% and now you want to include third world countries in that question, and you come up with a figure of 70% somehow. Here's how to make a good argument, Leafless. State your thesis, then the facts that support it. Saying essentially 'Trudeau liked Quebec therefore multiculturalism and Immigration was set up to distract the RoC from Quebec' doesn't constitute proof of anything. At this point, you should probaby just withdraw your statement and again another time with some evidence.

I believe they had to rent the hall. Read what seabee said. You can't legally refuse to rent an apartment to a gay couple for example. Freedom of religion is guaranteed in the charter, as is freedom from discrimination for homosexuals. When those rights clash, the parties take the case to court and a ruling is made.

Doesn't the CPC accept corporate donations as well ? I think all parties will be affected, but Mr. Harper just sees the sense in going down the path that Paul Martin started and for this I applaud him.

Leaf: You believe that, but upon what is that belief based ? Is is mistrust of the Liberals or do you have some other evidence ? How many come from troubled Arab countries ? I checked with the Stats Can... Immigration Facts 18.4 % of immigrants come from Europe and the UK 47.2 % from Asia 12.4 % from the Americas 22 % from Africa AND the middle East. I don't see that this is 'so many'.

Or do the people who say that Islam causes violence also attribute the acts of Christians who bomb abortion clinics and gay bars to the Christianity as a whole ? Of course not.

Exactly, they have not so it is indeed fair to compare the behaviors. People with poor education, that have no tradition of openness, and separation of church and state cannot be expected to act as we do.

Didn't Harper say something about banning corporate and union donations ? That would bring such a fresh air to politics in Ottawa, and set Canadian politics head and shoulders above the US system. The NDP wouldn't have to kowtow to Buzz anymore, and the other parties could develop policy without having to take their big contributors into account.

I agree Hicksey. These issues are only being raised because the CPC set the bar very high when it comes to ethics. If the Liberals had done these things, people would have barely noticed. I don't see these issues resonating with the voters either. I'm more interested to see how Harper will handle his caucus now.

The case you're talking about is one of many grey areas that will be tested. The KoC is a Catholic organization, but not a church. Its members are practicing Catholics, but being a practicing Catholic doesn't give you carte blanche to discriminate. There are many more cases that will need to be tested, including adoption.

I believe it actually came from 'National Socialist'. Anybody ?

I'm sorry but your point is not at all clear. Read this: What is your point ?

I think the most she could get out of a run would be publicity. She is intelligent, obviously, and has a unique perspective and would get the youth vote BUT being PM requires a far broader spectrum of talent and experience than she currently has.

Why though ? What is it about Islam particularly ? Anything that has been said about Islam as a religion is true of other religions, but when Muslims commit violence it's the religion itself that is blamed.

Yank, the Philadelpha example you give does illustrate the problems that happen with social services. The counter example you gave of your own school, though, reflects an institution developed through strong community ties over many years. Do you propose dismantling the existing social services structure entirely ? If so, how do you think the dependent community would respond ? If not, what is the plan ? I understand why people can look at the social infrastructure and brand it a failure, but it arose to serve a need and that need won't go away.

Yank - as Canuck E Stan pointed out, he only promised a free vote. If that happens, and it fails then he can move on. There's no abandoning anybody. Harper is much more interested in retooling Canada's economics, in my opinion.

Yes, exactly ! It's the caricatures here we're talking about after all ! It's good to know the cartoon version of your opponents view of you. Got that ?

The Nazis were a political party elected in Germany, with an ideology that drove them to exterminate innocent civilians and invade nations. Islam is a religion practiced by different races of different backgrounds across the globe. The interpretation of that religion varies, as it does with every other major religion. The Nazis were bound to one country that invaded other countries in Europe so the response followed the usual process: diplomacy, then military action. Islam is the chief religion of many countries (some are our allies, some not) but these countries aren't themselves exercising any military actions right now, with the possible exception of developing military capabilities (Iran). Iran is also a peculiar case, because the general population itself is fairly westernized and culturally at odds with its leadership. So with the Islamic radicals, you have a problem of disparate intolerance and propensity towards violence. This is also a problem in other non-Islamic countries and ignorance is a general problem everywhere. There are moderate and modern Muslims, but there was only one flavour of Nazisism. I think it's a mistake to attach a threat to the religion itself, ignoring other factors. No one has yet supplied a good reason why Islam itself would cause its adherents to become violent, which leads me to think that there are other factors happening here.

Yank... as long as we're arguing caricatures, I would add "demanding that people stand up and fend for themselves, while they have been handed a easy life, a supportive upbringing, a network of propserous friends and family members, and maybe even a trust fund.