Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons

[margrace]

[

Yes, Steve would like to burn you books. The secret agenda again Oh, and speaking of history, Tommy Douglas was a Baptist Minister. You strike me as a very frustrated person.

margrace

Oh thats interesting, care to elucidate on that? What makes me a frustrated person? Easy to make these statements isn;t it.

Wilber

The stuff you put in your rants. Where does it come from? Book burning, jeez get a grip, you will be far more credible.

Margrace

Oh come on you can do better than that It was not me who said about burning books it was you what is this bait and switch. I would like you to read more books anyone who burns them is an idiot and I think Tommy Douglas was the best thing that ever happened to Canada don't you

[scribblet]

Oh come on you can do better than that It was not me who said about burning books it was you what is this bait and switch. I would like you to read more books anyone who burns them is an idiot

okay you didn't actually say burn, you said:

There is no doubt that Mr. Harper would like to remove from our history books the facts of Mr. Douglas and Mr. Troudeau. If he gets the right people on our judges benches he will try, trust me

Please tell me how there is no doubt that Harper would like information removed from our history books - there is absolutely not shred of evidence pointing to this.

BTW I did some googling on the people mentioned in another post and didn't find anything, the accusations about stacking the committee with theo-cons are a figment of someone's imagination, or more creative thinking 101....

e.g. Cotter - not a whisper anywhere of him being an evangelical, so, evidence would be appreciated

http://www3.telus.net/public/advisory/brentcotter.htm

Vic Toews was born in Paraguay and is mennonite, certainly not evangelical, they are committed to nonviolence, nonresistance, and pacifism

Barbara Pollock was picked because of her experience ad background in committees, and because is neither a lawyer nor a judge nada on her being evangelical.

This is all a waste of time...

[Wilber]

[

Yes, Steve would like to burn you books. The secret agenda again Oh, and speaking of history, Tommy Douglas was a Baptist Minister. You strike me as a very frustrated person.

margrace

Oh thats interesting, care to elucidate on that? What makes me a frustrated person? Easy to make these statements isn;t it.

Wilber

The stuff you put in your rants. Where does it come from? Book burning, jeez get a grip, you will be far more credible.

Margrace

Oh come on you can do better than that It was not me who said about burning books it was you what is this bait and switch. I would like you to read more books anyone who burns them is an idiot and I think Tommy Douglas was the best thing that ever happened to Canada don't you

Your right, you didn't. My appologies. This is what you said.

There is no doubt that Mr. Harper would like to remove from our history books the facts of Mr. Douglas and Mr. Troudeau.

Yes, Mr Douglas was a good man and while I don't agree with all of his ideas, he did do some good things for the country. I just don't get why you would be so vociferous about people in politics who have religeous views then bring Tommy Douglas (a Baptist Minister) into the mix as one of your heros.

[Alexandra]

Sure it is, when you have 4 more CPC theo-cons sitting on the committee as well.

Well, are all of these people on the B.C. committee evangelicals? Please note this is just one committee in one province of Canada:

Federal Judicial Advisory Committee for British Columbia

JUDICIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS

BRITISH COLUMBIA

Chair:

The Honourable Madam Justice Pamela Kirkpatrick

Nominee of the Chief Justice of British Columbia

Ms Rita C. Andreone

Nominee of the Law Society of British Columbia

Mr. Terrence L. Robertson, Q.C.

Nominee of the Canadian Bar Association

Ms Laura C. Donaldson

Nominee of the Attorney General of British Columbia

Ms Sheila Sullivan

Nominee of the law enforcement community

Mr. Dirk Laudan

Nominee of the Federal Minister of Justice

Ms C. Kilburn

Nominee of the Federal Minister of Justice

Mr. Dev Dley, Q.C.

Nominee of the Federal Minister of Justice

Please also note, Jimmy Pattison's daughter, Ms. Kilburn is the sole non-affiliated appointee on this B.C. committee. As well, I highly doubt Rita would take kindly to being considered an 'evangelical' in the derogatory term as used/suggested by this poster.

[margrace]

Wilber

Yes, Mr Douglas was a good man and while I don't agree with all of his ideas, he did do some good things for the country. I just don't get why you would be so vociferous about people in politics who have religeous views then bring Tommy Douglas (a Baptist Minister) into the mix as one of your heros.

You know I had to go back and read my post to see what you were talking about. I merely stated some opinions, is that a rant? What a strange interpretation of what I said. You are somewhat like someone else I know who only reads far enough into something to feel threatened and then reacts to what they interpret is being said.

