Tory MP claims his fingernails are clean

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

So after 16 years why can't this guy change his stripes?

Has he changed? What evidence is there of that?

He has apologized now lets move on.
Hell I bet if a liberal or a dipper had said something like this about christrians it wouldn't have even made the news.

If he had made comments about Jews, would you be so sympathetic now? Would Harper?

scribblet · April 4, 2008

Why such smugness, the NDP and liberals have said their share of stupid comments. The left is not morally superiour, its just the arrogance that the left has to think they are.

He apologized to head off the criminal Robinson at the pass, better to nip it in the bud even though there was no reason for an apology.

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

better to nip it in the bud even though there was no reason for an apology.

In other words, he was a hypocrite in his bogus and insincere apology to Robinson.

Why was Larry Spencer's equally insincere apology not sufficient. Harper fired Spencer.

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

I don't normally reply to your bull, but you know it was NOT a vote against making it a hate crime to promote or advocate the killing of gays and lesbians, had nothing to do with that at all, and you know it.

Did Bill C-250 make it a hate crime to promote or advocate the killing of gays and lesbians? Yes or No?

Did Harper vote against Bill C-250? Yes or No?

Alta4ever · April 4, 2008

Has he changed? What evidence is there of that?
If he had made comments about Jews, would you be so sympathetic now? Would Harper?

So why are we so quick to forgive Tommy Douglas to Trudeau? Did they not advocate eugenics?

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

So why are we so quick to forgive Tommy Douglas to Trudeau? Did they not advocate eugenics?

I never forgave Tommy Douglas for his eugenics stance. I don't think he was the greatest Canadian because many people acted on beliefs like his and sterilized people. I personally think his views were criminal.

I think if more of Trudeau's early anti-Antisemitism was known, he may never have been prime minister. It certainly was unforgivable. I don't think I ever saw information on Trudeau an eugenics. Do you have a cite for that?

scribblet · April 4, 2008

I never forgave Tommy Douglas for his eugenics stance. I don't think he was the greatest Canadian because many people acted on beliefs like his and sterilized people. I personally think his views were criminal.
I think if more of Trudeau's early anti-Antisemitism was known, he may never have been prime minister. It certainly was unforgivable. I don't think I ever saw information on Trudeau an eugenics. Do you have a cite for that?

They would be viewed as criminal today, but I suppose he was a product of his time and I think he did change his views on eugenics. Apart from the eugenics, he was certainly against abortion and saw a larger role for Christian churches, he wouldn't be acceptable to the NDP today, even without the eugenics theory.

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

Why such smugness, the NDP and liberals have said their share of stupid comments.

No one is claiming that the Conservatives have a monopoly on stupid comments or homophobia.

However, the House of Commons would be better off without those who've acknowledged bigotry. We can't protect ourselves against those who cleverly conceal their bigotry but the others are fair game.

jdobbin · April 4, 2008

They would be viewed as criminal today, but I suppose he was a product of his time and I think he did change his views on eugenics. Apart from the eugenics, he was certainly against abortion and saw a larger role for Christian churches, he wouldn't be acceptable to the NDP today, even without the eugenics theory.

I don't think his views were widely accepted east of Saskatchewan. It was hate of the worst kind aimed squarely at the most vulnerable. I don't think think he ever did a mea culpa of made an apology and never campaigned against eugenics in Canada although it existed until 1971. He did overturn Saskatchewan's law on eugenics in 1944 but didn't bother to speak against it otherwise.

He was not Canada's greatest Canadian.

Topaz · April 4, 2008

The minister of Indian affairs came out said the government wouldn't have anything to do with the First Nation person who was coming back to the senate after being away because of things he said about the the Jews. Since then, the First Nation senator has decided not to come back to Ottawa. So how can the government be critical of the senator who said what he said many years ago and not one of their own? The people who elected him want him gone because they say he doesn't represent them any longer. So Harper has to let him go or Harper will lose him in an election.

jbg · April 4, 2008

It's only a few minor comments. Don't worry your gay friends will get over it.

The gays probably won't riot or kill people over it, the way some people do over Danish cartoons.

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

So how can the government be critical of the senator who said what he said many years ago and not one of their own? The people who elected him want him gone because they say he doesn't represent them any longer.

I applaud Conservative Indian Affairs Minister Minister Chuck Strahl for contemplating cutting back on funding to the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations for reinstating the anti-Semite David Ahenakew.

It would be nice if his government could acknowledge that bigotry based on sexual orientation is just as despicable as bigotry based on race, religion or ethnicity. But when homophobia arises from religious beliefs as it does in the religious right, such acknowledgment is not likely to be forthcoming.

guyser · April 4, 2008

The gays probably won't riot or kill people over it, the way some people christians do over Danish cartoons abortion Dr's.

