Peter F

I don't think beatings would change any of that. A child can learn to be a responsible adult quite easily without any beatings at all. So no, no child needs beatings. '

"untaxed, employer provided health insurance" sounds like a free ride to me.

Yes, thats what I said.

The clause being discussed: http://www.clusterconvention.org/files/2011/01/Convention-ENG.pdf Which seems pretty strait forward that signatories (Canada) shall adhere to the convention even if the USofA isn't a signatory. Also, Canadian troops operating within US units will be able to partake in the use of Cluster Munitions. Bill c-6 says this for exceptions from the rule: Seems to be in agreement with the Convention. But the seemed agreement raises the question why is it necessary for the parliamentary bill? So perhaps I've missed something.

So status-quo then .

I like affirmative action. I think we are a better society because of it. I support Affirmative action.

Random physical assault has never been considered a 'moral' thing. Even non-random assaults are looked down upon by society. That this is a supposed game doesn't change a damn thing. I would say this isn't a game at all. Just the usual inappropriate lashing out at someone/anyone to vent frustrations by young macho-challenged men.

posted in error

I shall also add: Ad Hominem my arse. It is not ad hominem to claim you don't really know what you are talking about. Abrogation for one example. Plus the invocation of the ol' don't believe muslims because islam says its ok to lie to unbelievers. You have been attempting to make a theological argument with, shall I say, very limited knowledge of the theology you are arguing.

What is your argument? That Burka's are not part of the religion of Islam. Point being? Lets ban the Burka. Is it now your argument that the wearing of burkas should be banned?

Ok, but the only one providing Islams position is you - and you're no Imam.

From the OP: " Presumably, the orderly has to be "bi-lingual" but what law says patients have to also speak both languages." And the whole of what follows is based on the presumption that the orderly must be bilingual. The presumption is wrong.

and keeping with the day... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWqQ9uwqQxk

"Why, sir, there is every probability that you will soon be able to tax it." -- Micheal Faraday to William Gladstone, Chancellor to the Exchequer, when asked about the practical worth of electricity.

I suspect even the numbers for self-identification as Catholic will fall drastically also. Where all my inlaws had some actual experience with Catholicism (schools, first communions, Mass) when they were children, their children have had no interaction with the Church at all outside of the baptism thing when they were babies and Grandpapa's funeral...and partying in abandoned Churches.

Ah. I see. Well you got me there for I did not really fathom that Quebecers still self identify as being Catholic. All my inlaws are Quebecois and I know that the only time any of them (outside of BelleMaman) see the inside of the many rather big churches there was for baptisms and funerals. So it surprises me that identifying as Catholic still holds water with them. Jaycee and BC pointed out the heritage aspect which makes sense. One learns something every day or so I'm told.

Who says Quebeckers are catholic? Micheal Hardner has already pointed out the Quiet Revolution. They aren't a Catholic society anymore. Quebecers have no need to disown the label Catholic since its some mysterious others who are the ones that applied the label.

Why the need to sustain Western civilization? What conscious effort has Western civilization ever made to sustain itself?

Whiskey now! I had this in Ottawa: http://www.belgianwhisky.com/en/products-3&products_11.html Wonderful stuff and wonderfully expensive too. Unfortunately the LCBO stocks are few and far between.

Sure, If they can make some money doing so. But who says Capitalists must meet demand? As Argus and Kimmy have pointed out - there's more money having cash sit in various investments than actually meeting consumer demand. Therefore, in pure economic 101 style, Apple and others sit on their cash because thats where the money is.

The judge was appalling? What information leads you to that conclusion?

I don't see any free speech issue here. That a public website is being held responsible for defamatory comments by anonymous users is entirely reasonable (no sarcasm intended). All forms of public forums are held responsible for the crap they allow on them and must take reasonable steps (editing) to avoid instances of defamation. The complaint here seems to centre on the fact that the web masters are going to have to take thier self-assumed positions seriously - just like every other public forum.

I like to think i'm a socialist yet I beleive the same as you? Whats up with that?

I don't see a problem. Libel is Libel wether expressed to the public in the press on tv or on public websites

No they were not. see "Minutes of the second meeting of the Target Committee, Los Alamos, May 10-11 1945" http://www.dannen.com/decision/targets.html#K As you say, MacNamaras' job was analysis of the results of bombings; Analyzing the results of actual bombing missions. he did not do target selection nor have a say in which targets would be good to bomb. Hiroshima was one of the targets selected by the linked meetings in Los Alamos with the Air Force simply told that those targets were not to be bombed. But we're getting way off topic here and this is merely a point of order