Toews: 'Free Vote' on Same Sex Marriage

[Ramesh]

It isn't racism. Ramesh, along with most Christian fundamentalists, has demonstrated again, again and again that they just don't GET Canadian Culture.

You do not know me or what my religion is.

You have demonstrated your ignorance of Canadian politics yet again. Both men are in the leadership, yes, even Morton and Flan. You seem to know enough that Morton is a MLA, but don't know what his role in the Con party is. That's fine. Educate yourself.

I know enough about Canadian politics to know I have the right to an opinion and have a right to vote. Just like you. The point is you made hateful and untrue accuasations against people you can't even prove.

Well, if they're going to be so insistant, let's give them a taste of what it'll be like. I have no problem, if they're going to use religion to justify their hatred and discrimination against homosexuals, I got no problem in attacking their religion.

I never said such things. You are lying again to try to make me look bad. I do not hate homosexuals at all.

However, I have a problem when they force their religion into public debate.

So they can exist but they are not allowed to express their opinions?

Public policy, in the public sphere, must be secular.

But it is ok for you to expressing your religious opinion?

What of my race? Can I talk of this publically or no?

[Ramesh]

I think that a good society need to have some source or orgin of values to start from. 

Does it matter to you what that source is? If yes, how do you choose?

Why is it wrong to steal from someone who is rich?

What do you mean by 'steal'?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well we must have some source. Traditions, comon principles shared in the creation of this country.

By steal I mean what I say. Theif, steal money steal gold, what ever.

[Black Dog]

I think that a good society need to have some source or orgin of values to start from. Otherwise where to we start from. Who is to say what other things are wrong? Why is murder wrong? Why is it wrong to steal from someone who is rich?

Simple. Laws against murder and theft infinge the rihts of others. Th eidea is that we shall do no harm. Gay marriage doesn't infringe anyone else's rights. It only affects those gays who wish to marry. No one else.

How is nudity hurting you - it isn't, but we don't allow it. Get it!

The idea behind public decency standards is that some things can be harmful in ways other than physically. I think there's reasonable limits to this. Nudity or say public masturbation is not something we need to see. But once you start dictating what symbols people are allowed to display, you're crossing th eline from decency to authoritarianism.

GET IT?

It isn't racism. Ramesh, along with most Christian fundamentalists, has demonstrated again, again and again that they just don't GET Canadian Culture.

Ramesh doesn't seem to be a Chrisitian. Between the name and an earlier reference, I'd guess Hindu? Can you see how your comment that he/she is not a real Canadian could be construed as rascist?

Rascism aside I think such sentiments are shitty anyway. You'r e making a soild argument when you say

Public policy, in the public sphere, must be secular.

Don't muddy the waters by getting into what makes a "real" Canadian.

[RightWinger]

Alright, let's give Ramesh a course on what it means to be Canadian, since clearly he doesn't get canadian culture.

I think this warrants an apology. Or is rascism okay if you don't agree with someone's position?

I would prefer as a general practice if we would avoid careless accusations of racism.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey Sweal he is telling Ramesh that he has no idea what it means to be Canadian!!! In other words, he is assuming by his name that he is not a Canadian. Or wants to assimilate him, I guess???

This awfuly sounds racist to me!!! This is a guy that will call all Conservative racists yet will use Ramesh as if he were an refugee and not a Canadian. Sounds like the double standard to me!

RW

[takeanumber]

Ramesh doesn't seem to be a Chrisitian. Between the name and an earlier reference, I'd guess Hindu? Can you see how your comment that he/she is not a real Canadian could be construed as rascist?

Rascism aside I think such sentiments are shitty anyway. You'r e making a soild argument when you say

Who cares if Ramesh is Hindu? He might be fourth generation Canadian. Somebody might be fifteenth generation Canadian and not be truly 'Canadian'.

If you don't have Canadian values, you ain't Canadian. Being Canadian is not 'racial', and frankly I'm offended that you seem to be implying that it is. Being Canadian is an attitude. It's a good attitude towards your fellow man.

Beating minorities with your minority religion (which is everybody) is un-Canadian.

I don't know what using a narrow interpretation of religion as justification for hate based public policy is...but that sure as hell isn't Canadian. If you disagree, check the history books.

-----

Glad you agree on the secular principle Black Dog.

[takeanumber]

In other words, he is assuming by his name that he is not a Canadian. Or wants to assimilate him, I guess???

I assumed no such thing and you have no proof that I did.

Moreover RightWinger, based on what you've writen on these forums, you're not much of a Canadian yourself.

[Ramesh]

You have demonstrated your ignorance of Canadian politics yet again. Both men are in the leadership, yes, even Morton and Flan. You seem to know enough that Morton is a MLA, but don't know what his role in the Con party is. That's fine. Educate yourself.

