Kenney Pulls Gay Rights from Citizenship Guide

[nicky10013]

Please don't clutter up the conversation with irrelevant pissing matches over which community is more tolerant than which; it isn't worth anyone's time.

The point is: people in both sexually defined societies choose to hide certain feelings and/or behaviours that run contrary to what's commonly expected by the population of their respective camp; in other words, they opt to bend to peer pressure in order to belong. Even your expressed beliefs alone should say to you this limited segmenting is insufficient, at best; how can people be "varying degrees of anything", yet all still be expected to slot themselves into and conform to essentially only two categories? And here's the bigger point that you ignore: the sexual desires of humans constantly shift - they move, aren't static, are fluid, in flux, vary; how many ways can I put it? I have not only read about, but personally seen, many times, the evidence of that fact; some are fine with it, many struggle, most keep it secret, all depending on their gender. That people can slide around like that behind their sexual place-card of choice out of two seems to be pretty irrefutable proof that their sexuality was not determined prenatally and locked in for life. If it were, I'd have to have been reading false testimonials and hallucinating; these people could not do what they do. Indeed, I think it is you who does not give the human brain the credit it deserves; to you, it seems, it's a block of concrete, all with unique variations amongst them, granted, but each is still unchangeable from the day its owner came out of the womb.

I don't care if religious kooks want to hijack to serve their agenda the fact that sexual labels are chosen. I despise their rigid fanaticism, and they'll take anything they can get their hands on to use to their advantage, anyway. Do you know how many hope for a biological explanation so they can say it's curable with drugs?

[c/e]

But, it is important because people who chose to cover up their sexuality, as you say, chose to do it for social reasons. My argument is that it happens way less in the gay community. People are far more open to heterosexuality as well as bisexuality. They don't really care which knocks a hole in your argument about bi's having to cover up their affection for te opposite sex due to gay people ostracising them. Absurd. It's called LGBTQ for a reason, the B stands for bi.

I also think you take a "shift" in people's sexuality too seriously as well. You're intentionally holding me to this "placard biological system" because you apparently believe that in human biology it has to be one or the other which fits your narrative because as you say, there are people in between. As I said, people can be born attracted to both male and females. They're called bi-sexuals. Whether they're attracted to a guy or girl isn't due to a choice of who they're going after but who they may be attracted to more at a given time. No matter how many ways you try and spin it, it's still always going to be about biology and not choice. You're being intentionally simple to try and prove your narrow point of view that gay people make a conscious choice to be attracted to men which horribly wrong. As I said, you'd have no idea because you're not gay. Neither am I, but the difference between you and me is I don't presume to tell people what's going through their head and why they're attracted to the same sex. They'd know better than I so why wouldn't I trust them?

The real question here to be asked is at what age did you make a conscious choice of liking women? Was there a point in your life where you stopped and thought Gee, I think I'm going to like women? I'm going to bet no, no you didn't. You look at girls, get boners and that's that.

Edited March 8, 2010 by nicky10013

[Mr.Canada]

I don't know is it is exactly Socialists that believe in a racial hierarchy.I think they believe in those things out of some sort of paternalistic guilt.By the way,one of the worst possible things for any minority is white liberal guilt.

Equally bad is the average conservative who thinks there is no racism anymore so all race based quota's are no longer relevent.

I suppose I'm somewhere in the middle...

By the way,the ultimate believers in a racial hierarchy were the NAZI's,and they could hardly be called Socialists even though the ideology they believed in was called National "Socialism".The Nazi regime was the most virulently Fascist regime of the last 100 years...

Well Nazi Germany had plenty of left wing elements to it for sure. Socially they were mostly right wing of coarse but fiscally the yhad a lot of left wing elements that today's socialists would like to see.

In fact blacks who went over for the Olympics in Berlin in 1936 were afforded many rights that blacks in the US didn't have at the time. They could eat where they wanted and take any bus they pleased.

Aside from that as long as people are allowed to think for themselves their will be racism. Racism goes both ways, one doesn't need to be white in order to be a racist.

