mcqueen625

They are lulling Dion into a false sense of security. Once the writ is dropped BAM they'll get him. For Dion to even be credible he first needs to learn the langauge of the majority, English, and for him to give up his French citizenship. He is either Canadaian or he is not, and a for someone wanting to be teh Prime Minister they first nedd to make up their mind whether they are Canadian or French. Dion unfortunately can't make up his mind, and sees nothing wrong with holding onto the citizenship of a country of cowards, namely France.

I will vote Conservative because for once we have a government that does not want to be all things to all people. Both the Liberal and the NDP want Canadians to be beholden to government for virtually everything. Let people start making decisions for themselves for a change. The following was an article outlining a Fraser Institute Report dealing basically with big government. Fraser Institute Report Taxpayers becoming slaves for government By Klaus Rohrich Friday, April 20, 2007 It appears that the transformation of Canada's people into tax slaves is now complete. A report issued by the Fraser Institute just last week has determined that the average Canadian family's largest expenditure involves taxes. The authors revealed that the average annual income of the typical Canadian family is just over $63,000 per year. Of that food shelter and clothing account for approximately 35% (about $22,000), while taxes eat up an astounding 44.9%, nearly $30,000 per year. What's so remarkable is that every single level of government from the federal to the provincial, to the county to the municipal is clamoring for more money. What's wrong with this picture? What's worse is that most Canadians seem to have accepted both the confiscatory taxation as well as the incompetence on the part of the burgeoning bureaucracy that appears to lumber from crisis to crisis. If you think there's something amiss with our society, then chances are you're a sentient human being whose brain hasn't been poisoned by a steady diet of "Oprah" and "American Idol". The fact that providing daycare has become such an important issue, both socially and politically, is directly related to the high level of taxation with which Canadians are currently burdened. Imagine, it takes two breadwinners in a family to make ends meet. One works solely to support the crushing taxes that government has imposed on the citizens, while the other works to provide for the needs of the family. God help you if you are a single parent, because then the game gets interesting. For openers you are absolutely dependent on some form of child care, as without it you could never make ends meet. What's worse, your decisions at the polls on election day are not driven by what's best for the country, but what's best for you, as you depend to a large degree on the largesse of the government to provide or subsidize your daycare. Some months ago, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives issued an alarming report that indicated that the rich were getting richer, while the rest of us were losing ground. Somehow the report attempted to imply that the rich were getting richer on the backs of the poor. It missed the real point by a country mile. People are losing ground economically because of high taxes. In addition our tax burden is crippling us economically as it affects the overall productivity of the country. Consider that in 1961 the average Canadian family earned around $5,000 per year. Single parents were almost unheard of and most families had a stay at home mom to raise the children. Back then that family's tax burden was $1675 per year. Today, nearly 50 years later, the average family's income has increased by a factor of 12.5, but the tax burden has increased during that same time period by a factor of 18, meaning that taxes have grown at 1.5 times the rate of income. Want to venture a guess on where this is heading? Mathematically, with taxes continuing to rise at that rate and productivity continuing to fall, it is inevitable that someday families will be forced to pay 100% of their income in taxes in an effort to keep the bloated corpse we call a government from rotting away completely. It seems the Liberals were looking way ahead of the curve when they enacted their gun control legislation all those years ago. If I were a Canadian politician I wouldn't be comfortable with an armed population either. Judging by the recent budget brought down by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, I'd guess that Stephen Harper will not abolish the Gun Registry any time soon. Klaus Rohrich is a columnist with Canada Free Press. Klaus can be reached at: [email protected].

My culture believes we should pluck the eyeballs out of moral relativists. Is this cultural moray ok with you? When can you visit for your introduction to comparitive culture? Utter hogwash. What other way should we find to "deal" with it? How about getting off the fence and saying that killing civilians is wrong, period. Who cares what their "culture" says about it? It's wrong. They are wrong. Who is civilian and who is the military, that is the bigger question. The military could be that innocent kid who is walking by a check-pint with a basket of fruits or vegetables, but when this child gets close enough they detonate a bomb that is contained in the basket, the purpose of which is to kill as many people as possible. The civilians/soldiers look like everyone else. Because they do not dress in military garb does not mean that they are not enemy soldiers. This is not a conventional war where you can tell who is who by the uniforms they wear, so unfortunately many declared civilian casualties are in reality combatants.

