SocDem

I wouldn't say Romans didn't care about Christianity....They kind of eventually spread it over the entire Roman Empire, but I think I get the jist of what you are trying to say, so I will let that one slide. Jesus was a good man. To the poor. He didnt really like the rich too much, but who does? Eye for an Eye? I thought Christianity was about turning the other cheek! PS: The Roman "religion" before Christ was Polytheistic, meaning they didnt just worship Jupiter. I know, I know, you were just trying to make I point. A very illogical point. But a point nonetheless.

Now, now, lets not make this a spelling and grammar class. Your use of punctuation really doesn't solidify your postion as the grammar police. Keep the insults to at least insulting someone's mother, not there spelling.

Yes it is taxes she didn't pay before. Taxes people on the left called her on during the campaign. She would have to pay when she leaves office and it was audited. She however didn't pay it or claim it at the time. Also why doesn't she make it public Shady? Why is it a big secret what and how much she owes? Don't blame you though you voted for Palin right? It's for last year either it is for the last 2 years.

9 out of 200+ is not several. In is a very small minority. It is less in percentage then the Senate republicans who voted for it.

Don't Blame Shady he voted for Palin. http://www.adn.com/palin/story/693695.html

The RCMP is serious business.

This was pure politics. Before his support he made it clear to establish this budget as one that wasn't a Liberal budget. Ignatieff couldnt guarantee a win now, so he will wait a bit and when the budget proves largely ineffective (which it most likely will) he can proclaim Harper's wrong doing and that he gave them a shot, while not being lumped in with the left (Layton). Besides did we really expect more from someone with such great foresight as to base his entire political career on the invasion of Iraq?

Hate to tell you Barts, but the old Reform wing of the Conservatives, really control the Conservative Party right now. And if they dont want Harper giving Quebec goodies, not only will he not get a majority, he wont be leader of the party any more. The small c's are not too thrilled with him right now, why would he alienate the only wing of the party that supports him......wait he did that today with the budget. Oh well.

A Referendum on the matter? That would just be a waste of tax payer money, as it would overwhelmingly be shot down. Face it, capital punishment is a way of the past not because we are immoral, but because it doesnt work and industrial progressive societies are above a vindictive vengeful justice system

Is the prison system a broken system? Maybe. But It is clear that nation and states that enforce capital punishment have a higher crime rate than those who do not. Actually read the article I posted. So if you agree all you want is a vindictive system. That is not moral high ground. I believe it was Christ who said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Capital punishment isn't of Christian values. This is why people look at social conservatives as sheep.

Ok, there is no way anyone believes this. Opt out of the UN huh? What would that accomplish? Lets ask Mussolini, or Hitler. Capital punishment doesnt prevent crimes, there is evidence to the contrary: Link: http://www.deltacollege.edu/org/deltawinds...athpenalty.html Limiting abortion is limiting civil liberties. Closing borders, a bigger military, it sounds to me as if your Utopia is a police state.

Wow, the agenda of the secularist is purposefully immorality because we hate Canada so much. I assume by traditional common sense you mean tenements of the bible such as stoning non believers and sodomites to death and giving away all our money because it is easier for an elephant to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter heaven right? By the way Jesus also said that his followers could drink poison and not be harmed by it, try that out and see how it works.

He didnt really cut funding though, he just moved it to other programs.

Then Harper needs to role back those big corporate tax cuts. I dont mind spending, but I dont like spending money we dont have.

I dont like the idea of spending more and more without an increase in the income coming into the government. No Canadians want five years of deficits and that is if you still believe in Flaherty which I do not.

I don't see McKay as winning a leadership convention. Especially if another conservative from the maritimes were to throw there hat in the race (Lord anyone?). The conservative branch of the party has taken it over, and I'd expect to see someone at least with some social conservative principles win a convention with small c vote splitting.

He doesn't have a beard, he has a mustache, an incredible manly mustache....

Someone needs to go back to civics class! In Canada we do not vote for a prime minister. We vote for specific candidates in our specific riding. These are known as our representatives. The representatives are usually in a party. That party picks a leader. In the Conservatives case, they picked Stephan Harper, and as the Conservative representatives make up more of the House of Commons than any other political party, there leader, again in this case Stephan Harper, becomes Prime Minister. However, in some special cases, like the one that just recently arose, if parties decide to group together and make a "coalition government", that means there representatives choose to do so. So, that coalition party now makes up more of the House of Commons than the previous party, then there leader, in this case Stephan Dion would become Prime Minster. Hence is a Representative Democracy.

You do understand in theory that communism is suppose to be a classless society right? Subordination, ok yeah your right, hierarchy, within a single party state, yeah I'll give you that one. But generally the class system is most prevalent in a free market capitalist society. And you are missing the point of a secular society, its not to protect the state from the church, its to protect the church from the state. Its to make sure that those wishing to abolish religious institutions can not do so from a political stand point. We have tried theocracies in the world, and like a communist or socialist state, they simply haven't worked. Lets look to the middle east right now, the true theocracies of the world, you can see that and think that they have it right? No, its modern secular societies that allow for growth of the populace, will of the people and true freedom to reign.