[nicky10013]

Well Nazi Germany had plenty of left wing elements to it for sure. Socially they were mostly right wing of coarse but fiscally the yhad a lot of left wing elements that today's socialists would like to see.

In fact blacks who went over for the Olympics in Berlin in 1936 were afforded many rights that blacks in the US didn't have at the time. They could eat where they wanted and take any bus they pleased.

Aside from that as long as people are allowed to think for themselves their will be racism. Racism goes both ways, one doesn't need to be white in order to be a racist.

They also took down all the "no jews allowed" signs for the two weeks. Hitler personally shook the hand of every gold medal winner. When Jesse Owens won, Hitler refused. The IOC said you either shake all of their hands or none. He shook Jesse Owens hand and that was the end of him shaking anyone's hand.

Edited March 8, 2010 by nicky10013

[Jack Weber]

Well Nazi Germany had plenty of left wing elements to it for sure. Socially they were mostly right wing of coarse but fiscally the yhad a lot of left wing elements that today's socialists would like to see.

In fact blacks who went over for the Olympics in Berlin in 1936 were afforded many rights that blacks in the US didn't have at the time. They could eat where they wanted and take any bus they pleased.

Aside from that as long as people are allowed to think for themselves their will be racism. Racism goes both ways, one doesn't need to be white in order to be a racist.

1.Could you name any of those left wing elements?Unions banned?Communist and Socialists parties banned and sympathizers jailed?Perhaps some sort of nationalized health care system might be a left wing element...

You realize that Adolph Hitler would'nt shake Jesse Owens ahnd after blowing NAZI racial superiority beliefs out of the water,don't you?

Why do you think that was?

Mein Kampf was printed in at least 7 languages by the late '20's.It was fairly evident that the NAZI's did'nt think highly of non-whites.

As far as the last statement goes...Absolutely,however there is a difference between bigotry and racism.Anyone can be a bigot.Racism is bigotry with the economic and political power to enforce those beliefs.

Edited March 8, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Mr.Canada]

They also took down all the "no jews allowed" signs for the two weeks. Hitler personally shook the hand of every gold medal winner. When Jesse Owens won, Hitler refused. The IOC said you either shake all of their hands or none. He shook Jesse Owens hand and that was the end of him shaking anyone's hand.

Well it's interesting that you're defending the US of the 1930's and their segregation policy.

I for one do not support it but now we know that you do and you're here defending it.

We learn a little more about you every day nick.

[nicky10013]

Well it's interesting that you're defending the US of the 1930's and their segregation policy.

I for one do not support it but now we know that you do and you're here defending it.

We learn a little more about you every day nick.

What? Where did I defend segregation?

[Mr.Canada]

What? Where did I defend segregation?

I said this...

In fact blacks who went over for the Olympics in Berlin in 1936 were afforded many rights that blacks in the US didn't have at the time. They could eat where they wanted and take any bus they pleased.

Then you said this...

They also took down all the "no jews allowed" signs for the two weeks. Hitler personally shook the hand of every gold medal winner. When Jesse Owens won, Hitler refused. The IOC said you either shake all of their hands or none. He shook Jesse Owens hand and that was the end of him shaking anyone's hand.

So it's onvious that instead of congratulating Germany for allowing Mr. Owens freedom to go and eat where he pleased which he couldn't do in the US, his own country.

You instead further berate his identity as an American black man by secretly stating that the US blacks and whites shouldn't be shaking hands either.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with this at all. You make no mention of the civil rights afforded him in Germany vs the US and yet applaud the further actions during the Olympics.

This is shameful.

[Mr.Canada]

1.Could you name any of those left wing elements?Unions banned?Communist and Socialists parties banned and sympathizers jailed?Perhaps some sort of nationalized health care system might be a left wing element...

You realize that Adolph Hitler would'nt shake Jesse Owens ahnd after blowing NAZI racial superiority beliefs out of the water,don't you?

Why do you think that was?

