Homosexuals and Children

[redhead_pt]

You are so unbelievably stupid, Leafless, words alone cannot describe... you have failed in rebutting even a single point I brought up, and countered only with mindless babble that makes no specific arguments, and only adds to your perceived stupidity.

"No real values or common identity"? The common value is one of respect of personal freedoms and equality, the common identity is one of multicultural, sexual, spiritual, and social diversity. If you don't agree with that, I suggest you hop back in your time machine, set the dial for 1940 and meet your mentor- Adolph Hitler- as you seem overly eager to embrace his philosophies.

If you choose to dwell on the fact that your religion touts an anti-gay message, then you are not in touch with God at all. Jesus' cardinal lesson was one of love and acceptance, an idea with which you are seemingly out of touch. The church once quoted the bible in denying rights both to blacks and women, and yet I don't see your stout opposition to their equal rights. You are a biased bigot, likely a result of your homophobia.

An interesting side-note, research has indicated that homophobic men are largely "turned on" by gay pornography, and that their homophobia is largely the result of an inner struggle of cognitive dissonance.

Secondly, America's stance as a leader in democracy was relinquished the very day they passed the Patriot Act- which basically acts as a limiting clause to their Bill of Rights… if that is the model of democracy for which you yearn, feel free to drop off your application for immigration.

The debate in this forum has become dull and vague… Leafless, you are moving from specific issues on to the broader base of grudge that you seem to hold for the Liberal party of Canada and democracy as a whole. Your ongoing generalizations are a result of your inability to recognize the outweighing strengths in EVERYONE else’s arguments. Your posts, meanwhile, ring hollow- a nonsensical amalgam of blather which never succeeds in making a single good point. I certainly don’t have time for nitwits like you, and every other enlightened person taking part in this debate seems on side with Charter Rights. Your reasoning as to the initial premise of this debate has been toppled by innumerous arguments of unambiguous superiority. It is time that you concede defeat!

[Leafless]

redhead_pt

I dont consider you to bright either and no is asking you to share my views or even reply.

I consider you a mere socialistic crusader out primarily to distort views with unrealistic socialistic and homosexual rhetoric.

Respecting freedoms and equalities are items that have to be earned and not just taken for granted especially concerning an established society who already has laid the social framework.

Your interpretation of common identity as being multicultural, sexual, spirtual and social diversity covers a lot of ground and I don't think many Canadians would be willing or ready to accept that at face value and clarification would obviously be next to impossible due to the sheer numbers of different and undefined opinions as of what each item is suppose to represent or mean.

[redhead_pt]

I dont consider you to bright either and no is asking you to share my views or even reply.

case and point... too bright, and no one is asking... are among the infinite mistakes in spelling and grammar which you routinely perplex us with.

I consider you a mere socialistic crusader out primarily to distort views with unrealistic socialistic and homosexual rhetoric.

I am in no way meaning to present distored views; my purpose is to change the distorded views of ignoratums like you. Rhetoric, here defined for you, since it's use proves slightly oxymoronic... :- Skill in using language effectively and persuasively... and yet you also claim that I am not bright... so which is it? Either you think the former and are simply using words for which you know not the meaning, or you think the latter and are therefore complimenting me... haha, one word sums you up in all your wanton and contrived pedantism. It's an adjective, starts with an S, ends with a D, and I'm certain your not too S _ _ _ _ D to figure this one out!

Respecting freedoms and equalities are items that have to be earned and not just taken for granted especially concerning an established society who already has laid the social framework.

OMG, please do tell me you are joking. The idea that rights have to be earned? Ha! Please look up "rights and freedoms", by anyone's standard definition, and find me some outside reference whereby anyone is in agreeance with you. By your lacky standard, people on welfare should be abandoned and left to die, seeing as how their "right to life" as defined in the charter is not well-earned. Yet again, the NAZI party awaits your call...

Your interpretation of common identity as being multicultural, sexual, spirtual and social diversity covers a lot of ground and I don't think many Canadians would be willing or ready to accept that at face value and clarification would obviously be next to impossible due to the sheer numbers of different and undefined opinions as of what each item is suppose to represent or mean.

Yet another fine example of the run on the sentence; something, Leafless, with which you seem all too familiar. That aside, I think Canadians do think their country to be one that is accepting of diversity, as published in survery after survey on "what it means to be canadian". These ideas are meant to be used in an utmost generality that it is meant to parallel our wide-ranging acceptance of a wide range of practises... get it? got it? good! Since you -> , dont understand the meaning of multiculturalism, spirituality, or sexuality, (among the many facets of diversity as a whole) the boys at meriam-webster would be sure to give you a hand. I think that everyone else has a fairly decent handle on my implied meaning.

[Leafless]

redhead_pt

Iam just trying to be polite!

May I should have replied with 'cheap homo propaganda.'

Have another glass of white wine you elated self righteous moronic idiot.

