lictor616

Tories are more centrist anyways. But what I would say would perhaps offend some party bosses (who know which side their bread is buttered on), but many ordinary Canadians who vote Conservative share many of the opinions stated here. A majority of canadians oppose third world immigration. A majority of them reject multiculturalism (albeit not very vocally for fear of racism smears).

Yes its nice.... it just hasn't been used in regards to multiculturalism and immigration restriction.

how fitting it is that the guy calling others "ignorant" here has as his signature: "The enemy advances, we retreat; the enemy camps, we harass; the enemy tires, we attack; the enemy retreats, we pursue." - Mao Tse-Tung on how to defeat the more powerful enemy through guerrilla warfare. "Did you know that today 27,000 children will die of preventable diseases such as diarrhea, measles, and malnutrition? That's the same as if an airplane full of children crashed every 16 minutes, killing everyone onboard." - Aug. 2005 edition of 'Warcry', official magazine of the Salvation Army ??? Did you know how many millions of children died of preventable hunger under mao during his artificial famines? about 1000 times the 27 000 you quote and bemoan...

dowry prerequesites? are you out of your mind? You don't even know what you're talking about do you? DOWRY PREREQUESITES? There IS NOT 1000 different types of marriage.. you're just inventing these absurd categories... while we're on the subject you could add.. English marriages, and Jamaican marriages, blond hair marriages, midget marriage, handicap marriage, retard marriage... none of these are useful ways of differentiating marriage... Marriage is and has always been for ONE THING: child rearing... whether the union is polygamous, monogamous... the central feature found in ALL CULTURES worldwide: is CHILD REARING... whatever quirky "dowry prerequesites" (!) the immutable fact is still the PRODUCTION OF NATURAL OFFSPRING. Does a single person adopting a child count as marriage... no no word about infertile couples, or what have you... and Mesopotamian/Babylonian marriage worked the same way ours did.... except for the whole "marriage market" business. Marriage cannot have anything but a one man one woman part ... because of the whole "child rearing part"... to be sure homosexuals have existed since... well forever... but I assure you it never once happened that a homosexual couple formed a natural family together... never EVER... because its biologically impossible. If gays want to have marriage to "legitimate of make "official" their love... that's fine... but to give them tax deductions intended for child rearing... that's NOT warranted...

no, the three are precisely accurate... the difference is worth noting... either way even if you had it you're way... that would mean that there even FEWER universally valid types of marriage... how's that for shooting your ow argument in the foot?

learn how to quote properly... I said prime motivator of marriage anywhere in the world... not of all cultures...

citing real life news events... is tantamount to "ignorance" any politically incorrect opinion is somehow "ignorant" for instance to claim that all men (by the very laws of biological evolution) are UNEQUAL... is ignorant... To remind people that blacks rape white women at scandalously higher rates then white men rape black women (showing the evidence for it)... is "ignorance". To say that majority black cities are disagreeable to live in... is ignorance... If language has not become mere babbling to excite the glands of liberals... ignorance can only mean ONE THING: " : the state or fact of being ignorant : lack of knowledge, education, or awareness" How is looking at the world around us, and trying to reason from it "ignorance", why is it "ignorance" to talk about race? you know I'm starting to get really tired of people using that leery word " ignorance" in association with any statement that isn't hardcore leftist, or which may may be unflattering to certain aggrieved segments of our sacrosanct "minorities" You know what graham, its people like you ruin the world... you are a "mass man".... a lemming, who parrots the TV party line and browbeats anyone who doesn't subscribe to your point of view... its you who has blinders on your eyes to avoid looking too far into what it is not politically correct for you to look at... it is you who is ignorant and shuts down debate and rational arguments (just as this post does) because (like a REAL bigot and ignoramus) you simply assume that you are right without bothering to argue or challenge your beliefs... your comment exemplifies the kind of mob mentality that use to lead to witch hunts in the middle ages... you're against what I say not because its objectively wrong... but because its RELIGIOUSLY wrong... it contradicts your religion of political correctness. I'm not saying that you're an ignoramus in the sense that you're mentally retarded, not at all, in fact you probably learned to use much of the machinery of civilization, but you are characterized by root-ignorance of the very principles of that civilization.

most of what I say is traceable and verifiable. i try to avoid anecdotal posts to make my arguments... when I do though, I don,t presume that they constitute rock solid evidence... In this instance we were presented with an anecdote with which there was ZERO evidence to back up...