Mein Kampf was printed in at least 7 languages by the late '20's.It was fairly evident that the NAZI's did'nt think highly of non-whites.

As far as the last statement goes...Absolutely,however there is a difference between bigotry and racism.Anyone can be a bigot.Racism is bigotry with the economic and political power to enforce those beliefs.

Germany at that time was largely socialist. Everything was basically free if you were a real German, as viewed at the time.

[nicky10013]

I said this...

Then you said this...

So it's onvious that instead of congratulating Germany for allowing Mr. Owens freedom to go and eat where he pleased which he couldn't do in the US, his own country.

You instead further berate his identity as an American black man by secretly stating that the US blacks and whites shouldn't be shaking hands either.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with this at all. You make no mention of the civil rights afforded him in Germany vs the US and yet applaud the further actions during the Olympics.

This is shameful.

Dude, you're an idiot, probably on drugs and have no idea what you're talking about. The point was to say that Germany was far from the black friendly paradise you painted and that there's no denying. How you can honestly turn that around and paint me as a supporter of segregation shows how truly out to lunch you really are.

[nicky10013]

Germany at that time was largely socialist. Everything was basically free if you were a real German, as viewed at the time.

Again, no idea what you're talking about.

[blueblood]

Greece is in trouble, but Greece's policy isn't the only reason why. Two words. Goldman Sachs. Enough said.

If we're going down the Goldman Sachs Rabit hole, lets go further. Three words Community Reinvestment Act.

I don't have greater mental abilities, I just know what socialism actually is. The fact that you keep calling Quebec venezuela proves my point. Sorry, you've got no idea what it means. Stop using the term until you actually go look it up.

I suppose all of their big government spending, all their numerous gov't debt, and sky high taxes are all a figment of my imagination. They're a lot closer than Alberta ever will be.

Ahahah if by fostering economic growth you mean reckless tax cuts that create structural deficits while keeping government spending the same level or boosting it adding mountains of debt, reckless deregulation that caused the morgatge crisis, the prosecution of two wars which has only served to fule global hatred of the west...the list goes on and on. It isn't a good record.

You see, I'm a gov't spending slasher, so there's no free lunch in that regard. I'll take the cut in services to keep more of my money. As for reckless deregulation causing the mortgage crisis, it was reckless regulation that forced banks to loan to trash when they would discriminate based on income like the banks in Canada. I'll take living in North America over living in Europe/Middle East anyday.

I'll give credit where credit is due. He should be applauded for NAFTA. The problem is everything else he did.

Then you won't like his GST to pay off the deficit. I don't.

You do have that right, but honestly, take a look around. You pay according to the society you live in. We pay on average more than the states, but then again, we have far less crime, have a health care system that works better than theirs and a plethora of other social services that are provided much more efficiently here than in the US.

But if your like me and contribute to society, the US is where its at. The only people that don't like the US are poor people and lower middle class because the American society has a philosophy where you should look after yourself, and that philosophy is why America is the top economy in the world and why they more people vote with their feet to immigrate there.

It's a premium. If you'd like to pay less tax but live in a slum, by all means, move to the US. I'd rather pay the premium of living here in a community where the people don't mind helping each other out than in a place where the dollar is god.

I help other people by buying things on my own free will and investing in companies, by me helping myself and keeping more of my money, I make it easier on society by having others keep more of what they earn, the Soviets used to think like you by saying we have to help out each other and a fat lot of good that did them, their incentive to succeed went down the crapper. I wouldn't call the US a slum, their rural areas are on par with ours, and lets not compare anything Canada has to Beverly Hills.

And don't act as though you can go to the US and strike such a bargain and make so much money by buying services like healthcare at cheaper because naturally the private market provides things cheaper than here. You'll pay twice as much for the same level as care there as you do here.

Or I can buy health insurance and include the insurance company in my investment portfolio to hedge against trips to the hospital. Plus I could enjoy my low taxes to boot.