[redhead_pt]

1) Anyone who opposes my right to equality can make no claim nor appeal for respect or pleasantries. That is what this is all about, respecting differences!

2) In response to:

May I should have replied with 'cheap homo propaganda.

Well, maybe you just did, which only supports my case for your homophobia and as a result your repressed homo-love-lust desires!

3) Lastly,

Have another glass of white wine you elated self righteous moronic idiot.

a ) I think I might do just that... having a drink before responding to your posts should intoxicate me enough so as to lower my mental acuity and cognitive reasoning skills to... well, your level. On second thought, I'm going to need an entire bottle if that is what I hope to achieve.

b ) Just because I am always right, it does not necessarily follow that I am self-righteous; nor should my reverence and appreciation for equality allow me to be branded self-righteous.

c ) moronic and idiotic are synonymous, and therefore needn't be used in quick succession. We already have a hard enough time deciphering your writing, Leafless. Grammatical and syntax issues succeed only in furthering our difficulties... I am happy to note from another post that I am not alone in my judgement

A facist government is an extreme right-wing government with little tolerance for "lefty" things like "organized labour"... You'll have to get it together, or change your handle to "Clueless" from "leafless"

[Argus]

To settle this argument - you are both idiots.

Okay?

[crazymf]

I think gay people should be able to adopt only gay children. And then they should have gay settlements with gay schools and gay shopping centres. They could start gay churches and have their own gay politicians. Hell, why not have a gay province??

Could call it Queerbec maybe.

[I Miss Trudeau]

I think gay people should be able to adopt only gay children. And then they should have gay settlements with gay schools and gay shopping centres. They could start gay churches and have their own gay politicians. Hell, why not have a gay province??

Could call it Queerbec maybe.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I vote to extend Argus' comment to this poster, as well.

[crazymf]

IMT. Lighten up. This topic has been beaten to death.

Maybe you'd want to move there, yes???

[Black Dog]

Respecting freedoms and equalities are items that have to be earned and not just taken for granted especially concerning an established society who already has laid the social framework.

Uh...no. Individual rights and freedoms are inherent: that is, no one has to earn the rights guranteed under the charter.

[Leafless]

Black Dog

Concerning--"Individual rights and freedoms are inherent: that is no one has to earn the rights guaranteed under the Charter."

This is if course depending on interpretation of the Charter in which I argue should be in the hands of the provinces rather than the federal government who are not in the position I feel to make major decissions incorporating a handfull of politicians while ignoring Canadian democratic input.

Irregardless rights and freedoms were fought for and that is why we enjoy the freedoms we do to-day.

The charter Rights you referred to are not the rights and freedoms that were fought for. To-day the rights and freedoms that we enjoy are basically protected by the United States of America much to their credit.

[Black Dog]

Leafless: you're out to lunch.

Individual rights and freedoms are inherent: that is no one has to earn the rights guaranteed under the Charter."

This is if course depending on interpretation of the Charter in which I argue should be in the hands of the provinces rather than the federal government who are not in the position I feel to make major decissions incorporating a handfull of politicians while ignoring Canadian democratic input.

No, the legal, democratic and fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter are I would counter that the idea of delegating individual rights to the provinces is ridiculous, simply because, without broad constitutional gurantees, there would be no consistency.

Irregardless rights and freedoms were fought for and that is why we enjoy the freedoms we do to-day.

The charter Rights you referred to are not the rights and freedoms that were fought for.

No? So freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of expression and freedom of the press, peaceful assembly, and freedom of association are not the freedoms "we" fought for? Tell me: which freedoms are missing?

To-day the rights and freedoms that we enjoy are basically protected by the United States of America much to their credit.

That implie sthat some one is trying to take those righst and freedoms away and are prevented from doing so only by he U.S.A. That is not the case. What's more, the U.S.A. doesn't give a flying fig abot Canadians' individual rights: thankfully, those are protected by our own law.

[Leafless]

Black Dog

Concerning --"there would be no Consistency"--What consistency is there now as far as for the feds enforcing charter rights? Quebec the second largest province in Canada discriminates every day and the feds do nothing about it. Why should the federal government be the ones who detirmine what a right issue is when obviously regional interest in the case of Quebec for instance establishes unrealistic demands from the rest of Canada. All provinces should have the same rights to accomodate for regional interest and cultural aspects.

You ask what freedoms we fought for. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms are BASED on the initial freedoms Canada won and this is owed to the British win on the Plains of Abraham.

U.S presence ALONE is responsible for maintaining Canadian security which directly relates to maintaining Canada's freedom's. I don't think any one would deny that fact.

[Black Dog]

Concerning --"there would be no Consistency"--What consistency is there now as far as for the feds enforcing charter rights? Quebec the second largest province in Canada discriminates every day and the feds do nothing about it. Why should the federal government be the ones who detirmine what a right issue is when obviously regional interest in the case of Quebec for instance establishes unrealistic demands from the rest of Canada. All provinces should have the same rights to accomodate for regional interest and cultural aspects.

