WIP

Enough of the alarmist BS about Canada being an abortion free-for-all! If you're only worried about late-term abortion, then you have no issue with Morgentaler or his clinics, since they do not perform them: Our clinics perform abortion procedures from approximately 7 weeks up to approximately 19 weeks gestation, http://www.morgentaler.ca/ourServices.asp And for that matter, most Canadian women have to go to U.S. hospitals to have a third trimester abortion: Third-trimester abortions are not generally available. For instance, in Quebec, there is currently no doctor who will perform a third-term abortion unless the health of the woman is in great peril or there is a genetic disorder. Currently the province sends women who seek to have third-term abortions performed to the United States. Quebec is currently actively looking to hire a doctor to do third-term abortions, but has not been successful as of October 2004. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Canada

Even if the law doesn't get you, you're going to burn for masturbating, since God kills those who use the rhythm method of birth control: The Bible mentions at least one form of contraception specifically and condemns it. Coitus interruptus, was used by Onan to avoid fulfilling his duty according to the ancient Jewish law of fathering children for one’s dead brother. "Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.’ But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also" (Gen. 38:8–10). The biblical penalty for not giving your brother’s widow children was public humiliation, not death (Deut. 25:7–10). But Onan received death as punishment for his crime. This means his crime was more than simply not fulfilling the duty of a brother-in-law. He lost his life because he violated natural law, as Jewish and Christian commentators have always understood. For this reason, certain forms of contraception have historically been known as "Onanism," after the man who practiced it, just as homosexuality has historically been known as "Sodomy," after the men of Sodom, who practiced that vice (cf. Gen. 19). Contraception was so far outside the biblical mindset and so obviously wrong that it did not need the frequent condemnations other sins did. Scripture condemns the practice when it mentions it. Once a moral principle has been established in the Bible, every possible application of it need not be mentioned. For example, the general principle that theft is wrong was clearly established in Scripture; but there’s no need to provide an exhaustive list of every kind of theft. Similarly, since the principle that contraception is wrong has been established by being condemned when it’s mentioned in the Bible, every particular form of contraception does not need to be dealt with in Scripture in order for us to see that it is condemned. http://www.catholic.com/library/Birth_Control.asp So, make sure you only let those semen out to procreate! If you masturbate or leave them trapped inside a rubber, the angel of death might come down and smite you!

