DogOnPorch Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Danger Mouse: Who wrote the laws you retard? Dumb twits like you give natives heck over your laws--whine about equality when you're the idiots who wrote the laws--grow up retard or better yet ask your local politician to write laws if the indians have it so good and call it DUMB REDNECK ACT! and rewrite the Canadian Constitution and call it the Dumb Redneck Constitution of Canada. More bigoted slurs and insults are not going to help your position. No getting into the 'Let's Party after party' for you. Why is it that you seek a solution based on the colour of one's skin? What would be the final result you'd like to see? Deportation? Detention, perhaps? Other solutions? ---------------------------------------- I get sick sometimes not because of drink or any other cause, except that I am forced to listen to the ranting of my honorable opponent. ---Sir John Alexander MacDonald Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 (edited) It is sad to see yet another thread on First Nations People go down the tubes in a hail of misunderstanding and just plain pig-headedness. In all the discussions of racism that occur in our society, it is amazing how little touches on those who are most often the victims of racism and discrimination in Canada - First Nations People. There is an advert on the telly these days by the Canadian Council of Christians and Jews. It touches on almost every form of bigotry in our society - Jews, Moslems, handicapped... and yet nary a whisper about the extraordinary amount of racism against First Nations People. Edited June 5, 2008 by HisSelf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Wouldn't it be more accurate to call the first nations the second or third of fourth nations? I'm pretty sure the waves of nomads that crossed from Asia didn't come as fully formed Mohawk, Ojibwa, Cree, or Sioux nations, etc... etc....So these nations must have formed identities thousand of years later. Who knows who many national identities rose and fell, prospered and went extinct before the Europeans came... Unless of course first nations means something else....like, these are the first nations that don't routinely die of starvation.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Wouldn't it be more accurate to call the first nations the second or third of fourth nations? Hope this helps USAGE NOTE First Nation has gained wide acceptance in Canada since the early 1980s. Like Native American (which has little currency in Canada), First Nation provides a respectful alternative to Indian, a term that is more likely to be taken as directly offensive in Canada than it is in the United States. However, there are several differences between the Canadian and American expressions. First Nation is essentially a political term, promoted from within the indigenous community as a substitute for band in referring to any of the numerous aboriginal groups formally recognized by the Canadian government under the federal Indian Act of 1876. Unlike Native American, it is not a comprehensive term for all indigenous peoples of the Americas or even of Canada, and while it is often used loosely in referring to Indian groups or communities other than those specified in the 1876 Act, it specifically does not include non-Indian peoples such as the Inuit or the Métis. Although each recognized band or community is a First Nation, the term is more commonly used in the plural with a general collective sense, as in a history of the First Nations in eastern Canada or a program designed for First Nations youth. There is no related form for an individual who is a member of a First Nation; officially, such a person is known as a status Indian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 There is an advert on the telly these days by the Canadian Council of Christians and Jews. It touches on almost every form of bigotry in our society - Jews, Moslems, handicapped... and yet nary a whisper about the extraordinary amount of racism against First Nations People. The "I am a native when I miss a day of work" scene must have been left on the cutting room floor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Hope this helps Yes...now I'm sure it's rather banal meaningless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 The "I am a native when I miss a day of work" scene must have been left on the cutting room floor. How about this one... "I am a bigot when I post racial slurs on a public web site."? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 How about this one... "I am a bigot when I post racial slurs on a public web site."? Why? Do you post racial slurs on public websites often? Nasty habit that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Why? Do you post racial slurs on public websites often? Nasty habit that is. And those would be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 (edited) The word "native " when used in reference to First Nations people or aboriginal peoples refers to a person having origins in the original peoples of North America, and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition. The fact that some of you want to use discussion as to its meaning as a pretense to insult aboriginal peoples is transparent. This idiot exercise of pretending native peoples does not refer to the original peoples of North America who existed here long before Europeans is par for the course. Some of us by the way have no problem acknowledging the fact that aboriginal peoples civilization pre-dates the Canadian confederation of 1867 and that Canadian laws and the Charter and constitution all acknowledge this and recognize the legal treaties that were signed between these peoples and the British and then were inherited and recognized by the Canadian legal system. The only people trying to revise history by the way are the usual few who pretend aboriginal peoples have no collective legal rights or whose ancestry does not precede some of the inbreds who later came from Europe and obviously have left their legacy. Edited June 5, 2008 by Rue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 The word "native " when used in reference to First Nations people or aboriginal peoples refers to a person having origins in the original peoples of North America, and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition.The fact that some of you want to use discussion as to its meaning as a pretense