Cartman

I have never voted Liberal in any election and I highly doubt that I ever will. Having said that, in several threads on this forum, people keep saying how they stole elections using scare tactics. If this is the case, then all opposition parties and politicians are really stupid to keep losing the same way over and over. What mystical knowledge do the Liberals possess to continuously claim the hearts and minds of Canadians? Is the opposition too stupid or too moral to use these tactics themselves? Let's face it, the Liberals have generally represented what Canadians want in government while the oppositions generally have not. If fear is the main motivator, then fine, let it be said that they are better at calming people than are the oppositions. The NDP and the Conservatives have both tried to move to the centre and it has not worked. The Cons. have even tried several makeovers but it is the "same shit, different pile" as far as most Canadians as concerned. As much as I do not like it, we should acknolwedge that the Liberals (with all of their obvious flaws) have generally represented Canadians' views and we should stop whining about how they steal elections. Unfortunately, they win them.

If you eliminate the five principles of Canada's health care, you have US style health care. The program itself is not Canada, but the principles underlying it are part of our general value system. The stakes are so high here that I tend to believe her accusations if spun a little. But, you do not need to take her word for it, just take a look at how transfer payments have plummeted for the last few decades beginning with Trudeau. Through de-indexed bloc payments with more provincial flexibility as to how they are spent, the program had to contract. Really, she is saying nothing new here. I am a little surprised that she did not say all of this before the last election.

A little more bold and direct than I am used to but it is a key point. When I said: 'I am sure that everyone can easily think of ways in which heterosexual and homosexual behaviour is "sick".', I kinda had something like this in mind. Homosexuality is effectively demonized by association with filth. As a child, I remember hating so-called "fags" even before I even knew what the term actually meant. I think that this shows we teach hate in the guise of morality very early in life.

Where the hell is Hugo when you need him? :angry:

Having your personal information "out there" creates opportunities for mistakes and misuse. Police often warn us about identity fraud etc. Not so long ago, the feds. lost a few hard drives with our personal information and the authorities were seriously concerned for good reason. Equifax has much of your personal information and they realize that they often have improper, inaccurate information that keeps people from obtaining credit for homes, cars etc. At least they have state regulations allowing people to challenge these errors. After working in the retail industry, I KNOW that mistakes occur too often to hard working, decent people. What if a foreign state used this information for racial profiling purposes or security purposes and you were mistakenly detained at a border crossing or airport and labeled a threat? As a Canadian, you would likely have no recourse to challenge the allegations. What if it was somehow mistakenly determined that you possibly constituted some sort of a health threat and the state wanted to conduct medical tests upon you? Bureaucracies do make mistakes and these mistakes can be very damaging. Two examples from Gary T. Marx "A Massachusetts nursing home resident lost her eligibility for government medical assistance because of a match of bank and welfare records...she had more than the minimum amount welfare recipients are permitted in a savings account. What the computer did not know was that the money was held in trust for a local funeral director". "The Educational Testing Center uses profiling to help discover cheating. In 1982, it sent out 2,000 form letters alleging 'copying' to takers of its scholastic aptitude test based partly on computer analysis...Students were told that in two weeks their scores would be canceled and colleges notified, unless they provided 'additional information' to prove they had not cheated". How do you prove you did not cheat? I have nothing to hide, but I would rather not be videotaped when in the changeroom or bathroom. When the federal government tries to make people register their guns, people are up in arms freaking out claiming that the information might be misused for other purposes. You should be more concerned when your medical records are being handed out to a foreign company. Whether you have something to hide is not the issue here. What is at stake is your privacy and freedom. More personal information being disseminated means more mistakes and less freedom.

I highly doubt anyone will convince you otherwise, but the question is whether people should be able to live in peace whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. This should be pretty easily understood coming from a nation that values individual liberty and freedom and is currently sending people to their deaths for that objective. As August has said, "I do not agree with what you say (or do), but I would fight to the death for your right to say (do) it" I do not understand why you have such an emotional reaction to this issue. I mean really, who cares what others do in their own home?

I do not know why I like the colour blue. I doubt that it is biologically fixed and I am not sure that it is just choice. I really do not care because there is no reason for me to justify this to anyone. I am surprised by the number of "biologists" in this thread. The assumption consistently is that heterosexuality has a purpose and that purpose is reproduction. As someone said earlier, that may be a result not a purpose. I highly doubt that most sexual encounters are intended to produce children. Can someone offer me the biological function/purpose of the human chin? I very highly doubt anyone can since biologists have not been able to do so. People are confusing effect with purpose and they are not the same thing at all. Prediction? Without biological variance, our species would be eliminated. That is why species are placed on the endangered list even though there are some living in captivity and thousands may still exist in the wild. Once genetic traits are eliminated, it is only a matter of time before the entire species is gone. Rather than consider homosexuality as biological deviance, perhaps it is just different and even important. I am sure that everyone can easily think of ways in which heterosexual and homosexual behaviour is "sick".

Let's face it...Alberta does have some of the best social programs including health care, but not because of some mystical leadership quality. It is simply because of oil revenues. Even George W. Bush could not have screwed up this economy... I think.