What you save by leaving here you'll have to spend more there. As for a large proportion of Canadians not liking our current tax structure, it's mostly people who have no idea where there taxes go who complain. Yes, some people do leave, but the people coming in outweigh the people that do go. The brain drain of the 90s has for all intents and purposes have been halted and talented people are now coming in.

It's people that do have an idea where they go, could care less about getting gouged at tax time so that Timmy in Toronto gets a free roof over his head. As for Ireland, the proper way of how taxation works, they pay less tax for everything, and have benefitted greatly. You are of the belief that people are to owe society, I am of the belief that society owes the people. Taxes are a form of punishment on people and should be kept to an absolute minimum. Alberta has seen the light, why can't Quebec and Ontario?

I challenge you to find the Canadian version of that document. Too many small liberal arts colleges that skew the numbers. I went to U of T and the numbers for my profs were staggering. Then again, our profs were actually good ones

.

Codswallop, the US is a prime example, they have 10 times the population, their schools have 10 times the prestige, that's a fair sample. Hell by that logic, Canadian doctors should be outearning their American counterparts. You said to find an example of a poli-sci prof making less than 150K, I found lots.

[Jack Weber]

Germany at that time was largely socialist. Everything was basically free if you were a real German, as viewed at the time.

That is not a very good grasp of history or an understanding of ideologies at the time...

[Mr.Canada]

1.Could you name any of those left wing elements?

Again, no idea what you're talking about.

Before the Nazi party took over unemployment was at 30%. After the ytook over it was pretty much at 0%

People went to work for Germany largely. Working to rearm Germany. Almost all profits were taxed by 50%.

The social welfare program of Germany found jobs for people to ensure they were at a livable level.

Government funded vacations and festivals t o bolster solidarity were also the norm.

The design and construction of the Volkswagon "The people's car" A car every german could afford. Not to mention the Autobahn. Both of these were Nazi Germany constructs and very socialist in nature.

Free healthcare, plus the dangers of tobacco smoke was first realized by German physicians but they were silenced by the Americans.

Germany was one fo the first advanced nations of the time to put emphisis on saving wildlife and forests and protecting the environment.

These are all socialist endevours.

Edited March 8, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[nicky10013]

If we're going down the Goldman Sachs Rabit hole, lets go further. Three words Community Reinvestment Act.

I don't doubt that some of this originated with Clinton. Not in the least. He, and more importantly, Greenspan should also be held accountable for what's happened. They changed it in order to enact further deregulation, but Bush took a few whacks at it as well.

I suppose all of their big government spending, all their numerous gov't debt, and sky high taxes are all a figment of my imagination. They're a lot closer than Alberta ever will be.

If that's what you think Socialism is you need to go back to school.

Y

ou see, I'm a gov't spending slasher, so there's no free lunch in that regard. I'll take the cut in services to keep more of my money. As for reckless deregulation causing the mortgage crisis, it was reckless regulation that forced banks to loan to trash when they would discriminate based on income like the banks in Canada. I'll take living in North America over living in Europe/Middle East anyday.

Fine, keep more of your money. But if we're going to cut services, things like emergency health services should be cut as well. Having a heart attack? Good luck, you chose your route by "keeping" your money. Enjoy all that dough while you can.

But if your like me and contribute to society, the US is where its at. The only people that don't like the US are poor people and lower middle class because the American society has a philosophy where you should look after yourself, and that philosophy is why America is the top economy in the world and why they more people vote with their feet to immigrate there.

It's pretty clear that even in terms of GDP the European economy is a lot bigger and provides more services. Furthermore, the lack of social services which are downloaded to employers causes US companies to be horribly inefficient. Why did Ontario even have an auto industry? Because all the auto-companies in Michigan decided to cut bait after the autopact was signed so they wouldn't have to pay health costs to employees.

I help other people by buying things on my own free will and investing in companies, by me helping myself and keeping more of my money, I make it easier on society by having others keep more of what they earn, the Soviets used to think like you by saying we have to help out each other and a fat lot of good that did them, their incentive to succeed went down the crapper. I wouldn't call the US a slum, their rural areas are on par with ours, and lets not compare anything Canada has to Beverly Hills.