[Figleaf]

Some Information on the relevant committee members is as follows:

Det. Cst. Shelia Sullivan - Vancouver Police Missing Women Spokesperson

http://www.missingpeople.net/joint_task_fo...dia_release.htm

Dirk Laudan, Past President - Vancouver Centre Federal PC Association

http://loisjohnson.ca/en/about/endorsements.html

Dev Dley -- former commissioner of WHL and former president of Social Credit Party

http://www.google.ca/search?q=%22Dev+Dley%...CA&start=0&sa=N

C. Kilburn, National Council for Crime-Free Canada

http://www.dnd.ca/site/minister/eng/restru...ng/e-anx-e.html

[Canadian Blue]

Wow, people are sure paranoid and drawn to a culture of fear on here eh. Here is what I have gotten so far from reading this thread.

Evangelical's are somehow evil kitten eaters intent on destroying Canada.

Stephen Harper want's to rewrite history textbooks Stalin style. [No real evidence behind this, with the exception's of the evil evangelical's who believe in Christ and want to take away our freedoms]

Yes, Mr Douglas was a good man and while I don't agree with all of his ideas, he did do some good things for the country. I just don't get why you would be so vociferous about people in politics who have religeous views then bring Tommy Douglas (a Baptist Minister) into the mix as one of your heros.

Impossible, if Tommy Douglas was a Baptist Minister he was surely in the pocket of Stephen Harper and eating kittens.

I agree, she is not a bad appointee, if it were NOT for her being an evangelical as well.

Barak Obama and Hilary Clinton would be good presidential candidates, if it were not for them being evangelical as well.

Why are people quick to denigrate an individual over something like religion, even though a person is just that an individual. It's tribal politics. If the only reason these individual's aren't qualified to serve is because of religion, then that should be of concern.

[Alexandra]

Some Information on the relevant committee members is as follows:

The exercise is to prove all of the people in the B.C. Judiciary Advisory Committee are Evangelicals.

Your information does not even mention their religious affiliations and according to the poster, catchme, the recent appointments are all Evangelical Theo-Cons.

Obviously they are not.

`

[Catchme]

Yup, the Sponsorship connections kind of worry me. It doesn't appear that she was really involved at all, but the fact that she was in a position to be potentially involved worries me for someone appointing judges.

It was fathers.ca that lists her as being evangelical I believe, though am not sure. I have been searching for the link I found it in , and cannot find the parameters I used to find it. Will keep on trying though.

Nothing about him being an evangelical at all anywhere. I really do think you just make this stuff up.

Oh, so, just his extended family are, and he just represents their interests, but he is not evangelical? Okat he is not evangelical then I never mke things up, and you are fully aware that I do not.

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML

I, W. Brent Cotter, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General, pursuant to. subsection 254(1) of the Criminal ... Mount Olive Evangelical Lutheran. Church of Regina ...

I, W. Brent Cotter, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General, pursuant to ... Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church. of Jansen, Saskatchewan. Sask.

No I do deny that she's some evangelical. Not that I should have to, having relgious values isn't a crime in Canada.

Ellen Campbell - Zion's Evangelical Lutheran Church

It is wrong to stack a judiciary committee with cornies let alone, religious appointees of the same faith when Canada is multidenominational.

One is, maybe two. Not seven. That's just ridiculous. I've searched them all extensively and found nothing.

We for sure have 5, please stop trying to minimize this, and I still contend Pollock and Cotter are as well.

[Canadian Blue]

Alright let's try this what are their ACTUAL beliefs with regards to matters relating to the legal system. May I remind everyone on here thats scared of the evangelical's that it is absolutely possible to have religious beliefs yet be a progressive.

http://www.christianalliance.org/site/c.bn...k.CB7C/Home.htm

If not, this is basically a mini McCarthy style speculation.

[scribblet]

name='Catchme' date='Feb 19 2007, 03:03 AM' post='187582'

You are making things up, I have found nothing either after some extensive searching; nothing other than Toews is mennonite .

If you google Brent Cotter and Evangelical you'll come up with a link http://www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/gazette/...95/g1199549.pdf which shows " W. Brent Cotter, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General, pursuant to ... Zion Evangelical Lutheran".

I suppose your adding 2 + 2 and coming up with 222 - try reading. Zion EL is simply a group having input into legislation to do with alcohol and gaming back in 1995.