Yeah, sure it's about human rights! That further illustrates the screwed up, mixed up notions of morality that religious dogma can lead you to! This is our future if prolife whining becomes real law: And this was why I had come to El Salvador: Abortion is a serious felony here for everyone involved, including the woman who has the abortion. Some young women are now serving prison sentences, a few as long as 30 years.............. .........In El Salvador, a mostly Catholic country, abortion first surfaced as a potent political issue in 1993, when conservative members of the Assembly proposed that Dec. 28, the Catholic Feast of the Holy Innocents, be declared a national day to remember the unborn.............. ...........The pope's appointment of Lacalle 11 years ago brought to the Archdiocese of San Salvador a different kind of religious leader. Lacalle, an outspoken member of the conservative Catholic group Opus Dei, redirected the country's church politics. Lacalle's predecessors were just as firmly opposed to abortion as he was. What he brought to the country's anti-abortion movement was a new determination to turn that opposition into state legislation and a belief that the church should play a public role in the process. In 1997, conservative legislators in the Assembly introduced a bill that would ban abortion in all circumstances. The archbishop campaigned actively for its passage. "The ban was part of a backlash," I was told by Luisa Cabal, the legal consultant for Latin America at the Center for Reproductive Rights, an abortion rights organization based in New York. The proposed bill, Cabal said, was a result of "the church's role in pushing for a conservative agenda." With the archbishop's vocal support of the ban and conservative groups fully energized, opposition soon became difficult. Any argument in favor of therapeutic abortion was met with a religious counterargument. ............................. .............When the woman is first detained, the form of custody can vary. Wandee Mira, an obstetrician at a hospital in San Salvador, told me that she had seen "a young girl handcuffed to her hospital bed with a police officer standing outside the door." ............................... .............In El Salvador, the law is clear: the woman is a felon and must be prosecuted. According to Tópez, after a report comes in from a doctor or a hospital that a woman has arrived who is suspected of having had an abortion, and after the police are dispatched, investigators start procuring evidence of the crime. In that first stage, Tópez has 72 hours to make the case to a justice of the peace that there should be a further investigation. If enough evidence is collected, she presents the case before a magistrate to get authorization for a full criminal trial before a judge. ............................ ................Indeed, the evidence suggests that the ban in El Salvador disproportionately affects poor women. The researchers who conducted the Journal of Public Health study found that common occupations listed for women charged with abortion-related crimes were homemaker, student, housekeeper and market vendor. The earlier study by the Center for Reproductive Rights found that the majority were domestic servants, followed by factory workers, ticket takers on buses, housewives, saleswomen and messengers................................ ..............A policy that criminalizes all abortions has a flip side. It appears to mandate that the full force of the medical team must tend toward saving the fetus under any circumstances. This notion can lead to some dangerous practices. Consider an ectopic pregnancy, a condition that occurs when a microscopic fertilized egg moves down the fallopian tube — which is no bigger around than a pencil — and gets stuck there (or sometimes in the abdomen). Unattended, the stuck fetus grows until the organ containing it ruptures. A simple operation can remove the fetus before the organ bursts. After a rupture, though, the situation can turn into a medical emergency. According to Sara Valdés, the director of the Hospital de Maternidad, women coming to her hospital with ectopic pregnancies cannot be operated on until fetal death or a rupture of the fallopian tube............................... ................n prosecutors' offices in El Salvador, as in prosecutors' offices anywhere, longer sentences are considered better sentences. "The more years one can send someone away for," I was told by Margarita Sanabria, a magistrate who has handled several abortion cases, "the better it is for the prosecutors." She cited this motivation to account for what she has observed recently: more later-term abortions being reclassified as "aggravated homicide." If an aborted fetus is found to have been viable, the higher charge can be filed. The penalty for abortion can be as low as two years in prison. Aggravated homicide has a minimum sentence of 30 years and a maximum of 50 years. ................... ................I was there to see Carmen Climaco. She is now 26 years old, four years into her 30-year sentence. She has three children, who today are 11, 8 and 6 years old. We talked about them for a while. Since she was the only person in the family who worked, her children's financial situation is precarious; they now stay with their grandmother.. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/09/magazine...amp;oref=slogin

This must be a new record for you! Four non-answers in a row! Especially those last two stupid responses. If you're such a conservative, what are you doing making excuses for your favourite hack throwing money at the churches who support him? http://www.alternet.org/story/90284/?page=entire

Of course he has a problem with women making these decisions! Pro-choice doesn't order women to go out and have abortions (unless they live in China), it's an individual right; whereas prolife means the state is going to force pregnant women to have the babies regardless of the circumstances or their own desires. If you favour individual rights over group conformity, then you can't be prolife! The blame-shifting rant about lesbians controlling family policy betrays the hidden motivation that draws so many men into the issue -- an evolutionary psychologist could best describe the many male politicians and religious leaders you see who focus in on the abortion issue, as acting like typical high-status male primates, that try to control where, when and how the females belonging to his group reproduce. That's the only way you can explain why they also show no concern for human life after it's left the womb!

Oh! It's up to us to win a war for you now? The Bush Admin, that you proudly wear as badge of honour, were warned by several generals and military experts that a major operation in Iraq would make it impossible to finish the job in Afghanistan; but you guys thought you knew it all, didn't you?

