justcrowing

Well I have my tinfoil hat on ... here goes! http://www.regent.edu/acad/schlaw/lawrevie...14_2baldwin.PDF Research confirms that homosexuals molest children at a rate vastly higher than heterosexuals, and the mainstream homosexual culture commonly promotes sex with children.1 Homosexual leaders repeatedly argue for the freedom to engage in consensual sex with children, and blind surveys reveal a shockingly high number of homosexuals admit to sexual contact with minors.2 Indeed, the homosexual community is driving the worldwide campaign to lower the legal age of consent. This trend comes at the expense of our children's safety."

If memory serves me correctly, I believe he was. So much for freedom of speech. Consenting adults. Then why is the age of consent being lobbied by the Gay Group to be lowered? And wasn't Svend Robinson one of the advocates for lowering the age of consent? Wasn't he the one too who advocated the gag law?

About swingers - obviously the adults do not believe in doing their swinging privately. Oh, I forgot, it must be part of a child's education. The fun has just begun. http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/WeirdNews/2006...1377340-ap.html Soccer parents upset about swinger party ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) - Some teenage players and their parents got to see more than they bargained for while attending a Disney soccer showcase, all courtesy of about 200 swingers who were having a New Year's party at their hotel. Paul Camporini brought his wife, seventh-grade daughter and eighth-grade son from Safety Harbor, Fla., and said he had to "delicately explain to my Catholic school children that swingers change partners during the evening." "My biggest gripe is that the hotel had two distinctly different groups under the same roof," said Camporini, 49. "A soccer team and middle-aged swingers should not have been booked together." The families said the sexually adventurous partygoers sometimes flashed breasts and bare buttocks in front of the children as they sashayed through the hotel atrium. The parents described the dress at the Crowne Plaza Hotel-Airport in Orlando as "raunchy, despicable and worse than prostitutes." "We thought we were coming to Orlando, not the Las Vegas Strip," said Mark Gilbert, the father of a boy who plays on the Clearwater Chargers, a group of 13-under players from Florida. The teams booked the $92-a-night rooms for Disney's Soccer Showcase, and said hotel management did not tell them about the swingers' party or try to keep the partygoers away from the children. The kids could see through the glass atrium into the ballroom where naked people were dancing. There were exposed breasts, thongs and see-through dresses on women who were not wearing any underwear."

Don't hold your breath. As I recall, the Reform Party opted out. Then they opted back in. Why would you expect the latest batch of Conservatives to be less selfish than their Reform predecessors (or Liberals)? Or NDP - who when turfed out of power in BC gave themselves a lucrative severence packages. Wonder if the two NDPers elected took their severence and then their MPs pay? Nothing said about that!! NDP also tried to blackmail the voters by saying "elect us back and you won't have to pay severence".

To add - nor does one have to be religious to want tradition maintained which does not in any way take away anyone's "so-called" rights.

What all these minority rights boil down to is that it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds. Anyone notice how masterfully this is being achieved? According to socialists we should have no social order or traditions - anything goes because it is a right. The fire has been lit by our Charter.

Consenting adults. Then why is the age of consent being lobbied by the Gay Group to be lowered? And wasn't Svend Robinson one of the advocates for lowering the age of consent?

From what I've read I believe it was deliberate - not to mention sour grapes. I noticed it on the ballot and was taken aback for a moment. However, knowing my candidate I knew where to place my vote. Why was it on the ballot to begin with? They never campaigned or even produced any policies. Orchard is nothing but an NDPer posing as a Conservative. Shame on him so agree scriblett tht this was deliberate.

This should make those who retired on less than $20,000 happy especially those who have a percentage of their pensions clawed back by government if their income is a bit above the poverty level. Do you think these MP pensioners will be subject to any clawbacks? Somehow I doubt it. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ialNewTory2006/ Hefty pensions ease the fall y TERRY PEDWELL Tuesday, January 24, 2006 Posted at 6:53 PM EST Canadian Press Ottawa — Taxpayers needn't shed a tear for members of Parliament who were defeated in Monday's federal election or left politics before the vote: they stand to collect $74.6-million in pensions and severance. Four of the 67 retiring MPs — all of them Liberals — could each collect more than $3-million before they turn 75, estimates calculated by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation suggest. Shed no tears for retiring or defeated MPs. They are being well looked after by Canadian taxpayers.” The biggest annual pension recipients include Liberals Ethel Blondin-Andrew, at $137,820, and Don Boudria, at $135,906. Outgoing Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan is set to receive more than $100,000 annually. Ms. Blondin-Andrew would collect the most of any MP if she lives to 75, with her pension and severance package estimated to total $3,797,929. Two MPs — Independent Bev Desjarlais and Odina Desrochers of the Bloc Quebecois — will collect the smallest pensions, each receiving just over $40,000 annually. Exact pension and severance figures are kept secret by the federal government under the Privacy Act. However, the formula for making the calculations is publicly available. The basic formula is far from basic. It's based on how many years an MP was in office before departing, multiplied by compounding interest rates that differ from one term to another, and multiplied again by annual salary, averaged over the five-year period during which the MP earned the most.

