Chimera

From Wikipedia: Is that really the definition of a dud? Three years in print and still on the bestseller list? In my view, you seem overly concerned with denigrating Mr Brown's novel. You didn't like it. Get over it.

You see that's the thing about our charter of rights. Either everybody has them or no one has them. If you are allowed to force these people to assimilate, what happens when someone bigger and stronger (or more populous) comes along and forces you to change your ways? I will assume you oppose the language laws in Quebec. The funny thing is, what you are recommending is pretty much the same thing. You feel your society is threatened by this display of religion and diversification (english language in PQ). The only way you know how to fight back against it is to ban it. Again, I don't think Canadian values are going to fail simply because of Kirpans and turbans. And if it is so fragile, is it worth saving? So.....What was your take on the proposed handgun ban again??

If the SCC had upheld the absolute ban on Kirpans, then even these would not be allowed. Would that be just? The decision still does not prevent schools from banning them on a case by case basis, it just means they are not banned outright. Is our society and culture so fragile that a few turbans will destroy it? I used to think like you when I was younger. Then I met a few Sikhs while I was in the army. They wore their turbans, but it did not make them any less of a Canadian soldier. It is actually the idea of the multicultural society that Trudeau envisioned, and I now agree with. These Sikhs have integrated into our society, while still being allowed to practice their own religious beliefs. If you take away their freedoms of religion, they will resent our society, and never integrate, they will always be outsiders. IMHO, that is more dangerous to our society than a million turbans in our forces.

The Kirpan The banning of all Kirpans would include these necklace Kirpans. I admit that I have not seen one personally, but I would not have an issue with a child wearing a necklace with a tiny kirpan on it. Seems to me like it would be less dangerous than some of that freaky studded gothic wear crap I see kids wearing around. This decision does read like individual Kirpans can still be banned though, if it were long enough to be considered a potential threat. And for all of you who seem so worried about your kids (bear with me, not saying it's a bad thing), you must be old enough to have carried pocket knives to school. I know I did. It was never taken from me, and I never even thought about using it when I got in fights. Were we somehow more responsible back then?

Showing that freedom cannot be suppressed through intimidation, is what was gained IMO. I think that was the message that resounded all over Europe. What message do you think will we give to everyone if we back down and capitulate and give up some rights just because a group decided to intimidate us through violent means? That violent intimidation works! It wouldn't be long before other zealot fanatics...not necessarily muslims...but every other group fighting for whatever cause they're fighting for will be following this violent means! The freedom of the Canadian press was never in jeopardy over this. Noone has told them that the cartoons cannot be printed. The problem is that the people printing these cartoons are in no personal danger. They are stirring up sh!t for no reason. It is our soldiers, and others overseas who will have to deal with the consequences. Look at it from another angle. If a newspaper discovered the name of an informant against the hells angels, would you expect them to print it? NO. To do so would endanger someone's life needlessly. Reprinting these cartoons is effectively doing the same thing to all westerners in muslim countries.

Yes, I am quite intolerant of sexism. I am also intolerant of racism and bigotry. And no, I do not make any apologies or withdrawals regarding assaulting those who insult my family. lol...I did last time...maybe next time I'll vote green *sigh* I miss the Rhinoceros party. I'm definitely a Sens fan, but any team that beats the Leafs is ok in my books. Even if the Sens win the cup this year, it will be an empty victory if they don't face the Leafs in the playoffs.

You seem to have a litlle problem with reading comprehension skills there shoop. Let's review them, now take your time if you have to: And you're probably still wondering why central Ontario and Toronto voters think big "C" Conservatives like you are social neanderthals. hmm let's see now "the only poll she'd have a chance with would be on a stage". Now, maybe you're only thirteen and have never been to a strip club, so I'll fill you in: they have brass polls on stages where women dance naked. (pssst....that is what was inferred by the way) Then I went on to say "you're probably still wondering why central Ontario and Toronto voters think big "C" Conservatives like you are social neanderthals". Now, in case you haven't been paying attention lately, there has been a fair amount of discussion on here as to the "stupidity" of Ontario (and Toronto in particular) voters because they refuse to vote for the conservatives. One of the main reasons for that is that these voters are social liberals. Comments attacking MP's as whores (even if not meant in a sexual way) make the perpetrators seem anti-women. This does not go over well with ontario voters. They see these people as social neanderthals... Still with me...probably not, but let's continue anyway. What's the matter there shoopy, missed that little prerequisite there. Now, I am not by nature a violent person, however i do have a temper. If you call my wife/daughter/sister a whore, that will set it off. The point that I was making, and I do believe Sage understood it, is that it doesn't matter how you intend a remark. What matters is how it is received. Try telling your mother/wife/girlfriend tonight that she looks phat. Wait for the reaction, then tell her you meant phat with a "ph". See what I'm getting at. Well, probably not. Anyway, the way these comments (including wanting to see her naked, how come no-one has said they want to see Petey boy naked?) are tossed around flippantly here leads me to believe that the originators seem to think of women as second-class. Then you complain when the toronto media portrays big "C" conservatives as sexist and socially backwards. You can't have it both ways.