You're supposed to be the constitutional expert! You didn't know that "In God We Trust" was only put on your money during the religious fervour of the Civil War, and in the strictest sense (which conservative judges don't want to use) it is a violation of the Establishment Clause; and military chaplains have been a violation of the Constitution from the beginning? They've just been overlooked until lately, since Christian Evangelical chaplains have been trying to forcibly convert U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Like Hitchens says, let's see popular the chaplaincy is when enough Muslim clerics start elbowing their way in by taking advantage of this oversight: http://www.slate.com/id/2150801/?nav=ais The local distribution channel being payed for by the government should not be the church basement! It's been apparent for years that the soup-kitchen is the church's side door! As long as it's being payed for by the church members' tax free donations, no one is going to stop them from trying to evangelize drug addicts and other down-and-outers. These programs are clearly evangelistic tools. But, if it was about soup kitchens, there might at least be a tangible service to offer; but what about government money being given to a church, so they can create a bogus program that produces no positive results -- abstinence-only education.

Yeah, too bad the Iraqi-led purge of Al Qaeda is being run by a national army that is stocked with former Badr Brigades militia that are loyal to the Ayatollahs in Iran. Maybe the next U.S. policy will be to sponsor Al Qaeda militias to lead a Sunni uprising against the Iranian-backed government in Baghdad! Meanwhile, back in Afghanistan: Last month turned out to be the deadliest for US troops since the war began in late 2001. June was also the second consecutive month in which more US and Nato troops were killed in Afghanistan than in Iraq. If we were genuinely serious about our foreign policy this might at least have raised the odd eyebrow. This summer, Afghanistan is increasingly the deadlier war of America's two, but there's not much that can be done. Most U.S. forces are preoccupied in Iraq or preparing to cycle out and too exhausted to be reassigned to Afghanistan. NATO forces want no part of supplementing America's brave troops, and the Taliban is marshaling recruits daily, building a formidable and violent counterinsurgency. This was the war that should have been won but for the Bush administration's arrogance. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/b...,0,395802.story

It has several legal requirements that are frequently violated by state legislatures such as the Establishment Clause and the Free Excercise Clause in the 1st Amendment and Article Six of the Constitution - forbidding any religious test to hold office! And that's not going to last much longer! Other religions want their own religious schools supported with provincial tax dollars, an issue badly misjudged by the Ontarion conservatives, who lost by promising to extend funding to religious schools. A system that supports just one denominational school system won't last! And what might that be? Government services shouldn't be distributed by religious institutions in the first place! It would be different if they were spending their own tax-free donations, but why should tax dollars earmarked for government services, be handed over to churches to do the job? The system has been strangled by two political parties who have collaborated to prevent third parties from being established. If 20% of the voters were willing to vote for Ross Perot in 92, an unhappy electorate may be ready to rock the boat and end the two party- duopoly this time round! The whole world is watching the U.S. election this year. The effects of a U.S. economic collapse are being felt around the world; and concerns about whether Dubya is going to try to start another war before he leaves office, is the business of the whole world, whether we're voting in the election or not! He's an American who's supposed to be aware of what's going on outside of his country! He was supposed to be a game-changer, not more of the same old thing! No doubt! But the present administration is not just putting their interests first, they are totally oblivious to the fact that countries they don't like have their own national security interests, and they may not automatically coincide with U.S. interests. The "either you're with us or you're against us" vantage point isn't going to fly much further. Most of the dreamers weren't expecting miracles; but the rapid shifts of position of late, were not expected by most Obama supporters who expected some moves to the center.

Yes, I do think a 36 week fetus that's about ready to drop, is a baby, and so do most provincial courts that restrict late-term abortion to medical reasons such as the health of the mother -- but that's not what you're talking about, otherwise you wouldn't be all in a lather about Henry Morgenthaler!

George Bush still thinks he's the leader! That's why he plans to carry out an Iran Attack before the end of the year, if Obama is elected president: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07...ct_hersh/?yrail

The challenge is simple: show us the case that a fertilized embryo should be granted full human rights at the cost of downgrading the rights of pregnant women, and we can debate it from there! Continued hysterical assertions that it's a baby, don't count!

