Melanie_

You’re not following along. Both DangerMouse and I were making the point that sweeping generalizations are not productive. I don’t hold myself responsible for the actions of anyone simply because they share my skin colour, nor do I hold the actions of others against someone who happens to have the same racial or religious background. This applies to Whites, Natives, Muslims, Jews, etc. I would never defend pedophile priests, child molestors, rapists, and “beat and eat” criminals (I’ve never heard that term before, though). But their skin colour is irrelevent; it’s their actions that condemn them.

If your point was that no one should be subjected to sweeping generalizations, I was making the same point. Sheesh, you've come onto this forum like a bull in a china shop, just itching for confrontation. Try dialogue instead. What is Canadian culture? As I've said earlier in this thread, culture adapts and evolves. Canadian culture is different things to different people, and I'm OK with that. We live in a big country, and there's room for variation. Culture is fluid, and doesn't have to cling to the past; I don't want to be stuck in a time warp where everything is stagnant.

You're scraping the bottom of the barrel when you trot out names like Pederson, Dahlmer, etc. Would it be fair for me to say that your role model is the guy on the reserve in Saskatchewan who got drunk and left his daughters outside in the cold to freeze to death? Of course not. Give your head a shake, and try to post something intelligent.

Dangermouse, were you here before with the screen name of Chauchee?

Again, respectfully, I’ll disagree. Your definition states that culture depends upon the capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations. If culture were static, there would be no need to continue learning anything, as the culture would already be set long ago (at what point, then, would we know that the culture was set and no more changes could be made?). It also states that culture is an integrated pattern of knowledge, belief and behaviour, none of which are static – changes in any of these three must therefore be integrated into culture. The last point in this definition states that culture is the characteristic features of everday existence shared by people in a place or time, which means that culture changes as the people and times change. You’ve pointed out that separate cultures arise out of the necessities of living together, which seems to support the idea that culture is flexible. Language, traditions, and icons are all part of culture, and they all are dynamic, as you say. If these elements of culture change, then the culture itself must adapt to the changes. I agree that the Miqmaqs, Algonquins, Welsh, Irish, etc. all have different cultures, but I challenge you to show that those cultures have remained exactly the same over the past few centuries.

What is Quebequois culture but an amalgamation of French (from France) with other influences? What is Metis culture but an amalgamation of French and Native? What is current “Native” culture – certainly not the same as 100 years ago, 200 years ago, 500 years ago. As distinct cultures mingle, new cultures evolve. As Leafless has posted, This implies that culture can be modified on an ongoing basis, as new achievements are made. The definition itself states that it is relevent to a particular time or people – that means that as the time changes, or the people change, the culture can change as well. That’s called progress!

My post didn't say Canada doesn't have a culture, it said that Canada's culture does not have to mirror the US culture. We can make our own. Culture isn't static, it is constantly changing, which is why we can learn from history without clinging to it. I've never believed that traditions have to be preserved just for tradition's sake; culture is much more fluid than that. We can absorb immigrants and blend the good parts of the different cultures they bring with the good parts of the culture already in place. I know you don't believe this, but you don't have to be white to be Canadian.

I have to agree, Shady, there is a lot of personal sniping lately, and I'm certainly not above it, much as I'd like to be. Part of it is the left/right battles, as you say, but I think part of it also is the number of long time posters here who know each other well enough (as well as you can know someone on an internet forum) to know what will push buttons. Its like when my kids have been cooped up too long in the house, and start picking at each other, just to see how far they can push it. We all need to go outside and play, and not come in until we can get along. I'll do my best to restrict my posts to debating issues. Thank you, and may the Flying Spaghetti Monster touch you with his Noodly Appendage.

I guess we just can't please them...

I'm trying to figure out your geography - the US is to the west of us? We are sandwiched between 2 oceans - which one are you discarding, the Atlantic, the Pacific, or the Arctic? And are you claiming that, because we are east (?) of the US, we need to mirror their culture - we can't carve out a culture all our own? Being proud of the history of our country doesn't mean clinging to the past.

Looks like we just recognized Kosovo.... Serbia is not happy. Canada recognizes Kosovo independence

Your post made me think of a great children's book by Robert Munsch (perhaps we could agree he is a Canadian cultural icon?). Its called From Far Away, and it tells a story about a refugee child coming to Canada and her first experience with Halloween. By her second Halloween she is quite eager to go trick or treating!

It's a great topic to research, and I'm sure you can find lots of good sources of information online. I did a quick google of "aboriginal self government" and found plenty of articles that would be good for your essay. While you might be interested in our opinions here, and I'm sure there are many opinions, they don't reflect any research or true data - it would all be anecdotal. Good luck with the paper, and look for reliable sources for your research. The Born Loser

I'm a feminist, and fairly left leaning, yet obviously not ignoring this woman. What do you think of her views? Maybe you could state your opinion on the topic rather than slamming other posters.