No, the Soviets didn't think like me. Keep trying to paint that the Canadian left and the USSR are one in the same. Only shows how ignorant you are.

Or I can buy health insurance and include the insurance company in my investment portfolio to hedge against trips to the hospital. Plus I could enjoy my low taxes to boot.

The value of your stock portfoilio would have to expand exponentially to cover the cost of the money you lose paying for similar care here.

It's people that do have an idea where they go, could care less about getting gouged at tax time so that Timmy in Toronto gets a free roof over his head. As for Ireland, the proper way of how taxation works, they pay less tax for everything, and have benefitted greatly. You are of the belief that people are to owe society, I am of the belief that society owes the people. Taxes are a form of punishment on people and should be kept to an absolute minimum. Alberta has seen the light, why can't Quebec and Ontario?

How can society owe the people when society is just people in itself? Society is the benefit of when people come together to provide each other services. No pay no play.

Codswallop, the US is a prime example, they have 10 times the population, their schools have 10 times the prestige, that's a fair sample. Hell by that logic, Canadian doctors should be outearning their American counterparts. You said to find an example of a poli-sci prof making less than 150K, I found lots.

10x the prestige? Yes, they have a lot of really good schools, but it's because of what you say. They have 10x the population. for every big name school in the States, there are about 1000 tiny colleges that couldn't even give out a high school degree. Universities in Ontario are just that, universities.

[blueblood]

I don't doubt that some of this originated with Clinton. Not in the least. He, and more importantly, Greenspan should also be held accountable for what's happened. They changed it in order to enact further deregulation, but Bush took a few whacks at it as well.

The irony is, had there been no act (which is regulation in the first place), the bankers being the cheapskates they are would tell the poor people looking for a house they couldn't afford to go pound sand.

If that's what you think Socialism is you need to go back to school.

Quebec and Europe are on the trolley tracks. Next stop socialism.

Fine, keep more of your money. But if we're going to cut services, things like emergency health services should be cut as well. Having a heart attack? Good luck, you chose your route by "keeping" your money. Enjoy all that dough while you can.

Which is why I advocate a low flat tax. We keep emergency services, but say bye bye to things like the CBC, CRTC, welfare, union perks for the civil servants arts, foreign aid and other things like that to name a few.

It's pretty clear that even in terms of GDP the European economy is a lot bigger and provides more services. Furthermore, the lack of social services which are downloaded to employers causes US companies to be horribly inefficient. Why did Ontario even have an auto industry? Because all the auto-companies in Michigan decided to cut bait after the autopact was signed so they wouldn't have to pay health costs to employees.

The way the Europeans spend money, I should hope the Euro Economy should be bigger, by the way how is that working out relative to the US? Looks like the good ol' stars and stripes have the EU licked again!

US companies horribly inefficient? Walmart anyone? The huge amount of social services make our bureaucracy inefficient, we all know how that experiment with huge amounts of social services worked out in commie land.

The companies in Michigan are cutting bait on the Canadian factories as well. The unions cooked their own goose.

No, the Soviets didn't think like me. Keep trying to paint that the Canadian left and the USSR are one in the same. Only shows how ignorant you are.

But you are one in the same, you guys want gov't involved heavily in the economy, regulations out the wazoo, you guys want people like me to make less money, and for people like me to fork over money to poor people, which results in chaos. This is why Jack Layton can't crack 21% of the vote come election time. You guys think government knows how to spend my money better than I do.

The value of your stock portfoilio would have to expand exponentially to cover the cost of the money you lose paying for similar care here.

good thing the US's rock bottom taxes cover that. Then there's that darn health insurance I'm paying for. Why would I be paying a premium and not getting the benefits of health insurance? Then I'm investing in that company on top of that.

How can society owe the people when society is just people in itself? Society is the benefit of when people come together to provide each other services. No pay no play.