Fixed it for you.

scribblet · April 4, 2008

Homophobia is not a valid fear, it is simply a word coined to suppress anyone who disagrees with homosexuality, in another words, to suppress a point of view. It is simply a construct used as a weapon with which to aggressively promote a point of view or to force universal acceptance of a lifestyle.

Indeed, many in the world do not embrace homosexuality, and nor should anyone have to, whatever two adults do in private is surely their business, but simply because people do not accept it as normal, doesn't mean they fear it, nor does it equate to hate. Physical violence, harassment or prejudicial treatment etc. of course would be 'homophobic' although still not a fear.

Some of the outrageous statements made here re: the CPC and 'homophobia' are simply a manifestion of that construct., and in the context of these posts, they could be construed as heterophobia - maybe that should be a hate crime huh !

BubberMiley · April 4, 2008

Homophobia is not a valid fear, it is simply a word coined to suppress anyone who disagrees with homosexuality, in another words, to suppress a point of view. It is simply a construct used as a weapon with which to aggressively promote a point of view or to force universal acceptance of a lifestyle.
Indeed, many in the world do not embrace homosexuality, and nor should anyone have to, whatever two adults do in private is surely their business, but simply because people do not accept it as normal, doesn't mean they fear it, nor does it equate to hate. Physical violence, harassment or prejudicial treatment etc. of course would be 'homophobic' although still not a fear.

Some of the outrageous statements made here re: the CPC and 'homophobia' are simply a manifestion of that construct., and in the context of these posts, they could be construed as heterophobia - maybe that should be a hate crime huh !

Now you're talking gibberish to try and make his comments less offensive.

The thing is, even 16 years ago, those comments would have been considered beyond the pale by mainstream Canadians. The fact that he felt comfortable within the Reform Party to say those things gives one an idea of what kind of people made up that party. You can try to normalize them all you want, but all that does is show how far you haven't come in the time that has passed.

Edited April 4, 2008 by BubberMiley

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

Homophobia is not a valid fear, it is simply a word coined to suppress anyone who disagrees with homosexuality,

How does one "disagree" with a sexual orientation? Is it the same as disagreeing with a race or an ethnicity?

Are you not aware of the role of genetics in determining sexual orientation?

scribblet · April 4, 2008

Now you're talking gibberish to try and make his comments less offensive.
The thing is, even 16 years ago, those comments would have been considered beyond the pale by mainstream Canadians. The fact that he felt comfortable within the Reform Party to say those things gives one an idea of what kind of people made up that party. You can try to normalize them all you want, but all that does is show how far you haven't come in the time that has passed.

Nonsense....

BubberMiley · April 4, 2008

Nonsense....

Nonsense that you're trying to normalize the comments and discredit anyone who would be offended by them? That's pretty much all I've heard so far.

scribblet · April 4, 2008

Nonsense that you're trying to normalize the comments and discredit anyone who would be offended by them? That's pretty much all I've heard so far.

Where did I try to normalize the MPs comments...

My point is that simply not liking or not accepting homosexuality as normal, is not a phobia. The word itself is a construct used to deflect and stop debate, not to mention it's outrageous usage towards any topic to do with the CPC. Usage that points towards heterophobia, and I might add, a symptom of HDS (Harper derangement syndrome)

normanchateau · April 4, 2008

Now you're talking gibberish to try and make his comments less offensive.

Gibberish is a valuable tool when attempting to defend Harper for his poor decision to tolerate bigotry.

guyser · April 4, 2008

My point is that simply not liking or not accepting homosexuality as normal, is not a phobia.

And while that may have some truth to it, it also has nothing to do with what Lukiwski said . He was being homophobic.

Edited April 4, 2008 by guyser

BubberMiley · April 5, 2008

Where did I try to normalize the MPs comments...
My point is that simply not liking or not accepting homosexuality as normal, is not a phobia. The word itself is a construct used to deflect and stop debate, not to mention it's outrageous usage towards any topic to do with the CPC. Usage that points towards heterophobia, and I might add, a symptom of HDS (Harper derangement syndrome)

Harper Derangement Syndrome? Good lord, talk about coming up with constructs to deflect and stop debate.

BubberMiley · April 5, 2008

The fact is, saying "homosexual faggots" spread disease with their dirty fingernails qualifies as "homophobic" in the popular usage of the term. I don't see why you think categorizing such statements is unfair and stifles debate, because no one is stopping you from defending him.

Edited April 5, 2008 by BubberMiley

DangerMouse · April 5, 2008

The fact is, saying "homosexual faggots" spread disease with their dirty fingernails qualifies as "homophobic" in the popular usage of the term. I don't see why you think categorizing such statements is unfair and stifles debate, because no one is stopping you from defending him.

:lol: I've always said that the "right-wing" element are worse than little kids! So called men with a very immature mentality! Bunch of grown men running around like little kids! Good grief! No wonder the world is going to hell! ANd just think! Women actually associate and marry these things! :lol: