CANADIEN

Unfortunately (for you, that is), evolution (as in life on Earth having evolved from primitive life forms to the current life forms is a proven FACT. That some will use it as a futile attempt to disporve - or prove - the existence of God does not change that FACT. Fortunately, most Christians know that there is no contradiction between evolution and the existence of God.

Actually, thanks should come to YOU, for the way you ignore a truth almost as certain as the turth of the existence of God - that the knowledge of His existence comes through faith. As I said beofre, feel free anytime to show the mathematic formula that proves the existence of God.

Actually, the buggy is the technology that existed at the time the Mennonites were founded. In other words, the result of science. But then, the Bible is not a science book.

Nope. As the site YOU quote demonstrates, the law is that REASONABLE alternatives needs to be considered. Not the same.

Evolution has been proven wrong. Discoveries in recent decades has shed light on aspects of the history of life that would have escaped Darwin, and have even contradicted some of the conclusions Darwin came at as to how evolution works. But this is clearly not the same as proving the theory of evolution is wrong. To prove it wrong, one should come with a SCIENTIFIC theory that totally contradict it. Those two pseudo-sciences called creationism and intelligent design don't even come close to doing that.

You do not think science and faith and opposite, yous simply reject science that does not conform to your interpretation of things. I stand corrected. Because, unlike what you are doing with evolution, they do not choose to discard inconvenient truths. Does not change the fact that they arrive to truth by taking - and I choose the word on purpose - a leap of FAITH. Feel free to show to scientific formula or theory that proves God.

Actually (kicking myself for not remembering my litterary genres right), a better term would be an allegory - a way to describe a reality known through faith, namely, that the Universe is from God, in terms that were understandable. Science will never prove or disprove the existence of God, but it has proven that things did not occur the way described in Genesis.

better let the Popes (the current and the last one) know that evolution has been proven wrong. Both (the last one in particular) said there was nothing incompatible between faith and the theory of evolution.

Because I said it. But let me rephrase it. My faith is what tells me God exist. And science is not what proves the existence of God or His non-existence. Knowing that makes me closer to the truth that you will ever be.

Correction... The thread you refer to proved that there are people who claim that science proves the existence of God. Nothing in the thread included the actual formula or scientific theory that proves God. Because there is none. Or feel free to show the equation. Until then, I will experience God through the one window to His reality - faith. If you opened your eyes and remove the glasses long enough, you would notice that I do not share Dawkins opinions on science and on God. You and him are both wrong.

Nice hairsplitting. Won't work. Ypu mean refuting that Big Bang occur, right. Which is what a lot of Bible litteralists, like you, do. And so do you. I beliee in God, but nice try. And nice try deforming the view point of the atheists. They don't say that there was nothing, or something, beofre the Big BVang, but rather that there is no answer yet to this question - and that if there was something it was not God. Why not, God inspired a wonderful methaphor known as the Genesis. Science has never be, and is not now, supportive of the deistic or atheistic vision of the Universe. It is... science.

Good thing that God revelaed itself,because what is written by some of His self-proclaimed defenders would be enough to make an atheist out of me ;-) Demanding people to prove the non-existence of something, or someone, or god, is illogical. Non-existence cannot be proven. As for the evidence supporting the Big Bang Theory, or the evolution of species... it's there for anyone to see. That atheist admit that they do not know what was before the Big bang does not change that the Big Bang did occur. Science is noone's God, and noone is cliaming it is. As for science turning on atheists... To believe that, one would have to believe that science and faith are opposite to each other... Interstingly enough, a misconception you share with at least a few atheists.

Coming soon to theatres or YouTube... The truth about immigration, produced, edited and directed by Mr. Canada. Watch as immigrantds are carefully screened at our airports and non-whites are discreetly directed to a private lounge. Recoil in horror as they are handed cheques in the ten of thousands of dollars. Feel the shiver down your spine as they are driven in their new luxury car to the mansions allocated to them, stoppping on the way at the welfare office. This groundbreaking movie will come right after the release of Mr. Canada's other masterpiece, Flying Bodily Fluids at the Gay Parade. By the way, when are you releasing it?

Genesis... what a wonderful METAPHOR on the origin of the Universe and our own...

Nah, it's because they're not white... right Mr. Canada?

Correction (no 8 - of myself). I should have specified that French is the main language of business and communications of more than one Canadian in 5. Correction (no. 9) Whether or not English is THE lingua franca of the world could be an interesting subject for a thread (with people who have a clue, that is), but is irrelevant here. Quebec is, and will remain, a part of Canada, and French is the primary business and communications language of more than 1 Canadian in 5. Get used to it. Indeed. I too would take a long time to get used to something (racist language policies) that does not exist. Correction (no. 10). Provincial governments in the past, and one today - namely, that of Quebec, have violated the rights of Canadians. Thank you for demonstrating your bigotry and ignorance once again. Well... as those with a clue know full well, I think, or more exactly I know, that choosing what Canadian language they use is the rights of Canadians. First bigotry, now just plain hatred. I haven't thought even you could sank so low. The fact we are talking about French-speaking CANADIENS, not citizens from France, and that French-speaking Canadians are not immigrants to their own country are things you will never get a clue about. But the use of the word cancer is something that would have made Goebbels think "why didn't I think of that one". Not that I would consider your ideology to be Nazi... after all, like most people and unlike you, I understand what nazi means, which is why I won't misuse the word. Correction (no 11). Official language status was enacted following a vote by the federal Parliament, a legitime institution in our democracy. And no federal party promoting that it be scrapped has ever, or will ever, win a general election. Correction (no 12). If provincial governments outside Quebec fulfilled their dream of enacted their own version of the m*nure known as Quebec language laws, there is nothing the federal government could do about it. In fact, the Government of Manioba clearly violated the Constitution for more than 90 years by refusing to even enact its laws in English and French - and the federal government did not do a thing. Fortunately enough, that kind of thing is unlikely to happen again. The provincial party that came the closest to be in a position to fulfill your dream, namely New Brunswick`s Confederation of Regions Party, could not manage to get more than an third of the English-speaking vote, and crumbled after one term. Correction (no. 13). The provincial governments already look after their own programs, and the federal program looks after its programs. Also, most ELECTED provincial legislatures have voted laws providing for at least a certain level of service in French. I haven't checked the other provinces, but none of the main provincial parties in Ontario has a repeal of the French Language Services Act on its program. Correction (no. 14) and Kids coming out of French immersion can function in English. Correction (no. 15) By your definition, you must be pretty stupid because YOU promote a language policy (namely, an Ontario version of Quebec's language laws) that would be clearly discriminatory. And try to build ENGLISH sentences, will you? A lot has already been covered. Mostly by you. Don't blame other for the fact that you still have not proven your claims nor can you prove them. There is no need to create yet another thread on this. Feel free to try to demonstrate your claim with actual wording from the Constitution or federal law. You mean, I cannot sink to your level of cluelessness, ignorance and bigotry. As for my so-called inferiority complex, you obviously (no surprise here) do not have a clue. As a French-speaking Canadian, I have no reason to feel inferior, or superior, to any other Canadian because of my Canadian language of choice.

Thanks for proving (again) that you have no clue what fascism is and what nazism was. fortunately for you, about everyone with a clue has stopped taking you seriously a long long long time ago.

Trying the old `French-speakers are more likely to be able to speak english than Ènglish-speakers are able to speak french, so official binlingualims unfairly favour the first over the second`? But that mesure, Anglophones in Quebec are unfairly favored at the expense of Quebec French-speakers, since they are way more likely to be fluent in the other language even without leaving the province. Needless to say, I find the argument unconvincing.

The part he quotes is itself a quote word for word of the Official Languages Act (1985). He takes everything from an article ABOUT the Act though, instead of going to the Act itself. Again, i don't he even bothered to read the Act itself.

Correction. What he quotes is not the Act. I doubt he has even bothered to actually read it. Please stop insulting bulls.

It is much more than that: Pay special attention to (.^ Actually, I would suggest that YOU pay special attention to the actual TEXT of the Act itself, instead of taking a commentary on the Act and distort it. Here it is for your viewing pleasure. The Act You never heard about those times when French-speaking Canadians outside Quebec were FORCED to attend English-only schools? Of course you haven't, which is why you keep saying it was a good thing that it was done. Speaking of imposing the English language (which is your dream, admit it), may I suggest you start by writing sentences that actually respect the structure of the language, unlike the last one? Feel free to say that to Burmese, Chinese, Iranians languishing in prisons and being tortured for daring to express an opinion different from that of their Government. I am sure that local governments will be happy to pay you to do a speaking tour of their jails to spread your message - after all, they still recognize the value of comic relief.