Well I decided to "educate" myself. Morton or Flan (short for Tom Flanagan) are not in the leadership of the Federal Conservative Party and they aren't mormons either. You lied! and tried to make mormons look bad.

[takeanumber]

Oh? You checked did you.

Alright then.

When was the last time Morton and Flanagan, Harper, and Brodie got together?

What were they doing?

tried to make mormons look bad.

How?

Quote me.

[RightWinger]

Beating minorities with your minority religion (which is everybody) is un-Canadian.

-----

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, everybody, constitutes a minority????

That sentence is so full of contradictions I don't know where to start.

Next question.... who made you the authority on what a "Canadian" is. I could not find it in the dictionary!

A Canadian would be someone with citizenship in Canada seem to me!

[Ramesh]

Sadly, the Con party is dominated at the top by people who are in with Focus on the Family and many other religious groups (mormons in particular).

I'm not going to name names.

Morton, Flan. to name 2.  Happy?

You lied.

[RightWinger]

In other words, he is assuming by his name that he is not a Canadian. Or wants to assimilate him, I guess???

I assumed no such thing and you have no proof that I did.

Moreover RightWinger, based on what you've writen on these forums, you're not much of a Canadian yourself.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am a Canadian, that would be happy to see "your kind" abolished, to be honest!

Sadly, we can't do that kind of thing anymore, so we will just have to figure out how to live in the same country.(Hopefully under a Conservative gov't)

I am certain that I will not be frequenting any gay bars in the near future, so that should accomplish keeping me & you seperate!! All the work here in Alberta should be deterent enough to keep you away.

RW

[takeanumber]

Pretty narrow definition of 'Canadian'.

Beating minorities with your minority religion (which is everybody) is un-Canadian.

Beating minorities (Jews, Sikhs, homosexuals, women with unwanted fetus') with your minority religion (every religion in Canada is in the minority, since I believe that Catholic has fallen below 50%) is un-Canadian.

Go ahead and deny it.

Say that forcing religious based policies is Canadian, and is a Canadian value.

Go for it.

[RightWinger]

Pretty narrow definition of 'Canadian'.

Beating minorities with your minority religion (which is everybody) is un-Canadian.

Beating minorities (Jews, Sikhs, homosexuals, women with unwanted fetus') with your minority religion (every religion in Canada is in the minority, since I believe that Catholic has fallen below 50%) is un-Canadian.

Go ahead and deny it.

Say that forcing religious based policies is Canadian, and is a Canadian value.

Go for it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You'd rather have homsexuality rammed up your ass than religion down you throat is what I gather!

Your choice, grab some lube then!

RW

[takeanumber]

I am a Canadian, that would be happy to see "your kind" abolished, to be honest!

Sadly, we can't do that kind of thing anymore, so we will just have to figure out how to live in the same country.(Hopefully under a Conservative gov't)

I am certain that I will not be frequenting any gay bars in the near future, so that should accomplish keeping me & you seperate!! All the work here in Alberta should be deterent enough to keep you away.

RW

There's the true face of Conservatism.

Since I wouldn't be proud to call you a Canadian, I won't.

That's totally un-Canadian.

We gotta get along in this country. A part of that is keeping politics secular.

In your case, you don't need the religion as justification. You're an exception.

-----------

You lied.

Have some proof.

Prove to me that neither Morton nor Flannagan are not Christian Fundamentalist/Mormon.

Otherwise, your assertion that I've lied is false.

Moreover, somebody else on these boards can independently verify that fact.

[takeanumber]

You'd rather have homsexuality rammed up your ass than religion down you throat is what I gather!

Your choice, grab some lube then!

RW

1. So you see SSM as 'homosexuality rammed up your ass'.

Interesting.

2. So you see it as a tradeoff between religion and homosexuality.

Are the two mutually exclusive.

You seem to be assuming that God isn't sympathetic to homosexuals.

3. You know what lube it.

Do I detect some previous homosexual experience?

I think we've just discovered a different side of RW.

[Black Dog]

Okay: it's official. I'm in Bizzaro world.

RightWinger backing allegations of rascism?

NDP supporters calling for totalitarian suppression of speech?

Liberal-leftists using nationalism as a club to beat down opposition?

Is it Opposite Day on MLW and I didn't get the memo?

What next? Will Hugo be calling for state control of the means of production? I need a nap.

Who cares if Ramesh is Hindu? He might be fourth generation Canadian. Somebody might be fifteenth generation Canadian and not be truly 'Canadian'.

Who the heckare you to decide who's "truly Canadian" enough? I thought defining that was Molsons' job...

Seriously though: this ain't cool. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them any less a citizen. Attack the argument on its own merits, don't attack the person holding the opiinion.

Say that forcing religious based policies is Canadian, and is a Canadian value.

Inclusiveness and diversity are Canadian values. Paradoxially, defining who is and who isn't Canadian is very unCanadian.