The big problem is that aside from the large urban centres public transit is either unavailable or simply not adequate, so the majority are still forced by necessity to use their own cars. I live just outside a cith with a public trasit system that comes only to the city line, before turning around. Now tomorrow for instance I have to go to the city, but I have a doctor's appointment at 8:30am but the last bus for the city leaves at 8:30am, and the next bus is not until 1:30pm, long after I have to be in the city. So even though I would rather use the bus, it is simply too inconvenient, so I will use my car. If an adequate bus service was made available I would be willing to use it regularly instead of driving myself. The other aspect is that we have 7 day per week shopping as do many jurisdictions but our public transit system is available only Monday to Friday, and on Saturday many runs do not operate, and on Sundays and Holidays only two routes are operated, yet these clean-air freaks continue to get upset that people choose to drive their own vehilces. One of those is a city councillor and when I pointed out the inadequacy of the public transit system his simple reply is that it was not financially viable to fully run the already inadequarte system more tan the Mon. to Fri. schedule. What are people supposed to do refuse to work other than those days the transit system is available? I'm not sure, but somehow I don't think that the employer would be willing to buy into that idea.

Guthrie; Islamic scholars are defined as what? Only males, since these radicals deem that female are little more than chattel and are not allowed to be educated? Think how smart these extremists would be if they became enlightened and actually stepped out of the 7th and 8th centuries. Instead of developing their shills at building bombs and finding cowards with a screw loose to strapped these bombs around their bodies or loading them into a vehicle and deliver them with the purpose of killing as many people as possible? The crazy part is that it does not seem to matter whether those killed are also Muslims. Look at Iraq for God's sake they're targeting other Muslims for death, now that makes a lot of sense especially if their declared enemy is the West. The West is not going anywhere, and the sooner these radicals are eliminated from the world the sooner people can get back to living a peaceful existence. Just remember it was these radical who brought this fight to North America through 9/11, and for whatever reason they do not want peace, what they want is for the world to convert to this backward radicalism. Mainstream Islamists proclaim that Islam is not all about violence yet these same supposed moderates are not willing to stop the radicals, so to me the absence of their willingness to stop these radicals is in fact condoning this action. The World was appalled by the ongoing civil war in Ireland between the Catholics and the Protestants, yet this same world is now willing to make excuses for radical Islam to declare war on the West simply because they do not like the idea that Westerners are not flocking to convert to their brand of radical Islam. Talk about intolerence, when they would rather kill Westerners than to allow people the free-will to think and worship as we see fit. I am Christian, but if the only choice was radical Islam which holds no value for human life, or nothing I would choose no religious affiliation.

This used to be a big deal when Harper was back in the Reform part. Who cares, because it certainly is far less than the Liberals wasted on the failed gun-registry, and let s not forget the money they misappropriated from the taxpayers to give to their friends in the advertising business, mainly in Quebec. The greater crime is that not one politician spent a day in jail, even though it was politicians who were behind the scenes making the decisions. Chretien and a his Cabinet including Martin and the fumbler they now have as their leader, had to have known what was going on. Martin was the Finance Minister and Dion was Chretien's Quebec lieutenant, and if they didn't know they are either incompetent or deliberately turned a blind=eye, and let it happen. The Gomery inquiry was simply a whitewash, because his mandate did not allow him to find fault with any individual or organization, and it was worded that way in the instructions to Gomery. So for him to find no fault was not a surprise, those were the instructions given to him by Martin.

The Liberals are calling Baird's presentation as fear mongering, yet I just finished reading an article which cited specific examples of a damaged economy in Europe. The article talks about the huge increases in gasoline, heating oil, natural gas and energy due to Europe's attempt to meet Kyoto. The article cited a once thriving company who has had to half their workforce, and those that are left are working only two or three days per week. Due to the astronomical costs being charged for electricity, even though the power companies are reporting record profits, companies have to negotiate months ahead of time for a power rate, in order to determine how many days per week they can afford to operate. It is not because they are short of orders, in fact they say the opposite is true, they have many orders waiting, but cannot afford the power to run the factory. With the Liberal is this what we are looking at, and if it is what we will be looking at, are we at least going to get a admission that they were wrong, and the economy is destroyed? I doubt it very much, because the Liberals and the NDP have their heads in the clouds and have no clue what is going on around them. Europe is the place the Liberals would like to model Canada after, and what a disaster that would be.

