jefferiah

You know, Norm, very often people who support a more Liberal view will accuse, and rightly so, some of us Consevatives of using patriotism as a weapon. I know alot of people who do this and I find it can be frustrating myself when it is not applied fairly. By this, I mean, if you dont agree with everything they say you are anti-Canadian or anti-American. Well I experience this same frustration when arguing with many people of the feminist lobby, who (because I dont support many of their views, or socialist solutions) accuse me of wanting women to stay in the kitchen. They never even asked me what I thought. But if you dont support them, thats it. They will start telling people that you want women to stay in the kitchen and we want to keep them down. But anyways here is the problem. And I will try to simplify it to a very very small situation. Lets say I owned a small corner store, and I had two employees. One of my employees is male and one is a female. They are both good workers. Everything is fine, until one day it is discovered that at the end of the week the female recieves a smaller paycheck than the male. Well there is a newspaper article about it. On the face of it this seems to the public to be an injustice. Until I write into the paper in my own defense. I say look, I give both my employees the same hourly wage. The girl just happens to work less hours. Well then soon I am facing charges that I give my male employees more hours than my female ones. So then my defense is well look this girl leaves early two days a week to pick up her son at school and take him to karate class. This is her own personal choice. She gets the same hourly rate. And I give her less hours because she works less hours. But apparently even this is not a satisfactory defense. Because despite this defense a lot of these feminist lobby groups think it is the employers responsibility to pay an equal salary to the woman who works less hours. Why, maybe the argument is that women are being forced by society to work less hours because they have to take care of kids. I dont know if thats totally true. Do the feminists ask the women whether they do this of their own personal choice? And even if in many cases it is true, for the sake of argument, why should the employer have to pay for it? He is not the one forcing them to go home?

This is the new age, feminist, anti-father, athiest agenda that I speak of. The feminist agenda calls for social and economic equality for women. What's wrong with that? Just because something claims to represent social and economic equality, does that mean they have the monopoly on it? I believe in equality, social and economic, but I think alot of these groups have a logic that I find is weak. Why should I have to support them for fear that I will be called a bigot if I dont support their version of equality? The way these modern groups seek equality is by trying to even out the end results of every facet of life to make it appear as if there is equality. The assumption they seem to make is that in an ideal society every career would have employees from every race and gender proportionate to their percentage of society itself. As if by magic, proportionate numbers would all apply for the same jobs. As if by magic, proportionate numbers would all magically be just as qualified. The flip-side to this assumption is that if jobs do not have proportionate numbers for every race, the only reasonable explanation is discrimination. Enforcing the appearance of equality is a very very unreasonable way to seek equality. However if you disagree with these people, they will lynch you in the papers as a "bigot" who does not support equality.

But I mean imagine what the general reaction would be if someone formed a group with such specifications but called it The Society of White Anglo-Saxon Males. Really. First off I wouldnt endorse it myself. But I mean it seems to be ok for other groups to do this when forming a group of the sort I just mentioned would certainly cause some concern.

Lets brainstorm then Mike.... what could we start. It cant be called the society for straight white males thats for sure. Hmm.... I am left-handed though. That puts me in a minority. So left-handed could be a part of it. But yeah the head of the Advisory Council for S of W in NB writes in the Moncton newspaper. I think, if I remember right, in one of her articles she proposed the idea of an "Adivisory Council for The Status of Acadian Women". We could hire this woman to brainstorm names for us.

I think thats well said Mike. Advisory Council for the Status of Women is just a name. I could start a group called the Equality Liberty Happiness and Justice Association, get lots of funding for nothing, and then when the Gov finally tries to make cuts I can raise a public fuss by saying "The PM is against Equality Liberty Happiness and Justice."

The site is recommended on the website for The Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon. Confirmed by the website for a known Lodge. I already stated this.

