Immigration

[Machjo]

Short of prohibiting international marriages and denying Canadians access to their foreign spouses and children, you'll have to accept at least a certain degree of immigration.

[Machjo]

What does Jesus teach about immigration?

[kraychik]

What does Jesus teach about immigration?

So Zionists and Islamists are opposite sides of the same coin?

[Bonam]

Calling someone homophobic raises the self-awareness of that person to reflect on their thoughts, don't you think? 'Homophobic' or 'Racist' is simply a label. It may be derogatory in your mind but it may be accepting for someone who actually is 'homophobic'.

Calling someone homophobic, misogynist, or racist are all clear and unambiguous insults.

If you want someone to "reflect on their thoughts", try posting something more constructive rather than namecalling.

[Machjo]

What does that have to do with what Jesus teaches a about immigration?

[Michael Hardner]

Calling someone homophobic, misogynist, or racist are all clear and unambiguous insults.

Likely true, unless somebody unabashedly admits those positions. I got caught in thread drift, though, so let's get back to the topic.

[kraychik]

Why aren't the leaders arguing about immigration? It should be in the top ten most important topics.

Because of acquiescence to the left-wing media. Maclean's hosted the first debate, what did you expect?

Still, it's no excuse for Harper not to take charge. He's failing Canadians in not having the courage to speak more directly to the demographic destruction being wrought on the country via irresponsible immigration policies. It's sick that the subject is perceived to be so taboo, and it benefits the left.

[kraychik]

Calling someone homophobic, misogynist, or racist are all clear and unambiguous insults.

If you want someone to "reflect on their thoughts", try posting something more constructive rather than namecalling.

I agree. Still, I prefer my leftists unhinged. Being insulted with nonsense ("racist!", "homophobe!", "bigot!") doesn't bother me.

[Bonam]

Because of acquiescence to the left-wing media. Maclean's hosted the first debate, what did you expect?

Still, it's no excuse for Harper not to take charge. He's failing Canadians in not having the courage to speak more directly to the demographic destruction being wrought on the country via irresponsible immigration policies. It's sick that the subject is perceived to be so taboo, and it benefits the left.

I agree that it's unfortunate that it's taboo... but I don't even see it benefiting the left much any more. Immigrants vote for all 3 parties. While some immigrants might be tempted by policies that make it easier for them to bring over their relatives, others would be just as happy if the door was shut behind them. And most vote based on issues unrelated to immigration policy, given that they are already here.

[Bonam]

I agree. Still, I prefer my leftists unhinged. Being insulted with nonsense ("racist!", "homophobe!", "bigot!") doesn't bother me.

Hah, well you'll find no shortage of that here

[kraychik]

I agree that it's unfortunate that it's taboo... but I don't even see it benefiting the left much any more. Immigrants vote for all 3 parties. While some immigrants might be tempted by policies that make it easier for them to bring over their relatives, others would be just as happy if the door was shut behind them. And most vote based on issues unrelated to immigration policy, given that they are already here.

I agree with the last part.... immigrants aren't particularly driven by immigration policy. The rest... not so much. Most immigrants we bring in like a big fat welfare state.

[Bonam]

I agree with the last part.... immigrants aren't particularly driven by immigration policy. The rest... not so much. Most immigrants we bring in like a big fat welfare state.

Well, I'm too lazy to look up any stats on the matter right now, but I grew up in Vancouver and almost all my friends were either 1st or 2nd generation immigrants from Asia (China, HK, Taiwan, etc). I've kept in touch with many of them and probably about half lean conservative these days. I don't think that sample is atypical.

Edited August 22, 2015 by Bonam

[kraychik]

Well, I'm too lazy to look up any stats on the matter right now, but I grew up in Vancouver and almost all my friends were either 1st or 2nd generation immigrants from Asia (China, HK, Taiwan, etc). I've kept in touch with many of them and probably about half lean conservative these days. I don't think that sample is atypical.

Vancouver immigrants are very atypical. Not representative of the types of immigrants in Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto, Ottawa, or Montreal. I mean, there are Orientals/Asians/East Asians in all those cities, but not to the same extent. Not sure the data we're looking for exists.