And society has to provide incentive for the people that contribute to society more than others, such as Alberta. The flat provincial tax covers anybody that uses their services and at the same time doesn't gouge those that go the extra mile. No pay no play is a two way street, and that's what the left doesn't get. The Russkies didn't get it either. By keeping up with our stone age taxation, more and more rich people will leave the country and we are poorer because of it.

10x the prestige? Yes, they have a lot of really good schools, but it's because of what you say. They have 10x the population. for every big name school in the States, there are about 1000 tiny colleges that couldn't even give out a high school degree. Universities in Ontario are just that, universities.

And there's no tiny colleges in Canada?

[nicky10013]

Before the Nazi party took over unemployment was at 30%. After the ytook over it was pretty much at 0%

People went to work for Germany largely. Working to rearm Germany. Almost all profits were taxed by 50%.

The social welfare program of Germany found jobs for people to ensure they were at a livable level.

Government funded vacations and festivals t o bolster solidarity were also the norm.

The design and construction of the Volkswagon "The people's car" A car every german could afford. Not to mention the Autobahn. Both of these were Nazi Germany constructs and very socialist in nature.

Free healthcare, plus the dangers of tobacco smoke was first realized by German physicians but they were silenced by the Americans.

Germany was one fo the first advanced nations of the time to put emphisis on saving wildlife and forests and protecting the environment.

These are all socialist endevours.

Socialist endeavours? Yikes. Weapons were built on contract by private companies. Healthcare was a right in Germany as early as 1888. Paid holidays weren't all that new either.

The Volkswagen and the Autobahn were government projects but both were created more for war than the people. The autobahn was created so troops could easily from east to west to either defend or attack. Volkswagen made trucks and cars for the wermacht. Environmentalism isn't really a socialist endeavour, either. Have you seen Russian megafactories? What about Lake Baikal?

Tell me, what do you think socialism is? I don't think I've ever gotten a straight answer from a declared conservative.

[nicky10013]

The irony is, had there been no act (which is regulation in the first place), the bankers being the cheapskates they are would tell the poor people looking for a house they couldn't afford to go pound sand.

I doubt it. There wasn't any regulation around credit in the 20s and look what happend. 10 years later, great depression

Quebec and Europe are on the trolley tracks. Next stop socialism.

Meh, not really. Germany, France now, England are hardly socialists. Spain, Italy and Greece and Portugal are going to have to fall in line and cut costs. Ireland benefited as much from their economic policies as they suffered from them. They opened up and cut taxes, the problem was when the crisis hit, everyone divested because it was easy to do so. Other than that, th EU itself is doing what most modern economies should be doing. They're investing in infrastructure, R&D and tax incentives for companies that produce new technology. EU multinationals are slowly taking over from American ones.

Which is why I advocate a low flat tax. We keep emergency services, but say bye bye to things like the CBC, CRTC, welfare, union perks for the civil servants arts, foreign aid and other things like that to name a few.

The CBC is debatable. I agree with the CRTC, but a country without welfare, foreign aide and other things like that wouldn't be a country. The more you cut people off from society's help, the more they're going to turn to crime.

The way the Europeans spend money, I should hope the Euro Economy should be bigger, by the way how is that working out relative to the US? Looks like the good ol' stars and stripes have the EU licked again!

No, they don't. It started in the US and spread to the EU. The EU will recover and the euro will gain stronger. There's the possibility that the low Euro might help the European economy. Most EU nations export and the high currency has hurt that aspect of the economy.

US companies horribly inefficient? Walmart anyone? The huge amount of social services make our bureaucracy inefficient, we all know how that experiment with huge amounts of social services worked out in commie land.

The companies in Michigan are cutting bait on the Canadian factories as well. The unions cooked their own goose.

The USSR never got any social services so really, the commieland comment is ridiculously stupid. You really should read a book about the USSR. I respect most of your arguments, but honestly, you're doing yourself a disservice by comparing Canada and Europe to the Soviet Union. It's stupid. Really really stupid.