And these are some of the reasons why a third to half of the population don't bother to vote in elections! The time-honoured tradition in U.S. presidential elections, has been for the candidates to run to the left or the right during the primaries, and then start moving to the center once they've secured their party's nomination; but Obama's internet campaign was the beginning of a new grassroots movement in politics, and the legion of small contributors that gave him enough money to opt out of public campaign financing, provided enough money so that he wouldn't need to pander to the special interests that he doesn't agree with! Many of the leftwing Obama supporters gave him their money to stop the old-guard Democrats that had already tapped Hillary as their candidate, primarily because she tried to position herself as a war-hawk and supported the Iraq Invasion in 2003. Obama wasn't in the Senate at the time, but was already on record for opposing the war, and that was his ticket to the party nomination! Backtracking, or equivocating on the promise to begin a pullout will cause campaign funds to dry up more than any other issue that he's perceived as waffling on! The commondreams piece doesn't mention NAFTA; that was another one that he made an issue in some states; but most pragmatic supporters will recognize by now that NAFTA and free trade in general, have created overall prosperity and trying to increase tariffs to protect wobbling industries will grease the slide to the bottom, just like it did back in 1930, during the Great Depression. Likewise, that piece was written before his shift on other major issues like the FISA legislation that calls into question his credentials as a civil libertarian! His interpretation of the 2nd Amendment - previously, he followed the liberal interpretation that language involving a "well regulated militia" meant that it wasn't intended to extend personal rights to carry firearms; and that shift may anger liberal gun-control activists, but that's not going to be the make-or-break issue since any gun control advocates who've travelled the country have to realize that outside of the major cities, it's a losing issue. Faith-based initiatives is an issue he was coy about during the primariies, although he was obviously trying to build his own religious coalition. He condemned the Bush Administration's use of the faith-based initiatives program to reward Republican-supporting church leaders, but last week, he announced a program that would be an expansion of the Bush plan: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080701/ap_on_el_pr/obama_faith] His staff claims that he won't back tax-funded religious discrimination -- the campaign factsheet says the churches will not be allowed to use federal money to proselytize. Good luck on that one, especially since the factsheet doesn't propose setting up any federal oversight of church-run programs! Go in to an evangelical church of any denomination or non-denomination, and see how long they can refrain from preaching the gospel. The Bush faith-based plan promised the same things as well, and it ended up as tax dollars wasted to fund things like the ineffective church-run "abstinence" programs! It's a bad omen for the future of American democracy that candidates in both parties have to get up in front of the clerical establishment and proclaim how much they plan to dole out to religious institutions if elected. For the last 30 years, this has just been a Republican thing, but now the Democrats have decided to abandon separation of church and state in favour of setting up their own religious coalition. For the 16% and growing, unaffiliated segment of the U.S. population, this means that they are going to be forced back into church to partake of some of the formerly government services that will now be handed over to church institutions to operate. This might not be a make or break issue for most secularists, but if I still had my U.S. citizenship, this would have been an issue to cause me to cancel my contributions to the Obama campaign. And if the lines of distinction between Obama and McCain got any more blurry, I would have to seriously consider supporting Bob Barr for president. And then there's Israel! I can't say I disagree much with his speech at the AIPAC meeting, but this is one he should not have made. Much of the appeal for making Barach Obama president, is secondarily related to his bi-racial origins. Since he is an African, who had grown up in the Third World nation of Indonesia, it has been assumed, even by myself, that he would have the intuitive feel for how the rest of the world views America. This has been recognized as the key weakness of George Bush on the international stage -- in contrast, he is a man who has never ventured beyond his own borders and is completely oblivious to the aspirations of people outside the United States. During the Democratic Convention, the notion that Barach Obama would be greeted more openly because of his origins, has been denied by conservatives; but if you read the comments from media in Europe and Asia, they have been viewing Obama's candidacy as a sign that the American people want to change their relationship with the rest of the world from the confrontational brinksmanship of the Bush Administration. Like it or not, Israel is not a popular player on the international scence, and going overboard proclaiming support for the nation of Israel will be seen as a sign that Obama is George Bush in blackface!