Highly unlikely since Martin resigned. Also, too much Liberal baggage and who knows what the Conservatives may well uncover and this is Martin's graceful opportunity to distance himself.

And I don't plan on losing any sleep over this issue. When a man with a natural penis becomes pregnant by another man and gives birth to a baby, I will congratulate them on their "marriage". Same goes with two lesbians & ladies no cheating with artificial insemination. Have a nice day!!

http://www.journalism.ubc.ca/thunderbird/a...en_agendas.html In Hidden Agendas: How journalists influence the news, Lydia Miljan and Barry Cooper argue that “it is not just random variation that shows that some media coverage favours one side or the other. …Journalists do influence news coverage and that coverage does move in a certain direction.” According to the authors, the news is headed Left. Starting from the premise that “cultural critics” have not yet successfully and empirically shown that media owners are responsible for bias in the media, Miljan and Cooper conclude that the ideal of objectivity is, well, only an ideal, and that journalists themselves are responsible for left-wing bias in the media. The second part of Hidden Agendas analyses the content of news for ideological bias. The authors hypothesize: journalists are more left-leaning than the general public, so this bias must transpire in media coverage. But the methodology of this part of the study fails right form the start. The authors looked at the content of a select group of media outlets: the Globe and Mail, the Calgary Herald, Le Devoir (known as the most left-wing daily newspaper in Quebec), CBC, Radio-Canada and CTV. In choosing these, Miljan and Cooper forgot to consider what people actually read and watch. Three of the six are arguably some of the most liberal mainstream media outlets in the country (like the public CBC or the Globe and Mail) but they gave very little weight to the largest media corporation in Canada, CanWest Global. Incidentally, the study shows that the Calgary Herald (owned by Southam at the time of the study and now part of the CanWest Global conglomerate) contains the smallest amount of “left-leaning statements” among the media studied.

I will be voting CPC - We need young blood [time to put the old boys out to pasture ] and they are the best alternative.

Did you not know that the Liberal Government spent millions - billions perhaps on a gun registry. That was supposed to get the guns off the street and reduce crime and help police. Guess they never thought that criminals would not register their guns. -

Why is abortion even brought into the discussion? Surely there are more priorities that have been left on the back burner long enough. Women are getting their abortions paid for by the taxpayer - so what else is there to discuss other than that if abortion is used as a form of birth control heaven forbid they have to pay for their own & take responsibility.

Sounds like an idea that anti-abortionist Stephen Harper would like...mandatory full-term pregnancy. And I suppose one could enforce this by putting the pregnant woman in jail and monitoring her prison activities so that she's not tempted to self-abort. After all, if she committed the crime of getting pregnant, she must be compelled to serve the time. What Canada is desparately short of are children unwanted by their mothers. Do have reading comprehension problems? This would merely be an option for the father and only if he signed papers saying he would take full responsibility for the child. The discussion was not abortion, rather fathers' rights. And if you read our comments before you would have seen that we accept that abortion is a choice even if we don't endorse it. Yet another liberal misconstruing and misrepresenting what a conservative says. What a surprise! Let me see, is this is how the system works?? .... * Woman gets pregnant - it's his fault. * Woman gets pregnant, wants child - he must pay child support and fight for visitation privileges [a weekend daddy if he is lucky or harrasses him out of the child's life]. * Woman gets pregnant, doesn't want child, he does. It's her body, her choice and he cannot have the child even if he agrees to raise the child. Will the Court ask her to pay child support or enforce it in the same manner as it is enforced upon men - probably not. * End result - Canadian equality the Liberal way.

Those comments supposedly made by the Mayor have been circulating via email for over a year now. So what else is new? Also, what does it have to be with being a Conservative since I received such an email from a staunch socialist. I am not a religious person but I do love Christmas celebrations and have refused to purchase any cards which said "Happy Holidays" or "Seasons Greetings". I celebrate Christmas with my christian friends and members of family - some are Conservatives but others are not. If other ethnic groups can celebrate their religious holidays, why should Christians not celebrate theirs. I think this political correctness has gone too far. Political correctness does more to divide people of this country today than when we had a time where the traditions of this country were not eroded. I fully expect that the Liberals would even make it a criminal offence to celebrate Christmas - sounds kinda like communism.