But you are one in the same, you guys want gov't involved heavily in the economy, regulations out the wazoo, you guys want people like me to make less money, and for people like me to fork over money to poor people, which results in chaos. This is why Jack Layton can't crack 21% of the vote come election time. You guys think government knows how to spend my money better than I do.

I want the government involved but not heavily involved. I believe that in most industries the private sector is the best way to go. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have the government looking out to protect us from scammers and morons. The entire conservative movement is based on the fact that markets are rational and will always distribute the most amount for the cheapest prices. Not true. Why? People aren't rational and markets are only extensions of human emotions. I can't remember his name but some dude managing a hedgefund made billions by making really weird calls based on that very fact. Lets just ditch all regulations. That means I can start selling medical licences online for 1000 bucks a pop. That means I should be able to use child labour or be able to pay someone $1 a day.

There needs to be laws to keep things in check. There need to be regulations to keep people from taking insanely crazy risks. They need to be smart so they don't stifle, but the ridiculously radical notion that no regulations are at all are somehow the promisedland of economics is just not feasible.

good thing the US's rock bottom taxes cover that. Then there's that darn health insurance I'm paying for. Why would I be paying a premium and not getting the benefits of health insurance? Then I'm investing in that company on top of that.

Like I said, you get what you pay for. I know where I'd rather live.

And society has to provide incentive for the people that contribute to society more than others, such as Alberta. The flat provincial tax covers anybody that uses their services and at the same time doesn't gouge those that go the extra mile. No pay no play is a two way street, and that's what the left doesn't get. The Russkies didn't get it either. By keeping up with our stone age taxation, more and more rich people will leave the country and we are poorer because of it.

Again with a comment about communism. You just don't get it.

And there's no tiny colleges in Canada?

They're community colleges, not universities. There's a massive difference. At community college you can take courses on casino dealing (not making it up, offered at seneca) and in universities you learn about things like economics, science and political science. In other words, how the world actually works.

[Smallc]

The walking experience is no more risky than in Winnipeg,

That's a bunch of bull. The murder rate of Detroit and DC are 10 times that of Winnipeg, the most murder filled large city in Canada.

[M.Dancer]

That's a bunch of bull. The murder rate of Detroit and DC are 10 times that of Winnipeg, the most murder filled large city in Canada.

The rate is 40 per 100k in Detroit, 30.8 for DC and 5.22 per 100,000 for winterpeg

[Smallc]

5.22 per 100,000 for winterpeg

The latest number I have is 4/100K.

4.1 in 2008, and it's slightly lower in 2009. No murders as of yet in 2010.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2009/07/22/10217306-sun.html

Edited March 8, 2010 by Smallc

[bush_cheney2004]

That's a bunch of bull. The murder rate of Detroit and DC are 10 times that of Winnipeg, the most murder filled large city in Canada.

There's more to life than just murder. Sorry that you live in a crime capital?

[Smallc]

In 4 years, I've never witnessed a violent crime in Winnipeg.

[bush_cheney2004]

Dude, you're an idiot, probably on drugs and have no idea what you're talking about. The point was to say that Germany was far from the black friendly paradise you painted and that there's no denying....

Well hell, neither was Canada. Blacks, Asians, Ukrainians, Jews, Natives...name your favorite oppressed "minority". Funny part being, it's still official policy to regard some as "visible minorities"...what an absurd idea!

[bush_cheney2004]

In 4 years, I've never witnessed a violent crime in Winnipeg.

So nobody has sex in Winnipeg either...because you have never witnessed it?

[nicky10013]

Well hell, neither was Canada. Blacks, Asians, Ukrainians, Jews, Natives...name your favorite oppressed "minority". Funny part being, it's still official policy to regard some as "visible minorities"...what an absurd idea!

At the time, no, no it wasn't. I never made the argument that in the 40s it was. In fact, I've argued that the 40s was one of the worst periods in Canadian history due to the rounding up of the Japanese. Not that you'd even rate that. Dick.