I guess from that, we can safely assume that conservatives are opposed to equal rights for minorities, homosexuals, and would close down the S.P.C.A.'s and remove animal cruelty laws and endangered species laws! So, despite all of the denials of oppressing minority rights and claims of respecting everyone's rights, you are informing us that conservatives only respect money and power! But since you are concerned about children until they come out of the mother's womb, feel free to prove that "A fetus IS an unborn human," and at what stage of fetal development, the fetus becomes a human person with full human rights that supervene the rights of others, especially the rights of the mother to decide how to handle her pregnancy!

No kidding! But fortunately we can trust the Bush Administration to make sure that an air war against Iran won't cause a complete shutdown of oil exports from the Persian Gulf and cause a complete meltdown of the global economy! It's a good thing we have wise leaders in Washington who have secured the world from terrorism and stopped Bin Laden from achieving this strategic goal in 2001: Fears, Again, of Oil Supplies at Risk By NEELA BANERJEE Published: October 14, 2001 ''If bin Laden takes over and becomes king of Saudi Arabia, he'd turn off the tap,'' said Roger Diwan, a managing director of the Petroleum Finance Company, a consulting firm in Washington. ''He said at one point that he wants oil to be $144 a barrel'' -- about six times what it sells for now.....................Most Western politicians and oil industry experts say they believe assurances from the Middle East that oil supplies will stay stable as the American-led attacks on terrorist groups continue. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...753C1A9679C8B63 I'm glad that never happened! Thank you George for preserving the international oil supply - the life blood of the world economy! With the good job you did protecting the world from terrorism, I guess we can trust you and your advisers, when you say that Iran is developing a nuclear weapons program that threatens global security, and your team will be able to eliminate this threat before the end of your term in office without disrupting the oil supply! Based on your prior success in office, we can put our complete trust in you now -- http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07...07fa_fact_hersh

Enough of the code words! It's not about Michelle's remarks, McCain's faint hope of winning rides on how many whites and latinos won't vote for a black man under any circumstances! They're counting on the Bradley Effect. Now if mushy McCain can't scare enough racists and fundamentalists to pick him because a black guy might win, Bob Barr will siphon off 3 to 5% of the vote, according to latest tracking polls -- and that number could rise substantially if Ron Paul throws his support, especially MONEY, behind Barr after the Republican Convention http://www.nolanchart.com/article4172.html Some of the military bloggers are talking about how McCain's use of his war-record as a campaign tool is drawing attention to the long-standing grudge that army guys have with the airmen -- Wesley Clark has made the point previously that the men on the ground have a better idea of what's going in a war than the guys who are dropping bombs from 10,000 feet! It sucks that McCain was shot down and spent 5 years in a Vietnamese prison, but that experience didn't give him any insight into how the Vietnam War was going either! This could explain why McCain, for all of his medals and awards, is as clueless about how to gauge the success or failure of the Iraq venture as are the chicken-hawk neo-conservative friends like Bush, Cheney, Mitt Romney, Karl Rove etc. etc.