You have offered no proof whatsoever of your assertions, they are simply spurious innuendo based on speculation in an attempt to promote hate and fear of a particular group.

Provide hard proof or stop with the nonsense.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Lets have a witch hunt and gather up all the religious zealots! Then when we tire of that lets go get the political zealots. Then we can hunt down all the blond people.

Me thinks that we have gone a little too far in this thread. An individuals religious believes are private and should not be subject to public scrutiny. Nor should their sex lives, medical history or anything else. The only thing that should be public information is a criminal record.

[scribblet]

Lets have a witch hunt and gather up all the religious zealots! Then when we tire of that lets go get the political zealots. Then we can hunt down all the blond people.

Me thinks that we have gone a little too far in this thread. An individuals religious believes are private and should not be subject to public scrutiny. Nor should their sex lives, medical history or anything else. The only thing that should be public information is a criminal record.

I agree!! but as long as a poster starts the witch hunt with unsubstantiated statements its hard to pass such nonsense by. Even the title of the thread is used to further the agenda of demonizing evangelicals. Any witch hunt such as this gathers momentum, the media starts to talk, bloggers blog and the whole thing gathers steam and the public buys into it. Just imagine if this was said about any other religion !!

[southerncomfort]

So we are all agreed that catchme's assertions are poppycock with no proof, good cos I believe that too. No proof is not a proof, or a proof how did that go What is this with the religious thing and who cares what Harper or anyone else believes, its a non issue. It really sounds like the Liberal definition of hate speech. Where's Svend when you need him.

[Catchme]

Interesting, Norman Spector, long time prominent, consevative advisor has this to say about Harper's stacking the Judiciary board with partisans.

...the evidence suggests his government would like to move the courts out of the grey middle, where most Canadians reside. Twenty-five years into the life of the Charter, Mr. Harper would like to make over the judiciary to reflect the socially conservative views of his party's core. His attempt threatens to undermine the intellectual independence of the judiciary, in appearance and in substance.

http://members.shaw.ca/nspector4/OTHER2.htm

And oh look another theo-con appointee:

David Mosley Brown - Faith Fact and Action

http://www.christianlegalfellowship.org/Co.../davidbrown.htm

[Catchme]

The Canadian Bar Association has raised fears that the new committees

will be the site of partisan battles. University of Toronto professor

Martin Friedland, an expert on judicial independence and the

committees, said the expansion of Ottawa's control over committees

that are supposed to be a check on federal politicking is "shocking,

because it's such a blatant attempt to control the outcome."

What's curious is that, in opposition, Conservatives talked about

making major changes. Prime Minister Stephen Harper was a critic of

judicial activists, and there was hardly a keener advocate of

judicial change than Vic Toews, who was justice minister when the

judicial advisory committees were changed, and filled.

Rick Anderson, the former Reform Party strategist who worked for

Preston Manning, said the outcry against "judge-made law" has always

been a major part of the ethos of the Reform Party, Canadian Alliance

and the Conservatives, and still is.

And he said the changes to the judicial advisory committees suggest

the government is doing something about it, even if they don't want

to talk about it.

And why are they appointing theo-cons to judiciaty committee when they had argued for the changes the Liberals had mad to cvreate arm's length appoitments?

In 2004, for example, Mr. Toews delivered a speech in which he argued

that judicial decisions on abortion are part of a larger trend related

to family issues, and that the courts' move to extend their own policy

initiatives in rulings suggests an "apparent policy agenda of their

own."

He argued that means that changing social policy requires the

approval of the judiciary, and therefore changing the process for

appointing judges.

http://www.anticorruption.ca/forum/phpBB2/...opic.php?p=4829

People are being appointed to the judicial committee because of their theocon credentials, it most certainly is our business to have full disclosure of their background. The RCMP, Prison Guards, Crown Prosecuters, future Judges up for consideration, all have to give full diclosure, and are subject to intense investigations and so should the judicial committee members, it is only common sense. For example:

“Marshall Rothstein’s candidacy was scrutinized by a comprehensive process initiated by the previous Government that included members from all the political parties,”

Mr. Rothstein has agreed to answer questions from an ad hoc all-party committee on Monday, February 27. The televised hearing will mark the first time in Canadian history that a Supreme Court nominee will face questions from Members of Parliament."

Those who appoint new judges should go through the same screening as those they appoint.