to insult aboriginal peoples is transparent. This idiot exercise of pretending native peoples does not refer to the original peoples of North America who existed here long before Europeans is par for the course. Some of us by the way have no problem acknowledging the fact that aboriginal peoples civilization pre-dates the Canadian confederation of 1867 and that Canadian laws and the Charter and constitution all acknowledge this and recognize the legal treaties that were signed between these peoples and the British and then were inherited and recognized by the Canadian legal system. The only people trying to revise history by the way are the usual few who pretend aboriginal peoples have no collective legal rights or whose ancestry does not precede some of the inbreds who later came from Europe and obviously have left their legacy. Nicely said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 (edited) Why? Do you post racial slurs on public websites often? Nasty habit that is. AngusThermopyle, when I put up my first response to this post, you were on line and you continued to be so for some time after. Now you have skulked away. When am I going to see your justification for this ad hominem attack? Edited June 5, 2008 by HisSelf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Sensitive aren't you. I never realized that logging off could be considered as "skulking". So, not only are you sensitive but it would appear you are somewhat of a drama queen, well, takes all types I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Sensitive aren't you.I never realized that logging off could be considered as "skulking". So, not only are you sensitive but it would appear you are somewhat of a drama queen, well, takes all types I guess. So what we have here is another ad hominem attack. Where is your evidence AngusThermopyle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Evidence of what? That you appear to be someone I would not tolerate in person for even a brief moment. Don't need any, I guess you'll just have to suck it up sunshine. Now if you'll excuse me I have to "skulk" off to a meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Evidence of what? That you appear to be someone I would not tolerate in person for even a brief moment. Don't need any, I guess you'll just have to suck it up sunshine.Now if you'll excuse me I have to "skulk" off to a meeting. Ad hominem ad nausea. What a surpirise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Ad hominem ad nausea. What a surpirise. Curious, HisSelf...were you born in Canada? If so, do you think of yourself as a "Native Canadian"? This I guess in opposition to moving here from somewhere else. If not...why not?? Why wouldn't one born here be a "Native Canadian"? ------------------------------------------------- Your door is a jar...your window, a carrot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 (edited) Curious, HisSelf...were you born in Canada? If so, do you think of yourself as a "Native Canadian"? This I guess in opposition to moving here from somewhere else. If not...why not?? Why wouldn't one born here be a "Native Canadian"?------------------------------------------------- Your door is a jar...your window, a carrot. I was indeed born in Canada but I think of myself as a Canadian Citizen. I would not tell people I am a native Canadian. That is a special designation I reserve for First Nations People. Why not? Because the word native has an overlay of meaning that I would not presume to lay claim to. Edited June 5, 2008 by HisSelf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 I was indeed born in Canada but I think of myself as a Canadian Citizen. I would not tell people I am a native Canadian. That is a special designation I reserve for First Nations People.Why not? Because the word native has an overlay of meaning that I would not presume to lay claim to. So some people are special? You see...I don't go for that...at all. People are people judged by their individual merits. Not their skin colour. ------------------------------- I claim for Canada this, that in future Canada shall be at liberty to act or not act, to interfere or not interfere, to do just as she pleases, and that she shall reserve to herself the right to judge whether or not there is cause for her to act. ---Sir Wilfred Laurier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 So some people are special? You see...I don't go for that...at all. People are people judged by their individual merits. Not their skin colour. ------------------------------- I claim for Canada this, that in future Canada shall be at liberty to act or not act, to interfere or not interfere, to do just as she pleases, and that she shall reserve to herself the right to judge whether or not there is cause for her to act. ---Sir Wilfred Laurier Sure they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Sure they are. In your world, perhaps. ----------- T-minus ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 In your world, perhaps. ----------- T-minus ten, nine, eight, seven, six, five... I am beginning to understand why M.Dancer so often resorts to name calling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Sure they are. I'm back. So you're saying that you judge people by their skin colour? Not me, I'm an equal opportunity sort of guy. As far as I'm concerned a bum is a bum is a bum and the colour of their skin makes not one whit of difference. As for the word Native, look it up. You may wish to revise the definition to suit your sentiments but I seriously doubt Websters et al will give a damn about what you wish. DOP is correct in his usage, your usage is incorrect, end of story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HisSelf Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 Why? Do you post racial slurs on public websites often? Nasty habit that is. So you have nothing to back up your claim. I am adding you to my ignore list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted June 5, 2008 Report Share Posted June 5, 2008 How about this one... "I am a bigot when I post racial slurs on a public web site."? Actually that commercial is all about empathizing with other cultures. As DM will likely tell you, "going to work" is part of white culture, not the native culture. So there is no real slur. It's a statement of profound understanding. Maybe even a joke. So lighten up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.