I wasn't! Especially after doing a little background checking on the "man of God." -- He was once the "Saint of Saskatchewan," a Catholic priest whose work with troubled teens earned him the Order of Canada and a citizen-of-the-year award. But Father Lucien Larre has been dogged by controversy in recent years. In 1992, a Saskatchewan jury convicted him on two counts of physically abusing children in his care at Bosco Homes and acquitted him on nine other charges. Larre was sentenced to one day in jail and paid a $2,500 fine for one charge of common assault and one charge that he forced pills down the throat of a teenager to teach her a lesson about drug abuse. The National Parole Board of Canada pardoned him five years later and erased the charges. In 1998, Larre registered as a psychologist in B.C. His work, however, has prompted a number of complaints to the B.C. College of Psychologists in recent years, court documents show. There were no allegations of abuse, but individuals and other psychologists have questioned his methods and the quality of his work. Last November, the college held an extraordinary hearing and suspended his registration pending a disciplinary hearing because it felt he posed "an immediate risk to the public." The public, however, was never told of that at the time. http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonis...ae41da4&p=1 So! At best, he's a hack and he's already been convicted of physically abusing kids he's worked with, but that's okay because he wears a collar! He shouldn't even have the option of returning his Order of Canada! According to the rules adopted ten years ago, he should have been stripped of his award for his prior convictions. He wouldn't even have his award now if didn't have a powerful religious institution backing him. And Larre candidly spoke about sexual abuse allegations that arose against him when he worked in Regina many years ago, saying they were false allegations for which he was acquitted....................... At least no one has been able to convict him...............yet! Good thing we don't have to worry about celibate priests in the company of young men and boys! ...............He said he has been haunted by the allegations ever since but that won't stop him from speaking out about Morgentaler, http://canadianpress.google.com/article/AL...kn0JKPNR3OM6mJg No! Ofcourse it won't! First rule for social conservative hypocrites is that what you believe is more important than how you conduct yourself! Just keep on making professions of being pro-life and to hell with the fetuses after they come in to this world! The prolife people who are so gung-ho about protecting the rights of the "unborn," had no concern about the situation that motivated Dr. Morgenthaler to open private abortion clinics in the first place -- they want abortion back on the blackmarket, so that girls who get pregnant can face the death penalty for their sins!

I think you're going to have to look pretty hard to find a silver lining around this story! $200 a barrel oil not only means recession, it means skyrocketing inflation because of higher transportation costs and oil-based organic compounds used in making plastics and fertilizers are going to raise the price of food and just about everything you buy at Walmart! There have already been food riots in a number of third world countries; things will likely get a lot worse, before they get better!

Oh come on now! I've eaten in lots of Chinese and Japanese restaurants over the years, and I never seen anyone come out of the kitchen brandishing a knife or a meat cleaver!

Well doc, I don't know if the healthcare situation in Winnipeg is equivalent to here in Ontario, but if it is roughly similar -- with shortages of doctors and nurses, shortages of beds in hospitals -- is there any sane reason for devoting scarce medical resources to keeping someone alive on life support who can never again regain consciousness or some sense of self-awareness and have any sort of life worth living? Before this man died, the lawyer for the family was brazen enough to declare that it would be "murder" to take him off life support. He had the gall to say the doctors would be morally equivalent to Robert Latimer( the guy who murdered his 12 year old disabled daughter), no wonder everyone hates lawyers! He also announced yesterday, that the law suit started on Tuesday will continue. http://www.cjob.com/News/Local/Story.aspx?ID=1013685 Who gets to pay for that? Now that Mr. Golobchuk has died, I'd like to know if the lawyer, the family and all of the countless prolife groups who made the bizarre case that this man needed to be kept on life support so he could die a "natural death," to consider the possibility that others may have died waiting for ICU beds while they were expressing their devotion to their religious principles. They may believe that every moment is precious, regardless of its quality, and needs to be prolonged whatever the cost; but the guarantee of religious freedom shouldn't include the right to make unreasonable demands on the healthcare system!

Right! Why is this the issue that people are getting bent out of shape over? Maybe someone can explain to me how a Mountie wearing a turban will not be able to do the job! Of the five Sikh khalsa requirements, I would have figured that Sikh students carrying kirpans to school would be the issue that most would be concerned about: A compromise was proposed that would allow this religious requirement as long as it could be guaranteed that it would not be used as a weapon: After more protests from parents, a Quebec Superior Court judge proposes that the belt holding the kirpan must also be sewn in to the student's clothing as an additional precaution, but the schoolboard, backed by the P.Q. government, wants to play hardball: March 4, 2004: The drama comes to an end in 2006 when the Supreme Court of Canada rules 8-0 that a total ban of the kirpan violates the Charter of Rights because it infringes on the guarantee of religious freedom. But it does allow school boards to impose restrictions on the carrying of kirpans to ensure public safety. Are the restrictions on carrying the kirpan enough to maintain public safety? I don't know! As far as I know, nobody did a demonstration to see if it was possible to still use it as a weapon! If it is no longer a danger, then Sikh students should be free to wear it; if it is possible to use it as a weapon, then religious freedom is overruled by public safety! Now, could someone show me how the turban is a threat to anyone?