[margrace]

Mr. Harper made his point when he finished one of his early speaches with God Bless Canada. I only heard it once and realized that he was certainly apeing his hero Mr. Bush. He must have gotten a lot of negative feedback because I have not heard it since. So appointing christian fundamentalists to the judiciary is his agenda.

[scribblet]

Lets have a witch hunt and gather up all the religious zealots! Then when we tire of that lets go get the political zealots. Then we can hunt down all the blond people.

Me thinks that we have gone a little too far in this thread. An individuals religious believes are private and should not be subject to public scrutiny. Nor should their sex lives, medical history or anything else. The only thing that should be public information is a criminal record.

Me too, next thing it'll be burning at the stake based on innuendo and drive by smears, best to ignore this type of malicious tripe.

[margrace]

Yes and when those judges get power we will really see the witch hunt won't we.

[scribblet]

Yes and when those judges get power we will really see the witch hunt won't we.

Which judges, the committees are not judges- and how will they circumvent the constitution etc.

[Canadian Blue]

Mr. Harper made his point when he finished one of his early speaches with God Bless Canada. I only heard it once and realized that he was certainly apeing his hero Mr. Bush. He must have gotten a lot of negative feedback because I have not heard it since. So appointing christian fundamentalists to the judiciary is his agenda.

I'm pretty sure some people on here would be screaming theocon if Harper sang the national anthem.

O Canada! Our home and native land!

True patriot love in all thy sons command.

With glowing hearts we see thee rise,

The True North strong and free!

From far and wide, O Canada,

We stand on guard for thee.

God keep our land glorious and free!

O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

So we should use a form of McCarthyism in order to weed out Christian's from the judiciary, because people have irrational fears over someones religious beliefs. Is this what some of the posters on here are requesting?

http://members.shaw.ca/nspector4/OTHER2.htm

Can you give us the full piece. I'm not going to wade through all of the text there only to find out you omitted an important piece of information.

And oh look another theo-con appointee:

David Mosley Brown - Faith Fact and Action

What policies of his are so dominionist?

David Brown is a partner in the Toronto office of Stikeman Elliott LLP and a member of its Litigation and Energy Groups. Called to the Bar of Ontario in 1983, his practice includes commercial and corporate litigation, energy regulation, defamation and constitutional law. Mr. Brown has appeared before all levels of court in Ontario and Manitoba and frequently before the Supreme Court of Canada. He is listed in the 2003 LEXPERT/ALM Leading 500 Lawyers in Canada as an expert in Electrical Energy, and has appeared before federal and provincial energy regulators. Mr. Brown has acted as counsel in constitutional cases dealing with religious freedom, freedom of expression, division of powers over taxation, education, life issues, and same-sex issues. He taught trial advocacy at the Faculty of Law, Queen’s University from 1989 until 2002, and will be teaching a course in Energy Law at Osgoode Hall Law School in 2004. Recent publications include: Energy Regulation in Ontario (2001, Canada Law Book); “Freedom From or Freedom For? Defining the Content of Charter Rights: Religion as a Case Study” (2000), 33 University of British Columbia Law Review 551; and “What Can Lawyers Say in Public?” (1999), 78 Canadian Bar Review 283). B.A. (Hons.), University of Toronto (1976); certificate, Beijing Languages Institute (1977); certificate, Nanjing University (1978); J.D., University of Toronto (1981); currently enrolled in Part-time LL.M, Osgoode Hall Law School. Executive Member, OBA Natural Resources and Energy Section and International Transactions Committee, Energy Bar Association; member, Canadian Bar Association, American Bar Association, International Bar Association, and Advocates’ Society.

Wow, that guy's sure as hell unqualified.

Really what's the issue here, this isn't a dominionist agenda, and their is no real proof other than the fact they are religious which is bigoted speculation at best.

For each of these "theo-con" appointees, show us what their position's are on controversial issues and what they have said.

As well don't use "theo-con", it's just a smear, call them dominionist's since that's more accurate of the type of smear your trying to sling at them. Even though it probably isn't true about them being dominionists.

[Catchme]

More on david brown's theo-con ideology, and he believes his religous beliefs should factor in and trump others freedom of conscience and self determination.

Brown is a member of the Christian Legal Fellowship, which opposes SSM and the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance, which supported the homophobic high school teacher and Christian Heritage Party supporter Chris Kempling when he got into trouble with the BC College of Teachers for his public homophobic rants.

Earlier this year, David M. Brown spoke to a gathering of Christian law students at which he stressed the importance of being not simply a lawyer, but a lawyer in Christ.