But bad things do exist even within markets. Markets are not always rational. At times, they contract greatly and people suffer. Sometimes, the state must close stock markets or risk a collapse (rare, but it does happen). Anti-trust exists for a reason. In any case, I think the argument here is that competition was excessive for many and they felt compelled to open even if it was not very profitable. Personally, I was very shocked that the vote took place and turned out the way it did.

Perhaps that is part of it, but I think that there is a belief that one had better dearly protect what they have accumulated (wealth and power etc), because there is always the distinct possibility of losing it. I suppose it is the same thing stated differently, but fear is a great motivator.

I think that you should ask male and female professors about how students evaluate them. Female professors will tell you that they often receive unwanted comments about their appearances while male profs. rarely receive these kinds of comments.

I think for many businesses, the issue is not about Sunday profits per se, it is about making sure that you do not give your customers a reason to try out your competitors. IME, Sundays were always the worst retail day of the week. Also, many stores remain open because of agreements they make with the Malls in which they operate.

Thanx BD, nearly lost my coffee on that one.

Neal, the flaws in your arguments are being confronted by both the left and the right for the very same reasons. You advocate highly interventionist policies (morality) yet proclaim that individual rights are paramount. This seems rather inconsistent.

The only way that such a disproportionate number of homosexuals could be adopting at such a high rate is if adoption laws had suddenly changed resulting in a temporary increase (in the rate of homosexuals adopting). For example, if an homosexual ban were lifted and that day or so out of the 10 adoptions completed, 4 were by homosexual couples. But, the statistic provided leaves a very different impression. Even if this state has say 5 times the number of homosexuals than does Canada, it would be impossible to sustain such a high rate of adoptions for long IMO, if the media can be labeled “liberal”, then it seems to me that this is the result of a neo-liberal (free market) economy where profit (greed) is so important. Personally, I find it repulsive that soap operas have been so popular when they are filled with fleeting, whimsical expressions of sexuality (lust), and jealousy (envy) . I find it offensive that there are popular “reality” shows which depict people frivolously marrying for money (greed). Jerry Springer makes a good living by exploiting vulnerable people in American society while COPS and others make illegal and sickening behaviour seem common and to be expected (sloth). The fact that people are avidly consuming these cultural products is disturbing and I highly doubt that they have absolutely no effect upon society. But, this is the result of free market economics, not Jack Layton and/or PET (statists). That is why these things exist across the globe and not just in Canada or the US.

I will not be as kind as August on this one. According to our last Census, only .5% of Canadians are homosexuals living together in committed relationships. Even assuming they ALL seek out children, how can such a small number of people account for 40% of adoptions (which the above quote states are plentiful because of immoral heterosexuals)? I have no problem with a person advocating an opinion or speculating about an idea, but I do seriously question the convictions of a senator who feels the need to manufacture evidence in order to persuade. If s/he truly has faith in the righteousness of his/her beliefs (the Truth), then why the need to grossly exaggerate the situation? At minimum, lying in this fashion is unethical and immoral, at worst it is generating fear and hatred. Neither seem very consistent with Christian ideals. Perhaps it is immoral to have no-fault divorce, sustain common-law partnerships, engage in homosexual behaviour, perform abortions or allow children to be adopted by homosexuals. If this is so, I would assume that it should be relatively easy to document empirically or qualitatively and the senator's efforts should be directed towards this objective. But a glaring willingness to deceive will not win over many. Indeed, it is likely to have the opposite effect.

Agreed. The current system is ridiculous. I also think that loopholes should be closed.

It was obvious that Hugo was saying that one's career is irrelevant on a posting board. While I disagree with a lot of what Hugo says, at least s/he thinks through problems and debates them in a civil fashion in my experience. The hatred in your post BD6 is simply sickening and demonstrates weakness and fear. Ironically, assuming that you are a member of the military and hold such beliefs, YOU HAVE ACTUALLY PROVED MANY OF HUGO'S POINTS about coercion!!

That last post was very strong August. I think that you are right about the left needing to articulate a solid understanding of and appreciation for markets and corporations. I think that the left also has to consider how to ensure that noble ideals are put into practice b/c it seems as though few tax $$ ever really get to those needing them. Having agreed with most of your post, I still think that the left and the state (some believe them to be the same thing) are important in society. We need courts, police etc. to ensure that laws are respected and IMO to balance out the worst excesses of greed (sorry Hugo ). In the US, the cost of housing and health care have skyrocketed over the past 30-40 years.

The radical homosexual media? Now I have heard everything. August said: I think you should respond to these questions. Should the state force people to marry?

No MP's thank goodness. A pox on the lot of them.

Yup, there was quite a bit of ash there and I was surprised being so far away. I had the cover off the BBQ ' and it got a little "eaten".

I am surprised that this thread is receiving so much attention. I am with Sweal on this one, low priority. If given a choice, I say keep it 'cuz I am also getting tired of this politically correct crap.

I was amazed how well everything went considering all of the regulations that they were fighting about. I do not think anyone scored a knockout blow. Anyone think that they demonstrated huge differences in their approaches? Overall, not a bad debate but the domestic policy debate should be better.

Thanx NC.