And people think the pro-choice people will allow that? Yeah ... right. Its her body and her choice. To them we're sperm donors. Never mind it took two irresponsible parties. I think if I get a woman pregnant and I want to take the child as my own to raise even though she doesn't, I should be able to compel her to take it to term barring medical complications that would endanger the mother's life. If she decides she wants to have visitation she has to pay me support. That's equality if I ever saw it. I agree with you here but you know equality is a one way street in this instance and the feminists who have a strong hold on the Liberals nor the Liberal government would ever agree to a male ever having a choice other than to pay support or pay emotionally. Senator Ann Cools tried hard to have changes for more equality but it never came to pass. Therein lies the problem with pandering to special interests. Equality is never enough. Abortion is a touchy subject however, there are few stats, if any, as to why abortions are sought. An area I question is this - is every abortion a threat to a woman's life or it it a rape or are most of them a form of taxpayer funded birth control? When the survey began in late 1969, a woman could only obtain an abortion for health reasons. In 1988, with the removal of abortion from the Criminal Code, a reason for obtaining an abortion was no longer required. http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/analysis/020703.html Medically Unnecessary Statistics from Planned Parenthood reveal that only 3% of abortions are performed because the mother has possible health problems [1]. This leaves the clear majority of abortions being performed for reasons other than a physical threat to the life of the mother. This fact was reiterated by Marilyn Wilson, the executive director of the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League (CARAL), in her statement to a House of Commons Finance Committee in October of 2001. She stated that women who seek abortions: "... do so for socio-economic reasons. Sometimes it is a desire to complete their education and become financially independent. In many cases, couples with children wish to restrict their family size in order to provide adequate financial support. Often, choosing abortion is a conscious decision not to become a socio-economic burden on society." and "…the decision to have an abortion is a highly moral decision on the part of women and their families and more often than not it is made because these women and their families do not want to bring children into the world who they cannot adequately support or care for." [2] Clearly, the issues listed above are not health issues, and consequently, the resulting abortions should not be paid for out of health funds that could be spent to help individuals whose health is genuinely in danger Nationwide The support for defunding is clear outside of Alberta as well. The same Leger poll mentioned above found that 51% of Canadians wanted abortion to only be publicly funded in medical emergencies [17]. Only 23% of Canadians wanted all abortions to be publicly funded [18]. A survey carried out by Environics Research in 1995 revealed that 57% of Ontario respondents believed the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) should not provide funding for abortions, and 14% believed funding should only be provided in certain cases [19]. The rate of support for delisting abortion among Saskatchewan residents in a 1991 plebiscite was 62.7% [20]. In a New Brunswick poll by Corporate Research Associates in 2001, 58% agreed that abortions performed at private clinics should not be funded by the province, while 31% said they should [21]. Costs The charge for an abortion at the Kensington Clinic in Calgary for a woman without medical insurance ranges from $480 to $930 [22]. The clinic only performs abortions up to 19 weeks gestation, so it is assumed that abortions performed at later than 19 weeks in a hospital would carry an even higher price tag for the province. In 1999, there were 10,188 induced abortions in Alberta [23]. Multiplying this number by the costs given above produces a figure of millions of dollars, resources which would be better directed towards treating patients with life-threatening concerns.

Listen today and hear me on Monday. -k The numbers are in. We gained a point overnight from 6 up to 7. Those Martin ads have been playing for a week. They must not be hitting as hard as the Liberals had hoped. Could just be they're tired of fear and smear. Either way, 13 years of misery are behind me. These next (possibly) four at least present hope for better things to come. Alright!! I hope so too that all this corruption, etc. is behind us. Time to move on towards a better Canada than we had the past 13 years.

Use the full context of the quote by Bevan was not done: Policy states: "you agree that you will not copy, reproduce, alter, modify, create derivative works, or publicly display any content (except for your own personal, non-commercial use)". http://en.thinkexist.com/quotes/aneurin_bevan/ I have searched other websites with Bevan's quotes - they all carry copywrites.

That about sums up my thinking, August. But the sky will fall! And people think the pro-choice people will allow that? Yeah ... right. Its her body and her choice. To them we're sperm donors. Never mind it took two irresponsible parties. I think if I get a woman pregnant and I want to take the child as my own to raise even though she doesn't, I should be able to compel her to take it to term barring medical complications that would endanger the mother's life. If she decides she wants to have visitation she has to pay me support. That's equality if I ever saw it. I agree with you here but you know equality is a one way street in this instance and the feminists who have a strong hold on the Liberals nor the Liberal government would ever agree to a male ever having a choice other than to pay support or pay emotionally. Senator Ann Cools tried hard to have changes for more equality but it never came to pass.

What is "Reality Check"? "You have to try to bluff the public, and the public knows and expects this. In other words, you can't say anything sensible. It's got to be all bullshit during an election campaign." That is exactly what we are hearing from the Liberals during this campaign. yuk! yuk!!

Another area Harper has no experience is in the area of CORRUPTION!! Should we be worried? Go Conservatives Go!! Get that majority.

ooops!!