Correction. There qare many language spoken in Canada and the English language is the primary business language of business and communications of most canadians. Yet, another Canadian language, French, is the primary language and communications. BTW, nice way of avoiding the FACT, which you approve of, of past violation of the linguistic rights of Canadians. Corrction (no 2) What Canadian language(s) are used for the services provided by provincial governments is the responsibility of each provincial Legislature, like in Ontario where the ELECTED Legislative Assembly rightfully decided that provincial services should be offered in English and French. Similarly, what Canadian language(s) are used for the services provided by the federal government is the responsibility of the Federal parliament. Time you brush up on the actual working of the Constitution. Correction (no 3). The propagation of the English language in Canada is nation building to the extent that it does not infringe on the rights of Canadians to choose another Canadian language. Only a bigoted ignorant mind would think that defending the rights of Canadian is divisive. But then, we are talking about you. I wonder what is the worse in this statemnt of yours: its hypocrisy, or the sheer stupidity of said hypocrisy. Both English and french are Canadian languages that are sufficiently spoken throughout this country to warrant official status, which as had been demonstrated by others has its roots in our history. If you actually believe that this discriminates against speakers of other languages (which everybody on this site who as a clue knows is just hypocritical nonsense on your part), feel free to indicate which languages and why. Why should other provincial governments refuse to imitate discriminatory polcies enacted by the Quebec government? Duh. Because they are discriminatory, that's it. Feel free to admire those policies. I don't, never have, never will. Correction (no 4). The difference between then and now is that federal legislation recognizes Canadians as equal. Only the cluessless (meaning you) sees that as racism. When you can find a federal or Ontario language law that is actually racist, let me know. That should occur the day after the next Stanley Cup win by the Maple Leafs. Correction (no. 5). Quebec simply used different methods in trying what other provincial governments had tried in the past (remember, those school laws you admire so much while denying provincial governments outside Quebec ever did something like that). As to why no provincial government should go down that route again, see above. Correction (no. 6). You have CLAIMED that there is language discrimination by the federal government, but have yet to provide any proof of it before your ramblings and those of otherbigoted ignoramus. As for your demonstration of language discrimination by the Quebec Government, it is mostly a tool to express your jealousy that similar m*nure does not exist in Ontario. Correction (no 7) and big laugh I am not miffed by the fact that more Canadians speak English than French. Is anyone is miffed, it is YOU because this is 2011, French-speaking Canadians are not second class citizens in this country and you don't have laws that would virtually ban French. Mind you though, there is one thing I have given hope of ever being able to comprehend. The depth of your cluelessness.

as long as it was English, right? Except laws and regulations banning French or First Nation languages from schools, to name one example. You applauded them, remember? That Canadians be able to decide what Canadian language they are educated in, and communicate with their government in. Something neither the PQ or you wany. Education laws and regulations, remember? Actually, some have. You yourself have demanded that English be made "the sole official language. The difference being simply that other Canadians can now choose another Canadian language. Nothing more, and nothing less. French-speaking Canadians are not an elite group but Canadians, simply, no more, and no less. BTW, there are still more English-speaking Canadians than French-speaking Canadians in this country, but then maths (like logic) has never been a strong suit of yours. Correction... The only english-speakers in this country whose rights are being violated are those in Quebec, thorugh the same kind of òne-language only accepoted`policies you have saoid you want for Ontario. Not surprinzingly, you have not demonstrated that anyone's right is violated by federal language legislation. For a simply reason - none are violated.

If I were you, I wouldn't worry too much about Argus. Actually, considering the long list of people he dislikes (gays, Blacks, Muslims, immigrants, the poor, anybody to the left of Attila the Hun), I would feel left out if he didn't have anything to say against Quebecers or French-speaking Canadians in general.

Hear hear on all counts. Quebec's difference is no justification for a veto right that does not exist and is not needed.