I'll be moving to Calgary soon. Until then, I'll be in Collingwood, ON. I take it this means you agree that whore is derogatory towards women?

Semantics, my dear sage, semantics. I do cede your point that by using certain proper textbook definitions, it does not have to be a sexist word. Nonetheless, if you call my wife/daughter/sister a whore, I would not stand there and contemplate the many different definitions and possible variances. I would be more likely to beat you. And I'm not refering to rythm. Yes, it will be interesting to see what the future holds for Belinda.

I fully agree with Geoffrey on this one. In most cases, it seems to me that media bias is a reflection of the readers own leanings. For instance, the articles about Harper's speech to that American group from so many years ago. Conservatives saw that as a bias against Harper, even though it was true. On the flip side, the whole Martin CSL not paying Canadian taxes. Again true, but Liberals see it as being anti-Martin. "you'll find that many of the truths we cling to depend on a certain point of view" (or something similar) -Obi Wan Kenobi

The answer to your first question, is no. I suggested nothing of the sort. What I implied was that Toronto is more socially liberal. Having lived in both Ottawa and Toronto, that is my personal observation. As to your second question, WTF are you going on about??? You sound like Parizeau after the lost referendum "money and the ethnic vote". Bigot. So sexist comments are a form of social progression where you're from?

And therein lies the crux of the problem. And you're probably still wondering why central Ontario and Toronto voters think big "C" Conservatives like you are social neanderthals.

lol to answer the original question, my wife and I tend to discuss our views, but vote our own ways when the time comes (might change if we had wee ones).

i never mentioned rights... i pointed out that this conservative candidate was belittling gays. i see no need for that. nor for belittling women as he did. he is entitled to his own personal views, but perhaps he should explain to the public that those views will not override the wishes of his constituents. August... i am using this quote as an example to why many socially liberal canadians (and ontarians in particular) are leery of the conservatives. we see quotes like this in the newspapers and it leads many to believe that it is a widely held view within the conservative party. one of the ladies at work will not vote conservative because she is afraid that they will remove a womans right to choose (abortion). i believe that many women probably share that view. harper doesn't help the cause either by not explaining his own personal views on abortion.

= Godwin's Law

I call Godwin's Law.

Unfortunately, it seems that many of the conservative candidates are far from socially liberal: G&M article I particularly like this quote: Wow. belittling homosexuals AND women at the same time. There's social progress for you. I think it is time for a change to a FISCALLY conservative gov't, however, many Canadians are afraid of the social conservatism baggage that appears to be coming along for the ride.

Methinks you should rephrase that to "Harper's desire to actually make a conservative parliament work". If the liberals were to somehow pull off a win, Harper would behave the same as last term (if he wasn't booted out).

I have suggested raising the GST to 10%, and eliminating income tax as the best way to help those in the lower tax brackets. If one makes minimum wage, who cares how a 1-2% reduction in GST affects the price of a mink, a jaguar and a pail of caviar. (Just don't let the mink and the Jaguar fight over the pail of fish eggs) But the lowest income earners pay no income tax, so as a percentage of income....regressive tax and all. As for day to day goods, if you don't think reducing the GST will amount to anything of value, can I have all of your pocket change everyday too??

BINGO. There are only two instances when politics really make headlines: elections and scandals. Young people have become discouraged and believe that if the politician isn't crooked she will become so. It also doesn't help that most politicians are stuffy old self-styled aristocrats.

I think he was trying to tell you that the only place your "income-equality utopia" exists (or ever could exist) is in third world countries.

Honourable?? Since when do honour and politics mix? I definitely agree with you though. Any public official should step aside when they are the subject of a criminal investigation.

Where did you find thatpart of the policy? I just looked on the lib website, useless. I had not heard that part of it, and it is somewhat disturbing. Toronto Star Thanks August. I would like to see the actual policy on this one as well though. Does the student forego the tuition tax credit only on the $3000 or the whole thing? Does the student foregoe the tax credit for all four years? They seem to be quite vague on this issue. Any further insight into this would be appreciated.

Where did you find thatpart of the policy? I just looked on the lib website, useless. I had not heard that part of it, and it is somewhat disturbing.

My favourite quote from the debate was Layton telling the Libs/Cons that their guarantees weren't worth the paper they were written on. Reminded me of the line from the movie Tommy Boy: "The reason why they have a guarrantee on the box is because they know all they sold you is a guarranteed piece of sh!t. Hell, I can take a crap in a box and slap a guarrantee on it for you, if that's what you want." Aside from that, not impressed enough by any of them to earn my vote yet.