So much for the UN and it's silly sanctions for Iran defying the intrnational community with regards to their nuclear ambitions. Certain people were not supposed to be able to travel, and UN Members were not supposed to encourage travel by anyone connected to Iran's nuclear capabilities. Since sanctions don't work against Iran, maybe it is time to impose them against UN Members who help rogue states skirt sanctions, of which Russia is the latest sponsor of this action. Obviously Russia because they are receiving large amount of oil from Iran they see nothing wrong in helping out Iran even though it violates sanctions which they themselves helped to draft andand water down as well as voted to put in place. Now because it does not suit their agenda, Russia sees nothing wrong with ignoring these very sanctions themselves. Maybe the UN should instead imposed sanctions against Russia, France and any other country that continues to do business with Iran, until Iran falls in line.

Quote from the Jerusalem Post; My Webpage So the U.S. and Israel were right when they asked the UN and other countries to hold off on endorsing a coalition PA Government controlled by the terrorist group Hamas. By these statement Hamas has not renounced violence and they have not acknowledged Israel's right to exist, two of the main declarations which the international community demanded before there would a Palestinian government would be recognized. The EU and some other European countries are so eager to resume or continue doing business with terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah that they would sacrifice Israel and her people for nothing more noble than simple economics. This attitude offers nothing towards peace but instead encourages militants to continue using violence even against their own people. Where has the morals and values for human life gone when we have supposedly free countries encouraging the elimination of a people for economic gain? What is happening is the result of countries like Norway jumping onto the Hamas' bandwagon. Civil war was not the aim of Hamas, their aim was the destruction and elimination of Israel, by Hamas' own words they bluntly state that weapons were to be used against the occupation not against Palestinians. Neither Hamas nor the PA deserve recognition until Israel's right to exist is complied with, as well as the stoppage of violence, obviously Hamas's intention was not civil war, but the elimination of Israel, and for the rest of the Palestinian people to bow down to Hamas.

And just how do you know how people are treated in UK or US custody? Unless you have actually been there you know absolutely nothing of how anyone was treated. I can bet that those in UK or US custody are not blindfolded, with nutcases cocking guns in the background, and being threatened with death. As for the Iranian's, if they are not attempting to build a nuclear weapon, why is it that they will not allow UN Inspectors in to see just what they are up to. Iran keeps saying they want nuclear technology only for peaceful use, and if that is in fact true, let them prove it. Until inspectors verify that fact, they should be treated as if they are developing nuclear weapons capabilities. The big difference between Russia and the U.S. vs North Korea and Iran is that the former knows what the consequences would be to humanity if they detonated a nuclear weapon vs the latter who cares little about human life so detonating a nuclear weapon might seem like the thing to try in hopes that the other side wouldn't have time to launch a counterstrike to wipe them off the face of the earth. The leaders of both of these rogue antions no brains, and therefore may think they might be able to take on the world. Now that the British have their personnel back they should take this opportunity to give Iran the pay-back they don't want and launch an all out offensive against them. The people of Iran have proven to not be so afterall, as you referred to them, because they are stupid enough to beleive all of teh hot air coming from their respective leaders.

Well, that's a position that's rarely stated on these forums. How do you feel about global warming? My response in all likelihood belongs on a different forum because it does not deal specifically with "Little Mosque on the Prairie," but here goes; Global warming, now there is a subject that politicians of all stripes like to talk about, but will do nothing about. Kyoto Accord, what a farce! Jean Chretien blindly signed onto this Accord but obviously had no intentions of implementing it, because the truth is that emission levels rose significantly in Canada even after the Kyoto Accord was signed. I feel that as long as our governments at all levels, are following a corporate agenda, nothing is going to change. Oh the Liberals are now talking a good talk, but they have no plan to implement Kyoto without devastating the economy. As long as there is an option for industry to be able to pollute unimpeded governments not enforcing pollution limits, and are going be allowed to buy clean air credits from other jurisdictions, then things will get worse instead of better. As long as we are going to exempt some of the worst polluters IE; China, India, and other third world countries from Kyoto protocols industry is going to carry on polluting. For instance in Saint John, New Brunswick the Irving Empire are already polluting the air shed, and pollution limits seem to be nothing but unenforceable guidelines as far as the Irving's are concerned, because they regularly exceed those limits. What normally happens when one of the Irving industries exceeds pollution standards is an apology from an Irving spokesperson, and a hollow promise not to let it happen again. Environment NB usually will issue a press release assuring the people that the Irving's have given assurance that it will not happen again, and that no financial consequences are being assessed for the offense. It gets a little tiresome hearing the same excuses over and over, and the same rhetoric coming from the Environment Department. Now we have an LNG Terminal being build, against the objections of a great many people, because government wholeheartedly blindly supports any proposed projects Irving cares to put forward. The LNG Terminal, (if approval is given from the National Energy Board) will be accompanied by a 30" LNG pipeline which will go directly through the city, including many residential neighbourhoods, past hospitals and schools on it's way to the U.S. border. The preferred route for most city residents is the more direct route, under the Bay of Fundy, but that is being ignored by government, Irving, and the Emera who is going to build and own the pipeline. The only reason for these projects is simply to increase Irving's wealth, and the products produced and carried are primarily for the U.S. market. Sure there will be a number of jobs associated with the construction phase,, and to work at these facilities after they are built, but what good are jobs if the end result is that the emissions will end up killing people? Corporate well being should not be the determining factor when exploring the viability of any project, the impact on the health and well being of humans should always trump corporate profits. All the money in the world is not going to do a person any good if the end result is that pollution from these projects winds up killing the people. Money is nice, but you can't take it with you. The existing oil refinery alone releases 9,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere daily, and the additional emissions which will be produced from a second refinery is far too much for a community that already sports one of the highest incidents of Asthma per-capita in Canada. What needs to happen is for government to ban completely an industry's option of buying clean air credits, and if they cannot run their industry without polluting, then shut it down. I am not naive enough to imagine governments regardless of what political party they represent will ever tell industry what they will and will not do, instead they will continue to make excuses for industry and their polluting ways.