She has an empowering message for oppressed women, who desperately need role models to show them there is a way out of "sexual apartheid", as she calls it. It takes an incredible amount of courage to be able to come forward like she has and say that women deserve better, especially in the face of Islam. Thanks, Scriblett, for the info - more can be found here, at her webpage: Maryam Namazie Cybercoma, if you are reading this thread, here's an article she wrote, on religion as child abuse. (I'm pretty sure it was you who took that position, and here you will see that she really agrees with you. If it wasn't you, my apologies.) Here she quotes from Mansoor Hekmat, an Iranian Marxist (?!?):

Agreed, Argus. This has nothing to do with gay rights (which I support). I don't care who they have sex with, just don't do it in public. To the gays in Holland - get a room! Angus - the story about the woman on the toilet seat was just bizarre! Why wouldn't the boyfriend do something earlier? Can you imagine living for two years with someone who refused to get off the pot? Its an internet joke now, but I feel sorry for her; she obviously needed a mental health intervention long ago.

Apologies for the thread drift, this isn't directly about whether or not Harper is doing a good job, but I wanted to respond to this idea. Children with special needs are very much part of the argument about child care spaces. Their parents need to work just like everyone else, but they are faced with a much more difficult time finding child care for their kids. Many private homes won't take them, because of the increased challenges they bring, or they want to charge families much higher rates, which makes them unaffordable. Many families with children with special needs already have extra costs that the rest of us are barely aware of, so exorbitant day care costs are a further burden. Often these kids really just require an extra set of hands to help them through the day, someone who understands their condition and can help them be included as much as possible. Kids with autism, Down's Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy, ADHD, FAS, etc. can all be accomodated in child care settings. Licensed and regulated programs can get grants to help offset the extra costs, but the Harper plan rescinded the money that would have gone into these grants. The $100/month won't help these parents find the kind of care their kids need.

Argus, I had no idea you were a fashion maven! But seriously, what is the big deal about people wearing what makes them comfortable? Turbans, saris, kilts, buckskins, hajibs... so what? No dress code for Canada, please! (And more men in kilts can only be a good thing.)

They have nothing to do with your tax dollars. Neither one of them lives in Canada; they both are associated with American universities. Try reading up on them a bit... Irshad Manji Salman Rushdie

Dang! I missed out on the pool! No one had even picked today yet, either... I could have won.

I agree with you to some degree, tax incentives aren't enough to get business owners to invest in child care. Good child care is expensive, and it is detrimental to children's development to have a revolving door of caregivers. The free market hasn't worked very well for child care; in fact, there has been an argument put forth for market failure with regards to child care (just google it, there are too many articles to link to). The fact is, many families with young children are just building their careers. Giving them some support early on, to help them juggle family and work responsibilities, will pay off with huge dividends in the long run. And children shouldn't just be warehoused - licensed care is more likely to deliver quality care.

The day homes are part of the licensed and regulated systems, and the Liberal plan would have provided money to expand this part of the system along with the rest. Day homes (here they are called family child care homes) are an integral part of the system, because they can provide more flexibility than centres can. The Harper plan was not about increasing family child care homes - their plan was to offer tax incentives to individual businesses to set up their own centres for their employees. Not a single centre has come into being as a result of this. Can you imagine every Canadian Tire across the country having it's own individual daycare centre, for it's employees only?

Sorry, I edited this post and we must have cross posted, so the links aren't actually there anymore (they didn't seem relevent to my edited post). If the federal government has no right to intrude in child care, which is a provincial issue, how do you respond to the Harper child care plan? The thread really is about whether or not Harper's government is doing a good job, so the question should be about the $100/month and the promised 125,000 spaces. Do you feel he has done a good job with them?

The Liberal plan wasn't going to change the regulations, it was going to provide money for the provinces to expand the systems already in place. The province licenses and inspects programs, similar to how restaurants are licensed and inspected. They still operate as individual businesses. The province also provides a small operating grant to programs so that parent fees are managable (in Manitoba, parents pay a maximum of $18.80/day for preschool care), and provides supports for children with special needs. The Harper plan rescinded the agreements with the provinces; their promise to create spaces didn't include any money for the provinces to administer those spaces. In fact, I attended a town hall meeting during the last election where the Conservative candidate at the time said that the spaces created would not be part of the "institutional system" already in place. I was left wondering, who would regulate those spaces? Was the Harper government proposing establishing a parallel system? The candidate (Rod Bruinooge) didn't have an answer to those questions.

Whatever authority I have it on, the point remains that Spitzer's wife's sexual preferences have no bearing on this thread. But if you think they don't happen in Canada, maybe you need to leave the basement more often.