And I'd hate to quibble, but Canadians don't have sole ownership of the secular humanist ideal of church and state separation. That's old school Elightenment shit.

You'd rather have homsexuality rammed up your ass than religion down you throat is what I gather!

False dichotomy. "Render unto Ceaser etc etc."

Why do you hate gays so much?

[Ramesh]

Tom Flanagan = Roman Catholic http://www.notacolony.ca/101104A%20The%20M...en%20Harper.htm

Ted Morton. No evidence of what you say is true.

www.tedmorton.ca

You are a hateful person. I feel sorry for you. You attack people personally.

[takeanumber]

Hyperbole much?

The guy is a fundamentalist.

You are a hateful person. I feel sorry for you. You attack people personally.

I've done no such thing.

I've done you a great service, and if anything, you should be thanking me.

[The Terrible Sweal]

I think that a good society need to have some source or orgin of values to start from. 

Does it matter to you what that source is? If yes, how do you choose?

Well we must have some source. Traditions, comon principles shared in the creation of this country.

And what about where someone'e religious principles conflict with our common princples?

By steal I mean what I say.  Theif, steal money steal gold, what ever.

Sure you mean what you say, but I don't understand what you mean. You asked what makes steaing wrong. I asked what you mean by 'steal' because what makes it wrong depends on what your theory of property is.

[The Terrible Sweal]

Hey Sweal he is telling Ramesh that he has no idea what it means to be Canadian!!!

That is not what he said. Didn't you read it?

In other words, ... 

Other words? In fact, in YOUR words.

...he is assuming by his name that he is not a Canadian. ... This awfuly sounds racist to me!!!

How things seem to you, and how things really are are much different things. Takeanumber did not indicate anything that hinged on Ramesh's race, except according to the extraneous imputations of you and others.

[takeanumber]

And what about where someone'e religious principles conflict with our common princples?

You keep them in the private sphere, or you secularize your religious principles.

The point is to remove theology from the equation, because as you can see, the momment you start questioning the theology that somebody has invoked, you get into a very big fight.

How things seem to you, and how things really are are much different things. Takeanumber did not indicate anything that hinged on Ramesh's race, except according to the extraneous imputations of you and others.

That's exactly it Sweal, thank you.

I'm very, very far from racist.

Some of the best, most Canadian people in this country are recent immigrants.

Some of the worse, most un-Canadian people in this country are intolerant Heritage Front members with zero empathy and sympathy for anybody, who have been here for fifteen generations and feel hard done by more succesful people who arrived later, realized the opportunity, and seized it.

-----------

So, my ultimate point:

Keep politics secular.

The Con leadership, and most Cons, don't want to keep politics secular.

If these Cons are going to use religion as the basis for hatred against homosexuals, the basis (their religion) is fair game for public sphere debate. (and trust me, you do not want that.)

[Black Dog]

How things seem to you, and how things really are are much different things.  Takeanumber did not indicate anything that hinged on Ramesh's race, except according to the extraneous imputations of you and others.

I maintain it's easy to draw such a conclusion from the original statement:

Right, let's give Ramesh a course on what it means to be Canadian, since clearly he doesn't get canadian culture.

But I am willing to concede that takeanumber may not be guilty of rascism. I also maintain this "Canadian/unCandaian" business is a pile of rubbish.

Either you believe in the spearation of church and state or you don't. If you don't that's fine, but don't expect to see your views reflected in a country with a system of government founded on secular ideas.

[Dan]

Vic Toews on Politics just said something interesting:

He said that Harper has already said (really?) that should the Cons win the next election, there would be another free vote on Same Sex Marriage.

Wow!

So let me get this straight:

The Cons are going to have another vote in an attempt to revoke marriage liscenses?

What else could get onto the agenda through this free vote/private members' bills loophole?

Abortion?

Capital Punishment?

Notwithstanding clause?

With focus in the family in the drivers seat, I wouldn't be surprised.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A "FREE" vote?

One MP, one Vote???

With no party whips enforcing party discipline?

Where everyone gets to express their opinion and use their democratic rights??

OMG, What are they thinking, those scary, facist, baby-eating, bastardds!!!!

[I miss Reagan]

Who's the jerk on the forum? Sweal are you related to Takeanumber? is there some reason why you're loyal to an obvious bigot?

[Black Dog]

He said that Harper has already said (really?) that should the Cons win the next election, there would be another free vote on Same Sex Marriage.

A vote that would be about as meaningful as legalizing the Easter Bunny.

If the curent SSM bill passes, a Con government would first have to overturn it. Then they'd have to find a way to get all the provinces who've legalized gay marriage to cut it out (how they plan to do this without violating provincial juridstiction is something I'd like to see). Then they'd have to convince those provinces to declare all gay marriages so far null and void. Then brace for the deluge of lawsuits from families joined under provincial law who's unions were torn a sunder by interference from the Cons.

Good luck with that, guys.