As it should! Just another mediocre Canadian production, and as a matter of fact I tend to change the channel or not tune in at all when I find out that it is Canadian, because that generally means that my tax money was donated to produce this crap. I have no problem with Canadian production other than what I just stated, and the fact that at least south of the border movie production is funded by private corporations and individuals, and they do not look to the public purse to fund it. The same should apply to our CBC, it should be privatized and run the same as PBS is run in the States, by subscribers. As long as the CBC continues to receive public funding they should get out of commercial broadcasting, sports, and stick to a format similar to PBS. I might even contribute voluntarily, but I don't feel tax money should fund a network that is in direct competition with non-tax payer funded programming. CBC is not alone in this because I am sure that CTV and other privately owned broadcasters are taking advantage of government grants to produce Canadian content, content I might add that is not worth the watch. I just read the other day that Porky's was produced with Canadian government grants, and although it was a good comedy movie, it was paid for with tax-payer's money. This movie made a significant amount of money at the box office, and I wonder if the producer repaid the Canadian government. or pocketed the profits and they went south of the border. What is wrong with this picture when an American can come to Canada, apply for a grant to make a movie, the movie becomes a hit and the people who paid for it's production are not included in profit-sharing? Which is why I say if people or corporations want to make movies, Canadian content or otherwise, let them do it with their own money, and that includes the CBC.

HE did not ignore the Atlantic Accord, they have the option of keeping that deal or opting for a more generous trasnfer program for supposedly have-not province. Unfortunately Danny Williams want his cake and be able to eat it too. He want to be able to keep the oil revenue and still qualify for transfers without the other provinces taking into consideration the money NL is receiving in oil royalties. As pounted out NL is now ahead of ON, and ON does not receive Equalization payments, they in fact pay them. NB and PEI are not fortunate enough to have oil and gas revenues and are truly disadvantaged by this side deal I think Stepehn Harper is right on. There should be no side deals with any province. What applies to one should apply to all, including Quebec.

Awesome speech, and the banning of this speech would be funny except that everything the speaker said was absolutely true. Unfortunately the U.N. has become biased, corrupt and ineffective. Yes, definitely the U.N. should be disbanded, and the one good thing that would come from it would be that terrorists and states that sponsor terrorists would lose the soap-boxes from which to sprout their hate. I don't remember seeing the same indignation from the U.N. when the Iranian, and Venezuelan representative got up and shot their mouths off about the Leader of the U.S. I am no fan of Bush's either, but the U.N. definitely seems to pick and choose who or which countries it is okay to criticize. This is biased at it's best from an organization that is supposed to be representative of all, and is not supposed to be taking sides. Koffi Annan was real good at criticizing both the U.S. and Israel, but not a word of criticism against Hamas, Hezbollah or countries who support terrorism, or abuse their own people's human rights. Bot a word about China and their poor human rights records, and that of many other countries.