"A candidate proposing to enter Freemasonry has seldom any definite idea of the nature of what he is engaging in. Even after his admission he usually remains quite at a loss to explain satisfactorily what a Masonry is and for what purpose his Order exists." The Meaning of Masonry, Wilhelm Leslie Wilmhurst "For many members of the Craft to be a Mason implies merely connection with a body which seems to be something combining the natures of a club and a benefit society. They find, of course, a certain religious element in it, but as they are told that religious discussion, which means of course, sectarian religious discussion, is forbidden in the Lodge, they infer that Masonry is not a religious institution." From the same book as the above quote.

Quotes I have found from texts of Freemasony posted on www.freemasons-freemasonry.com. This site is one of the recommended websites posted on The Grand Lodge of BC's website. This website has some online books. "There is truth in all these charges. The average Mason is lamentably ignorant of the real meaning of Masonic Symbology and knows little of its esoteric teaching." Freemasonry: It's Hidden Meaning, George Steinmetz. "Neither is masonry a philosophy; albeit behind it lies a large philosophical background not appearing in its surafce rituals and doctrine, but left for discovery to the research of the Brethren. That philosophical background is a Gnosis or Wisdom-teaching as old as the world, one which has been shared alike by the Vedists of the East, the Egyptian, Chaldean, and Orphic Initiation Systems, the Pyhtagorean and Platonist schools, and all the mystery temples of both the past and present...." Masonic Iniatiation by W.L. Wilmhurst

If the book was presented to a Mason on his receipt of the 14th degree then yes I would say it is respected.

But then why is Pike's book a respected text in Masonry. Why is it posted on Freemasonry websites? Also there are the works of Manly Palmer Hall. The Encyclopedia of Freemasonry. Their own writings say these things that I have quoted. I have never read the Da Vinci Code and I dont believe in the idea it is based on. Nonetheless, all this literature is Masonic literature. Not literature from a conspiracy theory website.

I dont doubt that they were. I am not asserting any particular conspiracy theory about the masons. I am only pointing out what would make me shy away from them, and also you will note that one of the quotes I used seems to suggest (on a Mason's own word) that the true meaning of masonry is hidden from outer degrees. Even though I believe, for instance, that Masonry is heretical to Christianity and Judaism there are many Jews and Christians who are members. Are they exposed to these writings I wonder? Do they know what it is all about? It may be presumptious of me, but I think many of them are not aware of this, or else they would have nothing to do with it. Another quote I left out from Morals and Dogma says that the Christian God is none other than Osiris or Baal. The pentagram is a symbol used frequently in masonry. Masonic writings include mention of many pagan Gods and occult related things. They make no secret of this and then on their websites they have the "you dont understand" defense. Its like a creature walking around, that looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and trying to tell you "I aint a duck".

I see what JBG was pointing out as well. It is sort of funny that he refused to make a denouncement of Hamas.

Just for the record the book that I quoted from---Morals and Dogma by Albert Pike was given to a candidate on his receipt of the 14th degree of the Scottish Rite. I have this information from a Masonic website, not from a conspiracy theory site. You can read this book on masonic websites, and determine whether or not these quotes or the material contained therein would not qualify as being heretical to Christianity, Judaism etc. There is no doubt in my mind that they are. The masonic defense is that people don't understand what Pike means. I just don't buy it.

Just about everything written about masonry is bogus and is the same quality as the 9.11 conspiracy theorists..... Masonry means different things is different places. In continental Europe, masonry is an organization which looks out for the rights of protestants. For all the rituals and such, they have the same signifcance and sinister aspect as a university fraternity initiation ceremony. The most visable masons are shriners, who fancy tiny mini bikes and raising loads of money for children's hospitals. My uncle was an high order mason and a member of good standing within the church. I understand that you are leary of conspiracy theories. So am I. However these quotes I made about freemasonry are not from some conpiracy theory book, they are from a respected "masonic" text by a respected mason, Albert Pike. The masons offer many explanations as to why Pike says what he says but I dont find any of them satisfactory.

