Riverwind Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 Maybe not, but shouldn't that be up to the people in the riding to decide?Any member running for the party gets funding from the party. The party has a right to decide whether any individual candidate is worth the 'investment'. Would you object to a party rejecting a candidate for expressing homophobic views? Doing so would violate the person's free speech. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
gc1765 Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 Any member running for the party gets funding from the party. The party has a right to decide whether any individual candidate is worth the 'investment'. Would you object to a party rejecting a candidate for expressing homophobic views? Doing so would violate the person's free speech. I'm not saying that the party doesn't have the right to decide which candidate to run, but if they reject a candidate for no good reason they would be less likely to get my vote. This is especially surprising coming from the NDP, since I'd bet a lot of the people who vote NDP don't give a damn whether someone is transgendered, and might even decide not to vote for the NDP over this issue. Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
August1991 Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 Any member running for the party gets funding from the party. The party has a right to decide whether any individual candidate is worth the 'investment'. Would you object to a party rejecting a candidate for expressing homophobic views? Doing so would violate the person's free speech.IMV, your point about party financing is correct Riverwind.As to free speech, the candidate is always free to run as an independent, or seek another party. As a voter, I can choose to put my X beside a candidate who is not homophobic. It is here on a ballot, ultimately, where the issue is decided. (Then again, I would not want such a minority right to be decdied by majority vote.) Quote
Riverwind Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 but if they reject a candidate for no good reason they would be less likely to get my voteRejecting a candidate because he/she makes the majority of the electorate squemish is a good reason. That said, any decision like this will cost votes and parties are gambling that votes lost will be less that the votes gained. They may have made a wrong decision but it was the party's right to make such a call. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
gc1765 Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 Rejecting a candidate because he/she makes the majority of the electorate squemish is a good reason. That said, any decision like this will cost votes and parties are gambling that votes lost will be less that the votes gained. Do the NDP even have a chance in this riding? The thing is, not only might the NDP lose votes in this riding, but they might lose votes across the entire country for rejecting this candidate, whereas I doubt people outside of this riding are going to choose not to vote NDP if they ran this candidate in that riding. Given that the green party is now ahead of the NDP in the polls, this decision is a bad one - at least politically speaking. They may have made a wrong decision but it was the party's right to make such a call. I'm not arguing with that. Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
jbg Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 Maybe not, but shouldn't that be up to the people in the riding to decide?No, it should be up to the party to decide, because it's the party's image that is affected, for better or worse, by it's MP's and candidates. That being said, I agree with you in one highly limited sense; the NDP has held itself out as a champion of the rights of such people They are branding themselves as hypocrits as surely as the "liberal" McGovenr Democrats did by turfing Eagleton as VP candidate after successful mental health treatment was revealed.(Link to thread on topic). Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Michael Bluth Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 Think of how many people commit suicide because they are ashamed that they are gay. Do you really think those people would be doing so if being gay was more accepted in society? How many? What's your evidence? Is the number really higher than the average for the population in general? Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
g_bambino Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 And where did I say that this person should get $10,000 of personal therapy or seek attention in court cases? I doubt you'd have to; it seems evident without you saying so that this particular individual registers her success through money and headlines garnered via court cases. Like many "Queer Activists" - or, activists in general - she appears to have designated herself the champion of the "queer" cause, but is really just in it for herself. Quote
Pliny Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 Pliny, you are a conservative. That means I think there is a pretty good chance that you are selfish and don't care about anyone but yourself. It means you probably want to jail the homeless as well as homosexuals. It means you probably live in Alberta and own 6 guns. It means you probably don't care at all about the environment. It means you are probably quick to support invading other countries, even without all the facts. No, I don't have a single fact to back up those *opinions*, just "experience". Note to anyone about to jump in at this point that I am obviously being sarcastic here. Read the context. If that were your experience of what a conservative is then that would be your opinion. I am pretty sure at least a few Liberals reading your above description of a conservative thought it an astute observation and hardly considered it sarcasm - just an opinion though - from experience. How about when they have even the slightest shred of evidence to support their opinions other than which gender a person identifies with? I believe he had enough experience with the subject to form an opinion. The facts presented later shored up his opinion. Not too much more information is necessary to prove his opinion to be correct in this particular case; in another case it may not be. I guess you are saying our opinions should be solidly factual in all instances and forever before we state them. I will grant you that some people do express opinions where they have no experience and/or education but that is usually quite evident. Are you afraid to have an opinion? Quote I want to be in the class that ensures the classless society remains classless.
M.Dancer Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 But the real tragedy will be if Layton and his beard are booed during the Pride Parade next summer.... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
jbg Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 How many? What's your evidence? Is the number really higher than the average for the population in general?The suicide rate for gays probably exceeds that for the population at large. This is in line with the traditional (i.e. pre-political correctness) view of homosexuality as being either a mental illness or symptom of mental illness. PC has forced us to suspend belief in reality in this and many other areas, including observing, for example, that radical Islam is violent. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Oleg Bach Posted December 17, 2007 Report Posted December 17, 2007 The suicide rate for gays probably exceeds that for the population at large. This is in line with the traditional (i.e. pre-political correctness) view of homosexuality as being either a mental illness or symptom of mental illness. PC has forced us to suspend belief in reality in this and many other areas, including observing, for example, that radical Islam is violent. Most gays are bitter and are power mongers - who gives a damn about this person mentioned - if they can not make up their mind on what sex they are - how can they make up their minds regarding important political decisions? Most gays are not even gay - just damaged people who were molested as children - besides - God only creates sexless eunuchs and they are a rareity - most gayness is engineered - and I have spoken to many where it is a choice - the gay lobby hates this truth - they want to be a race - and want to use racism as a tool to advance - they are not our friends - believe me I have tried to befriend them - unrelialble userers that can not be trusted - their is an agenda - if they can get your drunk and break your spirit and manhood though sodomy - most will - it's not about sex - or love - it's about power...and domination - inferiour men and woman who seek supremecey - let them find it amoungst themselves and leave the breeding population out of it - and let them not sexually interfere with out young with the presentation of a "legitimate" life style - they are not legit - and seek to assist in the destruction of the true and real power ful family - they are amusing at best - but are dangerous - and there is a gay mafia..just like in all other groups. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.