Exactly right, it would be the start of WW III, and the really sad part is the Iranian's have no idea what life would be like post-nuclear strike on Tehran, and sadder still is the fact that they actually believe all the hot air coming from the Islamist government. I'm sure many believe that they could take on the West and win. Maybe a taste of what could be their future would be like could be demonstrated to them with using nuclear. They should feel lucky I am not in change of the British government because I would have considered this abduction in Iraqi waters, as an act of war and launched a full-out military assault on Iran. If the people of Iran are stupid enough to swallow the crap their religious leaders are filling them with, they deserve whatever they get. I know the meek and mild would say the only way to go is through negotiations, but how far has negotiations gotten the international community and the UN so far? Nowhere, that where, and it's time to end this diplomatic crap and tell the Iranian government they are going to comply with the UN Security Council's demands or the UN will do it for them. Enough pussy-footing around!

I don't think the Britsih should negotiate with Iran but instead treat this kidnapping as a declaration of war against Britain, and launch an all out offensice against the people and government of Iran.

The initial concept of the UN was probably a good one. I believe that initially it was supposed to be a body that would intervene when flagrant abuses of human rights were taking place, and as sort of a military force to ensure that two sides in a conflict stayed apart to avoid further conflict. At least that was what I thought it was supposed to be. Canada has been sending UN Troops to places like Cyprus for a number of years to keep the Greek and Turks apart. Unfortunately for the UN, they have become an unelected body that feels they should be some sort of World Government and that was never the intent when it was formed. The other unfortunate thing is that the UN is that under Koffi Annan, Maurice Strong, and others they have become corrupt and have developed biases against certain countries like Israel, while they take the side of terrorists. They have become a toothless giant, nothing but a huge ineffective bureaucracy, and a further financial drain on member states. They should be disbanded and the people who are appointed fired immediately, and told to go find themselves real jobs. I feel how many other's feel, and that is; in Canada we already have far too much government and it is growing daily, so I certainly do not want another bureaucracy that is looking to get paid. I already have a tough enough time putting food on my table with what little I have left after all levels of government in Canada get through with me.

And what chunk of land was that? As I recall, Nelson Mandela has been quite sympathetic to the comparison of the Palestinian situation to that of the blacks in South Africa. J who? The Israelis have considered annexation of the West Bank a number of times.The problem is that it would bring a mass of Arab voters into the Israeli democratic system - something to be avoided at all costs. Not to mention that world opinion would never accept such a move. So you are wishing that Carter gets Alzheimers? I can't be sure but this might actually represent a new low for you. Isn't Carter the one always referred to a "The Peanut Farmer?" Maybe he should have stayed on the farm because he sucked at being President. Some on here referred to the fact that he became President as if that somehow makes him intelligent or good at the job. Just look at Canada, we have had quite a few incompetents elected to the PM's Office, such as Trudeau, Pearson, Mulroney, Chretien, and Martin, none of which were oarticularly bright, but they still managed to get elected to lead the country. U.S. Presnetial candiddates are picked using a process similar to that used in Canada, they are oicked by Party delegates, and chosen to run as their standard bearer. Again it certainly doesn't mean that you wind up with competent people, what it means is that the people are pissed at whoever was running the country before them, or the previous candidate's time wwas up in the case of the U.S. or the people are fed up and decide they need a change as happens in Canada.

The point is that from all reports I have read these British military presonnel were in Iraqi waters not Iran's

This forum is not about the U.S. or what they have done or haven't done, this is about the Iranians kidnapping British military personnel in Iraqi waters and nothing else. If this is not the subject you wish to discuss maybe you should go on one of the many "Hate the U.S." forums. Meanwhile back to the subject of this forum which is the capture of British military personnel outside Iranian waters. Is this going to turn into another Embassy like deal when the Iran government encouraged radical Islamist to invade the U.S. Embassy in Tehran a number of years ago and held them for an extended peeriod. Werer I the British government I would be telling the International community that I would regard what Iran has just done as a "Declaration of War" agaisnt Britain and tell the Iranian that unless those personnel are released immediately thata full military response was coming againt the people of Iran. If this is allowed to continue and fester it will just encourage Iran and other nations like North Korea to further ignore the international community regarding nuclear weapons. Russia probably won't like a military respose against Iran but then Russia, France and China seems to be taking a consiliatory stance against any suggerstion that the International community get tough with rogue nations. Could it be that this is where these rogue nations are getting help with attempting to arm themselves with WMD?

Was these assertion of your's actually in some actual news report or are they coming out of your obvious hate for the Americans that you just make these theings up in your head. I read a lot of news, and I have not read where the U.S. or any Western countries have been committing acts of terror anywhere including inside Iran.