Some notable quotes from Albert Pike's "Moral's and Dogma". (Pike was a Mason and this is one of his works on freemasonry). "Every Masonic Lodge is a temple of religion; and its teachings are instruction in religion." (Morals and Dogma, p.213) This quote establishes Freemasonry as a belief system. "The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them. Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry." (Morals and Dogma, p.819) This quote affirms the belief that the true principles of freemasonry are hidden to the lower levels and revealed only to the upper echelon. "The Bible is an indispensable part of the furniture of a Christian Lodge, only because it is the sacred book of the Christian religion. The Hebrew Pentateuch in a Hebrew Lodge, and the Koran in a Mohammedan one, belong on the altar; and one of these, and the Square and Compass, properly understood, are the Great Lights by which a Mason must walk and work. (Morals and Dogma, p.11) I think this quote reasonably establishes that the respect for all religions Masonry boasts is merely pandering. "Lucifer, the Light-bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual, or selfish Souls? Doubt it not!" (Morals and Dogma, p.321) And this is the most questionable.

Alot of well-educated people from all ethnicities cannot find jobs in their fields of expertise. It's not racism.

Masons in general are numerous and I dont think they are bad people. However, given the content of some masonic writings, including those of Manly Palmer Hall (a Canadian) and also Albert Pike, I don't think I would want to be involved with them whatever they are. Many people from all religions belong to Masonic groups, however I do feel that their core teachings undermine all these religions and amount to a brand of paganism.

This reminds me of a story I read not too long ago, but I can't remember which newspaper it was in. A young veterinarian in Nova Scotia recently gave up the practice she had studied years for to go out west and become a carpenter. Being a carpenter out west paid more than being a vet here. I don't think she is complaining about not getting a job as a veterinarian out there, but is quite happy to be making the cash.

Yeah, thats a good point Ft. Niagara. A decent sports page would have some more info on the NFL. I know some football fans up here and quite a few of them like the NFL much better than the CFL. (Kramer on Seinfeld liked the CFL though...lol).

How nice of you to speak on behalf of Christians? However I would say you are wrong. I am not a strict Christian but my father and some of my family members are quite fundamentalist Protestants and I have read alot of their literature since there is always some nearby. Nowhere in what I have read is there anything mentioned about trying to speed up the end times or Armageddon. I have heard of maybe a few whacko groups who believe in this, but not mainstream fundamentalists. The first place I actually heard of this phenomenon of fundamentalists (even though I grew up among them) wanting to speed up Armageddon was actually from accusations against them by people who are dead set against Christianity. Alot of these people were friends of mine who had no knowledge of the religion anyway.

I am a right-to-lifer myself but I would stand by JBG's opinion here. I think a lot of lawsuits are pretty far-out and this is definitely one of them. You can sue for almost anything now. Gimme gimme gimme.

And so does Isreal. Isreal was attacked by missiles so it has the right to defend itself. It's pretty simple who we should be siding with. As for not taking sides, I don't feel it's a positive for world development to not take sides. Imagine if everyone was impartial and didn't take sides. We'd probably all be speaking German right now if we didn't take sides and fight against wrong. Hezbolla on their TV station have a kids show where they have a game where kids trying to assemble a dissassembled AK-47 while blind-folded. Then we have a woman in Montreal saying 'Hezbolla is our protector' during a press conference. Right here on Canadian soil becuae her family died while living in his home country. I don't feel sorry for her. Yes she doesn't know what I meant. Most of the Canadian public is uninformed. They don't know how many poeple come into Canada each month, they don't understand the function of the economy, our national expendatures, and the climate of our country. The reason why is becuase they don't vote regularaly and have a say on policy so keep themselves out of the loop. The gov't is a dictatoriship that funds a left leaning organization called the CBC who's job is to further brainwash the people. Private media cannot compete with the CBC so we don't have a lot of media. Thus there's little choice. I completley agree. I felt all the answers to our problems was just to tax people a little bit more. Traffic? Just put tolls on the roads and tax poeple. Environment? Just tax businesses if they don't comply. Hospitals busy? Just make sure everyone pays fees. Hospital needs more fuding? When I was young, I had this perfect idea of the gov't building buildings per 10,000 people of population and 10% of the area could be hired by gov't. All people would have to do is pay.. i can't remember, I had the math worked out and figured that this would decrease employment by 5% and solve all our problems. But I was a dumb kid. I was uninformed. I never read into stuff. I just heard headlines and thought my simple could figure out all the solutions to our problems. I see some here with that same mentatlity to be honest. Way out there wacky lib ideas. I grew up and learned some hard knocks of life. Hard knocks of living in Canada. Met people from all over parts of the world and lived about. I researched for years and read into things myself. The media in Canada is NOT here to help inform people of facts. Kyoto is a huge deal. Canada puts out 2% of emmisions. Not ONE media organization stops and asks the logical question: "If we only put out 2% of emissions, we is this being made the #1 priority Mr. Dion". Not once did the media even ask the question. So it's natural to think the worlds going to end if Canada doesn't do something. Most people won't take the time to research stuff on their own. They are like me when I was a teen thinking in abstract ideals and trying to use my un-informed logic to figure stuff out. BC Chick is atleast smart unlike some others. It's such a shame to see it go to waste. Or for her to allow the media to brainwash her into thinking some issues should be important, when they really aren't. Just so you know Mike David, I agree that Israel wants peace. But I am saying that I think many of the people who do not back Israel are doing so because they believe Israel is the bad guy oppressor here, which I think is based on bad information.

