Progressive Tory

Why does everything have to be a 'right' or 'left' issue? The money should go where it's needed the most and municipalities would know that better than the federal gov't.

Exactly. As much as we may want to save her, we can't pay for her release. It will only put others in danger once the precident is set. Very sad story.

Pro-Choice does not mean we want to see all poor women get an abortion. Pro-Choice means we want all women to make that decision themselves whether rich or poor. The most common 'choice' that women make is to carry their babies full term. When my daughter got pregnant I knew she couldn't raise a child but told her I would respect her 'choice', by giving her options. Her social worker spent a great deal of time with her, and I made them both aware that if she decided to keep the baby we would be there, but if she decided to have an abortion, we would also be there. She chose to keep him and seven years later we've kept our promise and have been raising our grandson since birth. I felt she made the right choice but ultimately it was her's to make. I was only pointing out the hypocrisy of 'Pro-life' that ends with the fetus. Life is life. Do you support the distribution of condoms to prevent unwanted pregnacies?

'Conservatism' is now just a politically correct word for radical change and oppression.

That's rather sad because elections hould be about policies and what's best for Canadians. Instead it's about PR and wealthy supporters. So much for democracy.

And against Dion, who they pulverized with attack ads to the point where he barely had a pulse.

Noam Chomsky? He's a philospher and not even Canadian. What does he have to do with our conservative movement?

I mentioned Ignatieff's books, not as saving souls, but just to show where this gov't's priorities lie. They're slipping in the polls so forget unemployment and the economy. Attack! Again I never used the term 'evil' and the new conservative movement is not about upholding institutions and shouldn't be about supporting a monarchy. Next to religion, monarchies have been responsible for more deaths than any disease or natural disaster, so no I don't feel all warm and fuzzy over the 82 year old head of a dysfunctional family. They are not 'divine'. They are human like everyone else and often not even good humans. As to the 'Tory' supporting Canadian institutions, like they should, they are trying to dismantle them all and those they can't dismantle Harper is suing. Tradition and prudence? Whose? The fact that we are debating religous issues on a political forum is exactly why church and state must be divided, because why would Christians want to turn people away simply because they don't hold the same political views.

Exactly. This society forgives so much when it involves religion. Often born again Christians are seeking help from their new drug of choice, like the preacher who stuffed pornographic material in mailboxes. No one will get them help because they believe that they are already being helped by God. In many cases they are just mentally ill or having a psychotic break. This story is very sad and I don't think it will end well.

I'll trade you a Jack Layton for a Jason Kenney and will even throw in a Stockwell Day. Actually, I wouldn't wish this on anyone. She must be terrified.

The debate might be about those things, but it's mostly the current gov't dodging those issues while reading statements from Ignatieff's books out loud in an attempt to discredit him. BTW: I never said 'evil'. Just hypocritical.

What exactly are you basing that on?

I don't know who George Grant is but will find out. However, abortion is a legal issue, not a religous issue in terms of government (state) intervention. I am pro-choice and while to many that means pro-abortion, it is absolutely not. The billboards with the babies is excellent. I even liked the ad that was for some reason scrapped for the superbowl about Obama and the single mom. I have no problem with any groups offering alternatives, as long as they are willing to take it past the simple birth. I am also not implying that all Christians hate homosexuals, because I know that they do not. I'm referring to the 'conservative' movement in Canada that hates the CHRC because it inhibits their rights to preach that homo-sexuality is a sin. Clerics have a great deal of power over their followers, and if simple common decency doesn't tell them that it is wrong to preach intolerance, than someone has to step in. Charitable acts are one thing, and I'm glad that you like to help out at soup kitchens, etc. My sister is on the board of our local one and it is very successful. However, while it is not the gov't's responsibility to save our souls, it is their responsibility to protect their citizens. Social programs are a must, and meaningful attempts to keep all citizens fed should always be a priority. Hunger is the basis of revolutions, so keeping the wolf away from their door, might keep them away from yours.

Exactly, though 'hippies' rather dates you. I haven't heard that term in decades. However, even a 'hippy' who is pro-choice is probably more 'pro-life' than the anti-abortionists, because they care about things like war and poverty. 'Pro-lifers believe that life begins at conception but then can end whenever the hell it wants. It's no longer their problem. Starve, get slaughtered. Who cares? Just don't raise his taxes.

I don't blame Stephen Harper for this, but the new conservative movement in general. The CHRC was established to deal with discrimination and have been the thorn in the side of the movement ever since. When I listen to why they hate the CHRC so much, it boils down to the fact that some (and fortunately much fewer than people believe) churches feel that they have been forbidden from preaching their beliefs, mainly that homosexuality is a sin and an 'abomination'. This inhibits their 'freedom of speech'. But if I say that churches are wrong and any preacher who promotes this type of intolerance is guilty of a hate crime, I'm persecuting Christians, despite the fact that I'm only persecuting hate based on narrow minded beliefs. This is not a religous issue. Homosexuality is not a crime, nor should it be, and the gay community have a right to protection. The same thing should happen to the preacher who fires up anti-gay sentiment as it would if he railed against blacks. He should be arrested because he's violating the laws of the land. The conservatives did not invent intolerance, but shouldn't legitimize it. Church and state must be divided. Politicians need to be concerned with things like the economy, the environment, healthcare, etc. Things that affect ALL Canadians. Saving our souls is not part of the job description.

There is indeed hate and intolerance in Canada, but it shouldn't be fueled by our government.

It's more than that really. The new 'conservative' movement is not conservative at all; but use subterfuge and hypocrisy to promote their own agendas. They cry 'freedom of speech' and attack the CHRC for trying to suppress that freedom, which is subterfuge for their desire to spread hatred toward homo-sexuals. Then, when other so called 'lefties' speak out against religion, they cry persecution, and demand they not be afforded the same 'freedom of speech'. They claim to be 'Pro-Life', but you would find few at a Peace Rally, an anti-poverty demonstration, or handing out clean needles to stop the spread of the deadly Aids virus. In fact a popular battle cry is 'stop the welfare state' and 'why should our tax dollars support social programs'. In other words, they want the babies to be born, but once they're here their work is done. They can starve or be victims of war and it's not their problem. Children only get their protection at the fetus stage. They've just created too many wedge issues, so that lifelong conservatives like myself have no place under the big tent. I'm now camping someplace else.

I'm mentioning it in my list of priorities for party policy. They've asked the grassroots to submit items for the May convention. Asbestos is horrible stuff.

I spent some time reading the posts and perceived goals, and I've concluded that they are more socially conservative than actual conservative. Instead I'm working on my own site for homeless conservatives. I'm calling it 'Pushed to the Left and Loving It', to promote Red Tory priorities. The emphasis will be on the separation of church and state, smaller government, elected or no senate, and a restriction on the number of cabinet posts to 25. I find that today's 'conservative' is just a politically correct term for the self-righteous, who promote an agenda of intolerance and hate. So not Canadian.

Are you referring to Harper's complete betrayal of conservative principles to keep his job?

There is. Green or NDP.

He sure spent through a 13 billion dollar surplus fast enough. Created a glutton of a cabinet and appointed 18 senators during an economic crisis. These actions had nothing to do with a majority or minority. They were careless wastes of money and a complete flip-flop of what he claimed to stand for.

No. Actually I only started voting NDP when the PCs were swallowed up my the Alliance-Reform. I voted for Kim Campbell and was sorry she wasn't given more of a chance. I only voted NDP in 2004 and 2006. Liberal in 2008 as part of strategic voting and will again in 2009 because Michael Ignatieff now more closely represents my views.