White Doors

No, I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm suggesting all cultures are not equal and some are better than others at allowing people, as individuals, to live their life how they please. The facts are, the Afghani's would like us to stay in Afghanistan, killing Taliban, more than the left in Canada would want us to stay. We are there. We are doing the right thing according to the Afghani's and that is that. We are staying, your and myata's white flags wagging vigourously, notwithstanding.

??

What a ridiculous and childish argument. All cultures are NOT equal. What if there was a culture where after a woman gave birth, it was the accepted wisdom of the cultural leaders to kill the mother? it's part of their culture, it's the beliefs, should we allow it t happen? What would you do then? What if another culture had a belief that they were the only viable culture on the planet and that all others must die? Would you sacrifice yourself to 'honour their traditions'? See how easily weak arguments like your can be guillotined by me? grow up.

Wrong. See Japan circa 1945. Two atom bombs later and poof! A democracy!

Well good for Tarek! cheers!

Freedom > non-freedom You should come here to see for yourself.

War is bad, other things are worse.

He already is King!

A thinly veiled bait. you can do better than that AW. So let's change it around. What if the criminal was firing at the cops and the cops were firing back, but some people who had no weapons were standing in front of the criminal shielding him so as to play on the morality of the police in the hopes that this would protect the criminal and enable him to kill more police? Would the police have a right to shoot the unarmed people to get to the criminal or will the police have to let the criminal shoot at them? Your example was a very poor, simplistic view on the world. My example is much more apt and realistic.

Thanks For example, I would prefer Peter F have no kids so as to not perpetuate his socialistic philosophy. But I know I have no right to do so. Nor should anyone else have that right. It is perposterous to even entertain the idea. Humans are so fallable, this amount of power would turn out to be bad at avery turn. (Just kidding Peter. nice we can actually agree on something:)

What contributions have YOU made? Maybe we should retroactively abort YOU for having this inane idea? Hitler and Stalin had above average IQ's. Get it yet? I doubt it. You are fighting for a solution that is worse than the disease for a problem that does not exist. Takes a certain amount of stuborness to keep going along in your argument not admiting that you are completely wrong in every measure - in regards to this topic.

The fact that you have Oleg as your hero confirms my earlier, unstated, hypothesis on you.

What problem? Question for you. Are there more or less people on welfare now than say 20 years ago? thanks!

not practical? lol. Your solution is fundamentally WRONG in every sense of the word, I didn't even bother going into how unpractical it is. What happens if someone on welfare gets pregnant by mistake and they have a child. What to do then? lol unreal. A better way to deal with this non-existent problem? Well first you could read up that people are not on welfare due to genetics for the most part, they are there for a variety of reasons and genetics plays a very limited role in why they are there. There are alot of dumb rich people you know. Having an education system that people of every class can access is one main way to alleviate this 'problem'. Look up some famous, rich and talented people. Look at where they came from, the odds that they overcame and think that under your totaliarian system they would have never been born. Jk Rawling for one. Shania Twain for another. You obviously have very limited knowledge to what you are speaking. Shocking that you could argue for such a suspension of fundamental human rights and you never even to bothered looking into the effects of it. A young mind I think.

And I completely and fundamentally disagree with you.

can you repeat this again in your native language?

Besides, we are all dependent on 'handouts' to a degree. Did you build the internet access to your house? No, of course not. It was subsidized by the government and business. Your argument is weak, ill-conceived and not well thought out and bears a striking resemblance to eugenics. In short, your 'cure' is much, much worse than the 'disease'.

So what? These children are going to go to school and grow up and hopefully get out of the cycle. Even if they do not, it is no reason to restrict someone's fundamental right to have children. Change the system so it does not reward this behaviour? Sure. take their fundamental rights away from them to be able to bear children??? NO WAY

No, they have these rights simply for being human. I disagree that they have children when they are on welfare and it angers me, but they have the RIGHT to have kids regardless. I protect their right to do so to protect everyone else's rights too. Same reason I encourage freedom of speech rights for communists. Same reason I think that Robert Pickton is entitled to a fair trial. .......

I think it quite scary that a government would feel that it is able to regulate who has a right to have kids. It's the last place that they should be sticking their noses. Despite people who are on welfare having kids, they have a right to have kids. We cannot dictate who can or cannot have children even for the best of intentions because that is a way too much power to be given to a beurocracy. I get angry with people who take advantage of the system too, but the last thing we need is more 'system' that gave them an ability to take advantage of in the first place. BC, you need to eat some of what you handle says.

Agreed. Apology please.

never let it be said that you don't occasionally speak the truth!!

I sure hope there is a spring election! Nothing would provide me more enjoyment that to see Dion stumbling over his words on the stump on the 5 oclock news with playoff hockey on right after.

QFT. It also shows quite clearly that the person has no concept of what hard work is.

I see.. so instilling a work ethic in children is the same as slavery in the 1700's. well, I'm sure that any reasonable person would agree with that! lol