[Michael Hardner]

Most immigrants we bring in like a big fat welfare state.

Cite ? The generalities you post have been heard before. I would like to see some independent evidence.

[kraychik]

Cite ? The generalities you post have been heard before. I would like to see some independent evidence.

Oh right, I remember this routine. You demanding evidence you know doesn't exist because it hasn't been researched. Your posturing as a scientifically-oriented just-the-facts-ma'am objective rationalist was amusing, if not tedious. Glad to see you haven't changed.

If a tree falls in the woods and I hear it, but Michael Hardner doesn't.... did it make a sound?

Edited August 22, 2015 by kraychik

[Michael Hardner]

Oh right, I remember this routine. You demanding evidence you know doesn't exist because it hasn't been researched.

I remember the routine also, although I don't remember you personally as you said you're an old time poster.

But many try it: come on here and post opinions as facts without cites. When challenged, the poster can't produce them. That's ok. The discussion just goes away for me after that point.

I have changed my position quite a bit here since I joined, but always because there were facts that surprised me.

[kraychik]

I remember the routine also, although I don't remember you personally as you said you're an old time poster.

But many try it: come on here and post opinions as facts without cites. When challenged, the poster can't produce them. That's ok. The discussion just goes away for me after that point.

I have changed my position quite a bit here since I joined, but always because there were facts that surprised me.

Right. You're a fact-driven man. Not at all a leftist. I remember.

[Michael Hardner]

Ok... no harm, no foul, no cite, and moving on...

[cybercoma]

Please keep the comments away from personal insinuations. Unless someone calls themselves a racist don't insinuate that they are.

how does it feel to champion racist arguments by not allowing people to point them out?

[Michael Hardner]

how does it feel to champion racist arguments by not allowing people to point them out?

I said that going after the argument is the preferred way. "Your argument is racist because...." is ok. "You are a racist..." not ok, as it's pejorative unless the person self identifies that way anyway.

[waldo]

If you want me to say Harper says and does a lot of stuff I don't agree with, then by all means, he does. I don't think I've made much of a secret about that.

good on ya for acknowledging those statements of yours on immigration have been countered by the leader of your favoured Conservative party. But the, as you say, "stuff", that Harper stated is specific enough that it has to be fact based... it just can't be a cursory opinion he's providing - or are you really contending that Harper is telling porkies? Again, you assert that there is no foundation to support beliefs/positions that immigration increases are required... Harper says otherwise. Tell me, why is Harper, and by obvious extension, Harper Conservatives, so keen to establish immigration policy/legislation that completely undercuts your whole premise?

.

[Argus]

I suspect the reason you are these days dissing your guy Harper a bit is because he disagrees with you on immigration.

Not being a polical zealot, I have never shied away from criticizing Harper and have done so for years.

Some of those immigrants may have non-white skin, Oh My!

The steady mantra of the moog, the brainless ideologue who has to support something like it's religious dogma, even if he knows nothing about it.

Take a look at the fertility rates in Canada

It really reveals the low quality of a poster when someone posts detailed cites which show that an argument is wrong, and, never once addressing it, he makes the same claims again and again.

Edited August 22, 2015 by Argus

[Argus]

Is racist a bad word? Is calling someone homophobic, anti-feminist, mysogynist not allowed either?

No more than calling someone a moron, an idiot and a retard.

[Argus]

Certain folks get a bye here.

Ahhh, did someone tell you to address the argument instead of insulting the person putting it? Ahhhh! That's your whole shtick! You'd have to find another web site!

[Argus]

Calling someone homophobic raises the self-awareness of that person to reflect on their thoughts, don't you think? 'Homophobic' or 'Racist' is simply a label. It may be derogatory in your mind but it may be accepting for someone who actually is 'homophobic'.

In HIS mind? In whose mind would it not be considered derogatory? It's a pejorative term, an insult. If you can call people racists because you think they are, then shouldn't they be allowed to call you a moron because they think you are?