charter.rights

Wrong. Indian children have a choice to listen or not. Christian children rarely have the ability to avoid being dragged into Church every Sunday, when they would ratherstay home and watch cartoons. Fundamental religion is a disease that plagues society. "Church" is as anti-Christ as it gets.

Actually you have to dry them out real good first and then they are perfect as a key fob.....

And therein lies the problem with religious fanatics. When they lose control of the message, their message falls apart. Open discussions terrify them because their apologetic doesn't cover all of the angles of a certain subject - especially concerning homosexuality. Not only is Mr. Canada not a Christian in the trues sense of following the teachings of Christ but he is a hypocrite as well. In my experience his way of thinking is never right.

I'd be glad to show you the door if you want to leave...now....We don't need morons wasting our time.... We have disproved every argument you have tried to put forth and you still go on your homophobic rants. There is nothing left to be said. You lose. Gays and lesbians are no different than heterosexuals and often when one segment of society is found behaving in risky behavior, it is nothing but a microcosm of the entire society. Risky behavior is not exclusive and it is even committed by Priests and Christians who think they are God. IF you had children, you would have absolutely no control over their becoming homosexual. If you tried to influence their tendencies chaances are you would create a murderous, baby-killing monster. Which do you prefer? A gay son or a convicted killer in your household?

Neither the sperm or the egg have sentience. They are not "alive" but are part of the body. A fetus is nothing more than a woman's appendage and until it begins to have a thought process that is separate from the women, it is no more alive than a fingernail.

No its not. Propaganda has you believing that the Conservatives are our saviours. They are as far removed from God as the Communists and you are just being taken in by your own delusions.

Further I have not been "hurt by the church". They have never held that kind of power over me. Yet I see it for what it is. A place where people who are detached from God come together to share their misery and their consternation. Once one understands the path to Christ, there is no need of the Church, or the fanatical peons that inhabit it.

Ah but you have offended God's law and removed their free will to worship. God does not condone slavery, nor does He accept false prophets.

Just don't go behind the curtain with the priest. He may try to diddle your children.

Nor are religious beliefs. IN order to be a Christian children are indoctrinated against their will.

You are NOT following God's laws. If you were you would not be judging nor condemning anyone.

Romans 6:7-11 For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

No. You're just a rabble rouser skin head pal from Binbrook.

Sin is dead. It no longer exists UNLESS YOU choose to keep it alive. If society needs to be protected...it is from people like you.

With the arrest of the two guys from Bountiful, BC I believe we are about to see a successful Charter challenge on the issue of polygamy. At least since a Mormon polygamist marriage isn't sanctioned legally in the first place, it is unlikely that the Crown will succeed in proving that the guy and his 19 wives are actually married. Secondly, there is nothing in law that states that consenting adults cannot cohabitate and enjoy each other sexually from time to time. I do agree that the Crown does need to protect the children from preditors that would scoop them up for marriage in the sect, but have no problem once they are consenting adults to choose their own lifestyle. "The state does not belong in the bedrooms of the nation." Pierre Elliott Trudeau

The same can be said for other types of racism, xenophobia and other socio-phobias that seek to keep people down because others don't understand them or fear them.

I fixed your quote. There was a comprehension error.

Wrong. Pushing your opinion on someone is not the same thing as discussing it. Holding an opinion that judges others because of their ethnicity or race or religion IS racism, whether you wnat to believe it or not. If you hold these beliefs and in the face of proof otherwise that your myths are incorrect, then that not only makes you a racist but more likely a bigot.

Wrong. John 8:15 15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man. Romans 2:1 1Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. We are taught therefore, that The Christ forgives all and without judgment condemns no one. What comes of the flesh and what lives and dies as the flesh has no matter to us for we are of the Spirit. Sin is dead to us that have accepted the way of Christ, since sin died with Him and our life arose with Him free of sin, such that we can no longer see sin because we no longer recognize the flesh.

My only question is, if Tory loses the by-election will he finally quit as leader and give someone who IS elected the job? There is no sense being the leader of a political party if you can't sit in the legislature.

I've cited lots of points. You mustn't have been around to read them...unless of course it is just laziness on your part. How would you like me to frame the oral history? As far as other information, we don;t rely upon the internet for much of anything since it is often nothing more than a bastardization of a poor opinion. If you really want to follow this stuff up you have to go much deeper into books, periodicals and old letters. I have a fairly large collection of more regional stuff and a number of documents concerning land claims in much of Ontario, but that I'm not at liberty to share. The real truth is found through thorough research. If you want sound bites to fill your ears then I suggest taking up CPAC for a couple of hours. Otherwise the stuff I have will be presented in the form I have given, sometimes long-winded and boring but purposeful. You can take that or leave it but you obviously can't argue it when you don't have very much knowledge of Haudenosaunee history. I would suggest that you start with "Indian Givers", Jack Weatherford. It isn't a complex read, but provides a simple grounding in the gratitude we should be showing our First Nation allies. If you don't want to do that then I suggest the rest of this stuff will be over your head. UNtil you have respect for First Nation people, their culture and history you'll never get to understand them the way I do.

Most don't know how to think. Period. I don't know what you have been sniffing, but most of the Indian heritiage and history that has been offered to me comes from oral history. As a critical historian I do use the Jesuit Relations, ancient British texts and authors like Horatio Hale to confirm that history - especially when dealing with post contact stuff, but the majority comes from the source in oral history. I deal with Trent and Queens University faculty and students on a regular basis. The Professors of the Aboriginal Program at Trent agree with my assessment of oral history and that is very much where they reference the program from. In fact the Supreme Court of Canada also agrees and have ruled that oral history has as much weight as any British written agreement. I've seen you before and just like the Family Guy munching on cheezies I would agree that you are laughable, very laughable. BTW How's that court case coming. I hear that McHale is going to lose....but that's just the opinion of one Crown attorney.....

What...and YOU read history books written by one guy? Oral history stands to scrutiny because is is collected by many people and repeated verbatim by the students. When it is recalled, anything that might have been embellished or left out becomes relatively clear because it doesn't jive with the history other tell. It is far more accurate then books, given that history books tend to compound bias on the sources and add the writer's bias to the mix. I would give 20 oral accounts more weight then one written on. If you even understand how history is research you would know that we always go back to the source of all events and pretty much ignore written editions. "The source" in many case with native history are the oral teachings and then we can confirm our joint history by confirming them with the written record.

Nope. After 1988 the Constitutional challenges began. There is no reasonable limits that can be placed on gay marriage. Polygamy could have a chance if someone can make the argument. There are lots of cultures who enjoy polygamy and personally as long as the people involved are consenting of their own free will, I see nothing wrong with it.

Look! A new species just showed up.....its....its...Homo erectus ad hominem!