Topaz Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 I see that Harper has ads in NFLD on the TV. I thought he said he didn't need NFLD, I guess he does now that Quebec support is failing. Quote
normanchateau Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 Which is why we have stem cell research, abortion and same sex marriage in canada. This will probably surprise you but the US also has stem cell research and abortion. And Canada has same sex marriage despite the efforts of social conservative and religious nut Stephen Harper to prevent it. Twice he voted against it and twice a majority of MPs voted for it. If the majority voted the way Stephen Harper did, even hate laws against promoting murder of homosexuals would not have passed. And if Stephen Harper had been Prime Minister in 2003, today Canadians would be dying in Iraq. Fortunately, as today's polls indicate, Canadians are finally wising up to who Stephen Harper is. You're right that Harper is no George Bush. Harper will never receive the kind of electoral support in Canada that Bush did in the US. Canadians are grateful for that. Quote
M.Dancer Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 If pigs had wings.... Harper is on record saying he has no interest in opening up the subject. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Slim MacSquinty Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 "conservatives are pushing too be ultra right wing" So me somehting to prove this, can you even articulate what ultra right wing is? normanc: Please provide evidence of Mr. Harpers ultra religous beliefs, I have read just about everything on this guy and have never found a shred of fact that shows he's a social conservative, he has been divorced, did you know that? He stated his view that he didn't personally support abortions or gay marriage but he did not in any way try to prevent either from legality. Stem cell research is an ethical dilema which goes far beyond religion. You are just a purveyor of BS, have a little self respect why do you feel compelled to stoop so low. Quote
independent Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 "conservatives are pushing too be ultra right wing" So me somehting to prove this, can you even articulate what ultra right wing is? normanc: Please provide evidence of Mr. Harpers ultra religous beliefs, I have read just about everything on this guy and have never found a shred of fact that shows he's a social conservative, he has been divorced, did you know that? He stated his view that he didn't personally support abortions or gay marriage but he did not in any way try to prevent either from legality. Stem cell research is an ethical dilema which goes far beyond religion. You are just a purveyor of BS, have a little self respect why do you feel compelled to stoop so low. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_right Quote
Jobu Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 I see that Harper has ads in NFLD on the TV. I thought he said he didn't need NFLD, I guess he does now that Quebec support is failing. When did he say that? Quote
M.Dancer Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_right Didn't see the Canadian Conservative party on the list. You have a point? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Slim MacSquinty Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 wikpedia is not a credible source for information on politics and in particular political parties as its open for any zealot to fill in non-sensical factoids. Can't you do better? You are acribing fact to the Cons, show me where it is supported by party policy, specific writings, quotes etc. come on you lefties think you so bloody superior in your moral relativism, the only thing this proves to me is it allows you to set aside any moral criteria to make an arguement. Its rather kindergarten like. Quote
normanchateau Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 I have read just about everything on this guy and have never found a shred of fact that shows he's a social conservative, You and I must differ on how we define social conservatism. Do you not view voting against making it a hate crime to promote the murder of homosexuals as being socially conservative? As leader of the Alliance Party, Harper and his Alliance MPs voted against Bill C-250 even though the Liberals, NDP, Bloc and PCs voted for it. Harper favours hate crime legislation with respect to religion and ethnicity but NOT sexual orientation. And if you don't view harper's anti-libertarian view towards marijuana as socially conservative, there's really no point in arguing with you. When Harper campaigned in late 2005, he campaigned against the Liberals' marijuana decriminalization legislation. Now he's introduced legislation requiring judges to impose mandatory sentences of six months for one marijuana plant. Quote
M.Dancer Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 You and I must differ on how we define social conservatism. Do you not view voting against making it a hate crime to promote the murder of homosexuals as being socially conservative? Promoting murder is already a crime. I don't see how singling out one particular group can make it any wronger... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
normanchateau Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 Promoting murder is already a crime. I don't see how singling out one particular group can make it any wronger... So why does Stephen Harper favour hate crime legislation against promoting murder on the basis of religion? Because he's a social conservative. Quote
Slim MacSquinty Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 The hate crime thing is far to complex to argue in detail here, suffice to say a truly libertarian idea would be to have absolute free speech, and unless you actual treatened to kill someone and demonstrated a desire to do so you would not be a criminal. What your advocating is cultural socialism which requires the state to decide acceptable thoughts (see Moaist china). You are dead wrong on this one. No an ultra right wing concept of marijauna possesion would be Saudi Arabia. Pot possesion is not in any way universally advocated by adherant of any party. Quote
normanchateau Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 The hate crime thing is far to complex to argue in detail here, suffice to say a truly libertarian idea would be to have absolute free speech, and unless you actual treatened to kill someone and demonstrated a desire to do so you would not be a criminal. What your advocating is cultural socialism which requires the state to decide acceptable thoughts (see Moaist china). You are dead wrong on this one.No an ultra right wing concept of marijauna possesion would be Saudi Arabia. Pot possesion is not in any way universally advocated by adherant of any party. Yes, a libertarian view would be absolute free speech. But that's not Harper's view. He favours hate crime legislation based on religion and race but opposes hate crime legislation based on sexual orientation. As I said before, if you don't view Harper's extreme position on marijuana prohibition and opposition Bill C-250 as evidence of social conservatism, there's no point in me trying to convince you that he's a social conservative. Since most Canadians favour decriminalization of possession of small amounts of marijuana and since most Canadians are not social conservatives, it is no surprise that Harper will never win a majority. Quote
Slim MacSquinty Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 See your being intellectually dishonest with yourself. You're stating his views and ascribing phlysophical postions which you think he has not that you know or can prove. Do you feel yourself so superior that you allow yourself to get away with this? Or are your motives so pure that the end justifies the means? Quote
normanchateau Posted October 6, 2008 Report Posted October 6, 2008 See your being intellectually dishonest with yourself. You're stating his views and ascribing phlysophical postions which you think he has not that you know or can prove.Do you feel yourself so superior that you allow yourself to get away with this? (1) Learn to use quotes. (2) What are "phlysophical postions"? Sorry but I must leave this board now and do something productive. Goodbye. 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.