I miss Reagan

Great point! Wasn't that a UN operation? Exactly why the US is the first to be called like Haiti. Lol. Ya the UN is doing a great job there as well . BTW the US has been trying to light a fire under the UN to get involved. Unfortunately they don't consider the situation "genocide". Another great point! Would you really like the US to become antagonistic to a relatively less than stable country with a lot of nukes? And which Chechens would you like them to stand up for? The ones who killed innocent teenagers at a rock concert? The ones who took hostages at a play in Moscow? or perhaps the brave and oppressed Chechens who killed mothers, children and babies on their first day of school in Beslan. What a cop out. Ya how bout the Iraqis? The ones waving their ink dyed fingers after risking their lives to vote? Those Iraqis? Or better yet how about the Kuwaitis? Did I ever tell you about the lunch I had with the ignorant Ontarians bloviating about the awful US occupation in Iraq only to be chided by the Kuwaitis sitting next to them who were celebrating the US ouster of Saddam Hussein. Columbia? Ya the government enjoys the hundreds of millions in aid the US gives them for counter terrorism. Nepal appreciates the help as well against the Maoists. Ya I know, there is no terrorist threat. That whole cold war thing was blown way out proportion as well. The Soviets never would have touched us if the US wasn't there right?

Funny article regarding what fleeing American liberals may find different in Canuckistan: What Will Alec Baldwin Find in Canada

Really? Who is it the world first calls on for help when something goes wrong? It isn't the UN. How does Germany feel that US troops are leaving? Japan certainly appreciates the US presence. How about ethnic Albanians? South Koreans? Afganis? How bout the Kurds? Could they live without the US gnerosity? Even you yourself owe your freedom to the USA while you live under their protection.

False. This does not count the incredible cost in both human life and money the US bears for protecting the free world. By that factor alone it's amazing Americans would be so generous. The incentive of a free economy, IMV, is what puts the US on top.

Actually, if you put down the Chomsky reader you might find that the USA is the most qualified to lecture on humanitarian aid. They give more aid than any other country. And being a capitalist country they do it through individual donations rather than government mismanagment. Why would Americans rely on official aid through corrupt bureaucratic organizations like the UN. read the backupSo in your selective statistical manipulation you Mooreishly omit the truth: International giving by US foundations: $1.5 billion per year Charitable giving by US businesses: $2.8 billion annually American NGOs: $6.6 billion in grants, goods and volunteers. Religious overseas ministries: $3.4 billion, including health care, literacy training, relief and development. US colleges scholarships to foreign students: $1.3 billion Personal remittances from the US to developing countries: $18 billion in 2000

I think it's time to rethink the nearly half-billion dollars in aid the US send's to U.N. peacekeeping operations. How much more aid funding must we squander on holier-than-thou theives pretending to be do-gooders? For the sake of the innocents raped and pillaged, not to mention those starved by Oil-for-food, in the name of humanitarianism, they need to get stingy. First step would be to ask the UN to leave the US. Weekly Standard

Clopin, You're missing the point. The point is that gays have the same rights as everyone else already. Nobody is forcing gay men to marry women.

Yes I have, you just didn't like the answer. Not where you and I live. And until activist judges changed the law, it wasn't legal anywhere else either.

Uh...nice try. Can heterosexuals marry a person of their choosing? Only if it is someone of the opposite sex. Can homosexuals? Only if it is someone of the opposite sex. Completely equal. Disparaging and throwing personal insults at those you disagree with only highlights your intolerance and severely limits the credibility of your arguments . Weak and illogical arguement as homosexual marriage is currently illegal. "Parliament as recently as 1999 affirmed by a vote of 216 to 55 that the definition of marriage was between a man and woman 'to the exclusion of all others'." Do you read what you post? Basically you're making my argument for me. If the law allowed some people to marry those of the same sex, but forbade others, then it would be an equality issue. Great point!

It was banned. You're being obtuse again. No. Banned means "To prohibit, especially by official decree". If you'd read over the thread instead of barking like a trained seal, you'd see that was not the case. Fox was banned.

hmmm interesting. The best argument I've heard so far (no name calling). The only problem with "equal treatment under the law" is allowing gay marriage still doesn't give everyone equal treatment under the law. Polygamists will still not be allowed to marry, brothers and sisters (even adopted) will not be allowed to marry etc. Parliament certainly wouldn't give incestuous couples and polygamists equal treatment. So it still remains a special rights issue.

But see if you abandoned your emotional loyalty to this, you'd see that this argument is flawed, because as Jason Kenny pointed out Gays do in fact have equal rights. Gays are not forced to sit at the back of the bus, drink from different fountains, be disenfranchised etc. This is about special rights not equal rights.

Ya...nice try. Read again. The majority of Blacks oppose gay marriage. Care to point out the tokenism?

It was banned. You're being obtuse again.

You are comparing a visible minority who suffered hundreds of years of oppression and discrimination for how they looked to people who prefer sex with people of their same gender and spining it into an equal rights issue. (Not surprising from one who calls the US a police state and quite often calls conservatives "fascists") It's offensive that you use the injustices commited against woman and blacks as a political tool. Most blacks agree that this kind of argument diminishes their own triumphs over inequality. From Gay Wired

I find it odd being lectured about proper debate by someone who consistantly posts fallacy ridden arguments. Black Dog: Black Dog's response to a point: Black Dog: Yet from Black Dog: and: and finally: And that is just this page. In sorting through the insults I saw one point worth responding to. No I believe it is your side who is asking them to live a lie. Proding them into thinking they are second class citizens and unequal simply because you want them to be exactly the same. Instead of "celebrating diversity" you're stiring people up into a frenzy by making them feel oppressed and downtrodden because they can't change the definition of a word. Why don't we just admit there are differences between people. I'm not protesting the fact that I can't wear a kirpan or a turban because I'm not Sihk. I recognize there are differences between us and appreciate them.

Lol, the irony, ad hominem.

More: Times

Interesting 20/20 on Friday. Did anyone catch it? They did a story on UN peacekeepers and higher up UN officials in the Congo. Apparently there is a huge problem with UN peacekeepers raping local teenagers and participating in child porn and local prostitution of teenage boys and girls. Somehow the big media story is how US troops in Cuba are wearing thongs in the presence of their prisoners.

Settle down and watch your mouth. Same ol' strawman... ...and even more strawman

I like what Jason Kenny has to say about it. The fact of the matter is that it is not an equal rights issue, as hard as the radical left tries to spin it. The often ignored truth is that a heterosexual is not allowed to marry someone of the same sex either. And I find it quite interesting how the radical left chooses to spin the poll results on this issue. CTV

And today another revelation of UN corruption: NY Times

Oh come on Eureka, we can be friends. I'm sure we can find more common ground, despite the fact I'm a huge Dubya fan. I don't like guns... I like trees...

I'm glad you bring up the Oil for Food scandal August. I'm baffled that the media in Canada has chosen to ignore it. You'd think people would be outraged that all this money meant for hungry people was divided between UN officials and Saddam. Canadians evidently have an extremely high tolerance for corruption. BTW, correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think August even likes Bush.