Since no one else has mentioned this case yet, let's review: Now stop and think about this for a moment! We haven't even made it to the argument to allow active euthanasia yet and our system still can't deal with people motivated by rigid religious laws! If the family had a dog at the local veterinary clinic and demanded that their dog be kept alive regardless of circumstances, the vet would have to inform them that they could be charged with cruelty to animals.................but it's okay to do it to people! Mr. Golubchuk died on Tuesday, at least ending this little drama. The case caused a total upheaval in the hospital when three doctors resigned their hospital priviledges rather than comply with the order to continue medical treatment because of the family's wishes. And that doesn't even address the costs of keeping someone alive and dealing with future legal costs At some point, our society will have to draw up some clear universal ethical guidelines to determine end of life situations, abortion, medical research, and even animal rights! I tried in vain before to get a few fundies here to wrap their brains around the hypocrisy of allowing kosher and halal butchering of animals that a non-Jew or non-Muslim would be prosecuted for, so it looks like there are a whole host of issues where universal guidelines need to be drawn up, and for those who are want assimilation and shared cultural values, here's a good way to start: have rules and ethical guidelines that apply to everyone! How nice! Of course the family lawyer didn't explain why God's power is always so weak in these issues! If all-powerful creator of the universe wanted a man to be kept alive, it seems natural that he could have kept him living whether he was on life support or not! The Winnipeg Free Press has a poll question asking if it was worth the 450,000 to keep this man on life support......so far almost 90% are voting against!

Outside of the courtroom it makes no difference! Just answer one thing then if you believe this is so important: did O.J. deliberately kill his ex-wife and Ron Goldman or not? The differences exist because he was tried in civil court and not in criminal court the second time! That link I put up showed that for the purposes of awarding damages, no distinction is made regarding motive for causing death. The simple fact is that O.J. is a free man today not because he is innocent, but because he had a superstar legal team facing an incompetent prosecution. It's because of this fact that prosecutors are usually outmatched by big name lawyers that many district attorneys have hired a lawyer from outside the D.A.'s office to prosecute a celebrity............. like Mike Tyson for example!

Glad you noticed! These are the modern examples of how people got sucked in to marching off to war for dubious reasons. If you read about WWI, the European nations did the same thing, and just like Iraq, the leaders disguised their real motives that were based on competition for resources and control of colonies, with appeals to British, French, and German patriotism. So I no longer feel that identity neurosis anymore! Canadian nationalism has traditionally been based on anti-Americanism because it was the decision to remain British colonies that gave us an identity in the first place. But since WWII, Canada has kept moving closer and closer into the U.S. orbit because of our own self-interests, and instead of whining about our economy becoming linked to the U.S. economy and trying to stop American culture, we should recognize that we are going to have a lot more similarities than differences with the Americans. Maybe our identity is being like the Americans except a little more rational and less gulible!

No it does not mean a lesser charge! It's not my fault that a civil court charge for damages makes no distinction between the cause of death: A "wrongful death" occurs when a person is killed due to the negligence or misconduct of another individual, company or entity. A wrongful death claim may arise out of a number of circumstances, such as in the following situations: * Medical malpractice that results in decedent's death; * Automobile or airplane accident; * Occupational exposure to hazardous conditions or substances; * Criminal behavior; * Death during a supervised activity. http://injury.findlaw.com/personal-injury/...wrongful-death/ So why was O.J. convicted of causing wrongful death? He didn't get drunk and run them over in his Bronco; he stabbed and hacked them to death! That sounds like murder to me, regardless of what the legal definitions are!