"In a culture where choice stands as a new god," he warned, they must not be tempted by appeals to set aside faith when practising law.

"As a Christian lawyer, you are called to practise your trade and conduct your life in accordance with your faith," he maintained, "recalling, all the time, that your dignity consists in one's membership in the community founded and sustained by God, and that your freedom lies in the resulting moral responsibility, and not in some free-standing notion of freedom or autonomy."

and still more:

He has also represented socially conservative and religious groups in several high-profile cases. In Brillinger v. Brockie, for example, he defended the right of a printer to refuse to do business with a gay-rights organization. Arguing on behalf of the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance, Mr. Brown maintained that the law "does not require a person to provide a service to a cause or public advocacy group with which a person disagrees on sincerely held conscientious or religious grounds."

Was Mr. Brown simply representing a client who had obtained his services? Was he simply defending the sanctity of freedom of religion and conscience within the Constitution? One suspects not.

In a 2004 legal debate on proposed same-sex-marriage legislation, Mr. Brown vigorously opposed the new law. "Within a few generations, marriage will have no practical meaning," he warned, "and society will be the worse for that." So when Mr. Brown has represented socially conservative legal challenges, it is clear that he has done so as a matter of personal and religious conviction, and not simply in defence of freedom of religion.

It is no accident that Harper is thus stacking the judiciary and the judicial committees.

Mr. Harper, as a social conservative, is bothered by this liberal bias in the Canadian judiciary. Since he's the Prime Minister, it is within his power to appoint judges with a very different bias. If he is Prime Minister long enough, Mr. Harper could appoint enough conservative judges to one day fundamentally shift the judicial consensus. Ability to shape the Canadian judiciary is one of the more formidable, if subtle, of prime ministerial powers.

But if you were wondering how Mr. Harper will contain the restlessness of the social conservatives in caucus, here, in part, is your answer: judicial appointments. And remember: Mr. Harper doesn't have to placate the social conservatives in his caucus. He is one of them himself

[scribblet]

What policies of his are so dominionist?

Really what's the issue here, this isn't a dominionist agenda, and their is no real proof other than the fact they are religious which is bigoted speculation at best.

For each of these "theo-con" appointees, show us what their position's are on controversial issues and what they have said.

As well don't use "theo-con", it's just a smear, call them dominionist's since that's more accurate of the type of smear your trying to sling at them. Even though it probably isn't true about them being dominionists.

Hmm, just skimmed through this and a couple of others by the same poster. As far as I'm concerned this poster has jumped the shark. The accusations and the the use of Americanisms (theo-con) to describe actions by our gov't are surreal, there is no truth in what is posted; replying to her smears give her credibility not deserved. I've read some tripe over the years but this is like reading something from outer space

It is one thing to disagree with a gov't and to debate issues etc. but to read the garbage and malicious smears posted here is enough to make one whoops their cookies - like - Toto I'm not in Kansas anymore.

[Canadian Blue]

freedom of conscience

Brown is a member of the Christian Legal Fellowship, which opposes SSM and the Canadian Religious Freedom Alliance, which supported the homophobic high school teacher and Christian Heritage Party supporter Chris Kempling when he got into trouble with the BC College of Teachers for his public homophobic rants.

Yet no freedom for someone who disagrees with pro-gay education in BC school's.

In that same year, while his case was before the Human RIghts Tribunal, Kempling became a spokesman for the Christian Heritage Party of Canada and was made that party's candidate in the Cariboo—Prince George riding during the Canadian federal election, 2006. As its spokesman, Kempling wrote another letter to the editor criticizing the recently proposed Civil Marriage Act, which would allow same-sex couples to marry. Quesnel School District suspended him for three months as a breach of its earlier direction. [2] Ironically, the Bill C-38 parliamentary committee investigating the same sex marriage bill invited Dr. Kempling to testify as an official witness in June, 2005. The Quesnel School Board initiated another disciplinary investigation in response to Kempling's parliamentary testimony, but withdrew it after MP Bill Siksay (NDP), an openly gay member of the committee, and MP Vic Toews, wrote letters expressing their concern over the school board's attempt to intimidate a witness of parliament.

From the sounds of it the school board was doing more to harm individual right's then Gordon Brown.

[scribblet]

From the sounds of it the school board was doing more to harm individual right's then Gordon Brown.

They did indeed. We have to remember that Canada does not have the freedom of speech rights that the U.S. does, we are restricted.