Regardless of any work being done by Israel at that site it is not relevant because these people were obviously tourists not construction workers. Let's not also remember that this site is also one on great importance religiously by Christians and Jews as well as Muslims. The Muslims do not have exclusive rights to claims this as THEIR Holy site. In all likelihood this attack was perpetrated by members of Hamas, a recognized terrorist organization, and just because they form a shaky coalition with Fatah to form a government we have to remember that these terrorists have not recognized Israel's right to exist, nor have they agreed to abandon their violence as a way to get what they want. Their latest demand for any modicum of peace with Israel is for Israel to give up all lands that were occupied by Israel during the war in 1967, so that Palestine can claim that as their State. What they fail to talk about is that what they also want is for Israel to allow Palestinians to move back within the borders of Israel, and the result of that will be that Israelis will be outnumbered by Palestinians, and consequently have no control over their own country. even Koffi Annan was promoting that scenario and was amazed that Israel did not just jump at the chance. Koffi was too stupid to realize something the Israeli's realized right away, they would effectively have no country to call their own, while Palestine wants, their own country exclusively and proxy control of Israel as well. Norway and other EU countries are so eager to please militant Middle Eastern countries that they are willing to simply flush Israel so they can continue on with business as usual. Regardless of sanctions, some EU countries as well as others have skirted those sanctions for their own selfish gains.

Are you really naive enough to believe that the people actually get to participate now in government. Most decisions are made behind closed doors and only brought into the public to be voted on. Actual dialogue is really just a fallacy, because by the time it is discussed in public by politicians, the decisions have already been made and in the case of provinces that decision is made by the Premier in consultation business and what is good for business. As former Finance Minister in Trudeau's cabinet was quoted as saying in his book, "The Evil Empire," he said; "If the people are naive enough to believe that government decisions are being made by our elected representatives, they are living in fantasy land." He contends that these decisions are being made by the corporate elite representing multinational corporate interests.

Finally someone telling it like it is! Not only are the governments that you mentioned super-sized and wasteful, but every service they touch has been plagued by huge bureaucracies, including health care. We now have more pencil pushers and paper-shufflers in our hospitals than we do medical professionals and their necessary support personnel. In fact these are the very people who are charged with deciding who goes and who stays when budgets become tight. In the case of hospitals you can rest assured that when the layoffs come, the last place they will come from is in administration. I recently read an article which cited a study done by doctors regarding the high incidents of MRSA, and these doctors contend that the high incidents of MRSA can be directly attributed to reductions in house-cleaning staff. Their conclusion is that when administration starts looking for savings the first place they look is at the bottom end of the pay scale and in most cases that happens to be in the housekeeping departments. In my province of New Brunswick the newly elected Liberal government just introduced their first budget, and rather than tackle to fiscal shortfalls by eliminating several layers of bureaucracy, they have instead produced a budget that increases personal and business taxes, and most other fees charged by government. These people had the opportunity to do some good, but instead opted for the concept of "Big Government is somehow good for the province. Since we were already one of the most taxed provinces in Canada, I will predict that Shawn Graham will be a one hit wonder, and be defeated after one term in office. Obviously he learn nothing from the poor decisions already made by Bernard Lord before he faced defeat at the polls. Shawn promised that things would be different, but what we are getting is screwed as per usual.

Sure he should have the right to express his opinion on this issue or any other for that matter, that's what free speech is supposed to be all about. The Gay community has no problem in immediately coming out and labelling anyone who does not agree with the homosexual lifestyle as biased, bigoted, homophobic, intolerant, hateful, and any other adjective to otherwise describe anyone who does not agree with them. They think it's alright, I think it's immoral and wrong, and I'm sick and tired of everyone in this country, especially our political leaders of being too politically correct to the point of passing laws that basically try to tell the rest of us how we are to think. This issue is more about one group attempting to push their beliefs on the rest of us. Elsie Wayne got it exactly right when she said she could care less what people do behind their bedroom doors. and for them to just do it and shut up about it. I too could care less what two consenting adults do with each other, just don't expect me to either condone what they do or support what they do, because it just might not fit into my ideas and teachings of what is moral and what is not moral. Why is it that the Gay and Lesbian community tries so hard to get the rest of us to accept that what they do is either alright or as they put it normal? Why do they care what the rest of us think, unless they have doubts themselves about their own morality, and demand that the rest of us tell them it is okay? I say don't wait for my blessing, because even though I think it is immoral, I could care less what they do.