You contradict yourself. Quebec is able to maintain its divisive language laws because of the concessions made to the provinces (ie. the notwithstanding clause). So, if the constitution is flawed, it is because it gives the provinces a backdoor to duck out of their obligation to guarantee individual rights. If you had your way, all provinces would be free to ignore individual rights if they so chose.I'm not sure that's the kind of country we'd like to see.

You ask what freedoms we fought for. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms are BASED on the initial freedoms Canada won and this is owed to the British win on the Plains of Abraham.

More self-contradiction. Either the Charter is based on those initial freedoms (whatever they may be), or the rights therein are not the rights and freedoms that were fought for (as you contended earlier).

U.S presence ALONE is responsible for maintaining Canadian security which directly relates to maintaining Canada's freedom's. I don't think any one would deny that fact.

Yet, according to you, our freedoms are under attack. If that is the case, then clearly the U.S. military is not doing its job.

[Leafless]

Black dog

Are you unable to form a paragraph relating your thoghts without CONTINUALLY resorting to quotes on virtually every sentence one posts?? BTW Candians never did get a chance to be part of the process the Canada they would like to see.

This I would like to see-- ALL provinces in Canada using the NWC for instance to protect the English language in their respective provinces--and Iam sure the feds would allow this or using the NWC to enforce religious convictions.

We have always had Rights in Canada before the introduction of the charter with no major problems and these Rights and freedoms are a direct result concerning the British win of Canda and giving us their form of government and in fact are related to the creation of the U.S. by the same people. You seem to want to disassociate Canada's close relationship to Britain and the U.S.

Our freedoms are under attack and originating from this country--namely the Liberal government. The presence of the U.S. GREATLY reduces the risk of any type of attack in Canada--what do you think the reason is-- Canada has no enemies?

[Guest eureka]

I can't stand it!

[Black Dog]

Are you unable to form a paragraph relating your thoghts without CONTINUALLY resorting to quotes on virtually every sentence one posts?? 

It's called a "rebuttal". Look it up, right after you look up "how to write a sentence".

BTW Candians never did get a chance to be part of the process the Canada they would like to see.

Legislation does not define a nation's character, but reflects it. You keep bl;atehring on about how the patriation of the Cosntiution and the enactment of the Charter was an affront to democracy, but I fail to see why Canadians should have a say. It's a representative democracy, after all.

This I would like to see-- ALL provinces in Canada using the NWC for instance to protect the English language in their respective provinces--and Iam sure the feds would allow this or using the NWC to enforce religious convictions.

The English language is not under attack anywhere, save Quebec. As for using the NWC to enforce religious convictions: are you daft? The state has no place doing so.

We have always had Rights in Canada before the introduction of the charter with no major problems and these Rights and freedoms are a direct result concerning the British win of Canda and giving us their form of government and in fact are related to the creation of the U.S. by the same people. You seem to want to disassociate Canada's close relationship to Britain and the U.S.

The roots of the Canadian system in the British parlimentary model is both self-evident and irrelevant to this debate.

As near as I can tell, your beef is with the recognition of certain rights as being universal for all Canadians.

Our freedoms are under attack and originating from this country--namely the Liberal government. The presence of the U.S. GREATLY reduces the risk of any type of attack in Canada--what do you think the reason is-- Canada has no enemies?

So, if freedoms are under attack by our own government, and the U.S. is such a stalwart protector, why haven't they stepped in? Could it be because our freedoms are not under attack? Certainly, Liberal corruption is a serious thing, and the Canadian electoral system is in dire need of reform, but grab a little perspective here.

[Leafless]

Black Dog

I acknowledge the Left Wing and homosexual agenda rebutes Right wing ideolgies and operates on the same principle Quebec does.

With Quebec it's always been about linguistic superiority and with Left Wing and the homosexual community it's all about intellectual superiorty a direct take off from the Trudeau hippie pot smoking era in which Trudeau and his pals thought they were so intellectually superior.

Maybe the next election all those dormant Right Wingers who don't bother to vote and hopefully will vote kicking Liberal butt and their communist policies out for good.

[Black Dog]

Black Dog

I acknowledge the Left Wing and homosexual agenda rebutes Right wing ideolgies and operates on the same principle Quebec does.

With Quebec it's always been about linguistic superiority and with Left Wing and the homosexual community it's all about intellectual superiorty a direct take off from the Trudeau hippie pot smoking era in which Trudeau and his pals thought they were so intellectually superior.

Maybe the next election all those dormant Right Wingers who don't bother to vote and hopefully will vote kicking Liberal butt and their communist policies out for good.

Since you aren't able to rebut my arguments or even resolve your own contradicary statements, I'll take this as acknowledgment of my ""intellectual superiority".

Seriously: when did "you pot somoking hippies think you're so smart" become a sunstitute for rational debate.