Its important to know where the BIGGEST injustices occur so that we can focus our attention to these FIRST... Usually that's how problem solving goes... I mean if child slavery goes on in togo and benin (as human rights watch reports it does) do we simply ignore it as "Injustice anywhere is still injustice, regardless of who perpetuates it" and "we all have blood on our hands"... I think that adopting a relativistic attitude is pretty hypocritical in this instance.

i'll ask again, is there a recognized feminist faction or group or committee that issues newsletters or dispatches that is outspoken on the subject?... if there is... i'd like to know its name/website ...

surely they,re not this cynically and insanely hypocrititcal in such a way! They couldn't possibly be this frightfully hateful now could they!?

um, excuse me... but, YOU WERE THE ONE WHO SAID MARRIAGE CHANGED 1000's of times... I asked you to show me how this was so... the onus therefore IS ON YOU. you are the one proposing to introduce a new conception of marriage (based on love not on the bedrock economic principle of familycraft) therefore the onus IS ON YOU to show through A and B how such a conception is legitimate and rational. Burden of proof doesn't fall on the status quo people... its up to the "changers" to give evidence and arguments TO the status quo people. Infertile couples should be of no concern... state benefits of marriage should only kick in when a couple or union produces NATURAL offspring, and we should definitely cut infertile couples out of the loop if they are defecting on the "social marriage contract" of child rearing. Its an obscene loophole that you're playing on.

Quite amazing.... I was bang on again it seems. How unfortunate.

Look at college statistics... http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editoria...aduation_rates/ "BACK IN the National Collegiate Athletic Association basketball tournament this year after just missing the title last year, Memphis coach John Calipari said, “We don’t feel we have anything to prove because we’re a different team.” One thing is not different. Memphis should not be in the tournament at all, with a 44 percent graduation success rate for its African-American basketball players. {snip} UConn also should not be in the tournament with a graduation rate of 22 percent for its African-American players and only 33 percent for the whole team. {snip} Missouri should not be in the tournament either, with a 25 percent graduation rate for black players and only 36 percent overall. black colleges have graduation rates WELL below the national average. I mean 25% graduation rate? abysmal! Yet as a general rule, people get into college if they have stable parents and access to funds... so what the problem here?

top 25 black neighbourhoods: http://higley1000.com/about-this-site/methodology/top-25-b 1/West Mount Airy - 41.2% (Higley #168) (Philadelphia, Philadelphia) 28,873 residents http://philly.everyblock.com/crime/locatio...est-mount-airy/ Mt Airy has 2.85 the national crime rate. much of these neighbourhoods are not places you'd like to live in...

no because as every educated person knowns, Jews are the chosen people and are above reproach... at least if you want to hold onto a job and not get sued by the ADL or other fraudulent defamation fronts. Until muslims get a tightgrip on mass media and "human rights" leagues... they have to settle with the abuse ...

would you agree with the statement that Islam is more detrimental to female freedom? Would you agree that the Islamic regions of the globe are MORE oppressive vis-a-vis western ones? And please, could you point out a feminist organization that is vocal and outspoken about Islamic outrages such as FGM and other barbaric and unjust mistreatment of women? I'd be quite interested in knowing.

wow, I don't have time right now to show you the obvious inadequacy of that comment... but go ahead and sample this : http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4628960 The newest phenomenon today is Blacks STILL FAILING despite being raised in the right conditions... Some of the wealthier black neighbourhoods are still plagued by the same sort of problems present everywhere in ghettos. No less a liberal public figure then bill cosby spoke out against this... Now what of genetic factors... do you think they count for ANYTHING AT ALL in determining the behavior of people?

where are all you hand wringing liberals when the tables are turned? http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....showtopic=14890 still no one replying!

lol! that was pretty jokes!

he can be optimistic can't he?

especially since his entire campaign will be based on "negative comparative suggestions"... essentially trash talking the other side without showing why you,re any better.

revolting

why again must it be "either - or", don't you agree that it can be both?

OH BUT WAIT... how many of you want to wager that soon McDonalds will be called "racist" for targeting blacks to eat their unhealthy food? Yup they'll probably be extortionned into paying BILLIONS in corporate law suits for the propensity of obese Blacks because of such a program….. Ah diversity... a mighty tricky business no? Now whitey will be responsible for blacks being fat + oppressed... I weep for the future.