I am saying look Higgly. This is a forum. Rue does not have Right Honorable Status here or anything. So what difference does it make if she supports Israel. Its a little discussion forum. Its not a high powered career. I think more than anything using the forum to make this sort of a post is grounds for having your membership terminated.

Well if you are worried about Rue, a mere forum poster, being detrimental to a forum how much more concern should you have over the current Governor General, who sat next to a founder of the FLQ in a pub in 1990 and toasted Quebec independence, and whose film maker husband said only a year ago that he and his wife are "Canadians, but Quebeckers first".

Maybe. But now I put forth my information on global-warming nobody has yet touched it. Geography is definitely an aspect. People learn from talking to each other. But it goes both ways. You can't tell me all the Blue ridings in rural Canada and Alberta weren't influenced by THEIR parents and teachers and so on. As for blaming the media or immigrants, it's as silly as conspiracy theories on the left. People see what they want to see. I just canceled my subscription to maclean's because I find their editorials so biased and right-wing. Yet in the letters to the editor I read "reading your magazine is like voting for the NDP." Perceptions... that's all it is. Even though there are a number of issues you raise with which I disagree, as I said to another poster - I'm not discussing Israel as a topic anymore. We are in the federal politics section and we should discuss the point I raised initially - about Harper's handling thereof. Not Israel policies itself. But let me say to you what I also said previously. IF Harper was even a little more objective (as you just were), ie saying things like "yes, Israel does wrong, but in the end they are MORE right" I could respect his POV. But to negate all wrongdoings of one side of a conflict is wrong IMO. Life is gray, perhaps closer to white for some, closer to black for others. But to paint a situation as black or white as Harper does, bothers me. It's not something I admire as "leadership," I consider it narrow-mindedness. It was the way I was raised and taught I guess - that in a conflict there are always two sides to a story and any argument that starts on the premise of being 100% correct is flawed. I never said Israel was more right, or that they did wrong. I said not everyone in Israel is a saint and not everyone in Palestine is a bad guy. Conservatives know this. But when Israel defends itself against attacks and people criticize them for doing so in a far off country where we know nothing of the middle east and what its like to deal with that madness, I think it's a little bit ridiculous. And there are issues where one side is one hundred percent right, failure to see that results in great injustice. Imagine a man who throws rocks at your house everyday, and riots outside your doorstep. You try to negotiate with him, but he is never satisfied. So one day after a rock comes through your window. You call the cops and they say well we cant do anything about it. So one day you come out with a gun and say look I have kids in here, if you dont quit i will be forced to defend myself. And then the man instead of understanding your position says....well lookie here now, threatening me with a gun. He reports you and has you charged and everyone who has never had this experience watches the news and says "Yeah she could have handled that better."