Before you Liberals blow a gasket...

[Tonington]

I said traditional ways of life, not the handing down of traditions. I was responding to your comment of the eroding "Canadian way of life" which has changed quite a bit in the last 139 years. How many anti-Kyoto people would love to return to the original way of life of their ancestors, or for that matter anyone else.

Christmas hasn't been about Jesus for a long time now. The downfall started long before the political correct institutions popped up.

Curriculum isn't part of any right. That's decided by provincial departments and school boards. What right is being trampled by teaching anything? If the French students want to learn English they can. Is forcing a student to take any class a right of violations? I don't think so. This enhances their education to learn a second language and if Quebec doesn't care for that, that's their decision. Either way it didn't erode my Canadian values to learn french in junior high.

You mean they get an international license or they take Canadian driving training in a different language? As long as they can recognize what a red hexagon with some squiggly line means, or any of the other signs, then it's no problem. I don't have to speak French to understand that Arrete in a big red hexagon means stop. Very little language is needed to drive a vehicle. If you can recognize symbols you're better than half the 80 something year olds who drive in the middle of two lanes or don't use shoulder checks.

 

[Tonington]

Anyways, this thread is moving off topic, fell free to open a thread about Canadian values and the merits or otherwise of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Getting back on topic, what if we remove sexual preference from the situation? I'm not adversed to giving those people the same rights either. My parents are divorced. It puts a large economic burden on both of them. They both seem uninterested in ever marrying again. So my brother has suggested moving in with a friend to relieve economic pressure. Nobody would think that it is wrong for my mom to move in with a female friend to help pay the bills. Well, after many years they would become very dependent on one another and if one of them should die, it would leave the other in a horrible way. Had they been a man and woman, and even unmarried, they would have co-law benefits from the other's pension. Someone in that situation should not be sent to the poor house. Thus I think we should give them survivor benefits. I don't care, and I really don't want to know if they are having sex or not.

 

[CDNBear]

Anyways, this thread is moving off topic, fell free to open a thread about Canadian values and the merits or otherwise of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Getting back on topic, what if we remove sexual preference from the situation? I'm not adversed to giving those people the same rights either. My parents are divorced. It puts a large economic burden on both of them. They both seem uninterested in ever marrying again. So my brother has suggested moving in with a friend to relieve economic pressure. Nobody would think that it is wrong for my mom to move in with a female friend to help pay the bills. Well, after many years they would become very dependent on one another and if one of them should die, it would leave the other in a horrible way. Had they been a man and woman, and even unmarried, they would have co-law benefits from the other's pension. Someone in that situation should not be sent to the poor house. Thus I think we should give them survivor benefits. I don't care, and I really don't want to know if they are having sex or not.

Can't argue with that.

Like I said before, I have no issue with this area.

My issue is with the minority rule culture in Canada.

 

[CDNBear]

I said traditional ways of life, not the handing down of traditions. I was responding to your comment of the eroding "Canadian way of life" which has changed quite a bit in the last 139 years. How many anti-Kyoto people would love to return to the original way of life of their ancestors, or for that matter anyone else.

Me for one. but the eroding is continuing day to day, ever so slowly. One day it will no longer be anything like the country forged out of the wilderness that we have come to love, as our way of life is sold for votes.

Christmas hasn't been about Jesus for a long time now. The downfall started long before the political correct institutions popped up.

No kidding, so that means the minority can subjugate it?

Curriculum isn't part of any right. That's decided by provincial departments and school boards. What right is being trampled by teaching anything? If the French students want to learn English they can. Is forcing a student to take any class a right of violations? I don't think so. This enhances their education to learn a second language and if Quebec doesn't care for that, that's their decision. Either way it didn't erode my Canadian values to learn french in junior high.

Umm ya right. How is FORCING someone to do something that others are not forced to do in like, not against someones rights? If it is good for English Canadian students, then why isn't it good for French Canadian students. It is selling out English to the French, period. If my son does not want to take French, who's right is it to say he has to? If I lived in Quebec and he did not want to take English, the other official language, he would not be forced to. That is exactly the opposite of the premise of the Charter.

You mean they get an international license or they take Canadian driving training in a different language? As long as they can recognize what a red hexagon with some squiggly line means, or any of the other signs, then it's no problem. I don't have to speak French to understand that Arrete in a big red hexagon means stop. Very little language is needed to drive a vehicle. If you can recognize symbols you're better than half the 80 something year olds who drive in the middle of two lanes or don't use shoulder checks.

Right.(Note the sarcasm).
I'm referring to immagrants. They have available to them drivers training in their foriegn tongue. As well as testing and examinations.

If you do the traveling around city centers I do, you may note that you need to read things like construction signs, lane ends signs etc. I have been witness to and had my time wasted by 14 such accidents since Jan 1st last year in the GTA alone. The under lying cause. In broken English at best,,,"I couldn't read sign."

 

[Tonington]

As I said, curriculum is not universal. If you have a problem with that take it up with the school boards or education departments though we all know the outcome of such a pursuit. Other students across Canada have different requirements for graduation that others do not. I personally think that both should be mandatory, but unfortunately I'm no dictator,lol. That's a problem with the majority forcing something on you Bear in Quebec. Precisely what I was arguing against. I agree it's not right, if I were a Quebecer I would be a minority yes?

The Christmas comment I was making is a result of the majority forgetting what Christmas is really about. Everyone knows how commercial it is now. I'm not a Christian anymore, but to me Christmas is still more about the time speant with family and celebrating just that, which is closer to the original sentiment than a grab for shiny packages wrapped in ribbon.

I would also agree that they should have to speak one of our languages. That no doubt flies in the face of some right somewhere, but rights and freedoms are something which should be examined from time to time for evaluating, especially where new citizens to our country are concerned. This is most definitely a point I would agree on. If the accidents are as bad as you say, perhaps that should be indicitive of where our policies are failing. I would have thought that the drivers schools would teach them to recognize what the sign means, I mean even if you can't speak the language, after seeing a sign enough times and being told what it means, you should be able to comprehend it's meaning.

 

[CDNBear]

As I said, curriculum is not universal. If you have a problem with that take it up with the school boards or education departments though we all know the outcome of such a pursuit. Other students across Canada have different requirements for graduation that others do not. I personally think that both should be mandatory, but unfortunately I'm no dictator,lol. That's a problem with the majority forcing something on you Bear in Quebec. Precisely what I was arguing against. I agree it's not right, if I were a Quebecer I would be a minority yes?

The Christmas comment I was making is a result of the majority forgetting what Christmas is really about. Everyone knows how commercial it is now. I'm not a Christian anymore, but to me Christmas is still more about the time speant with family and celebrating just that, which is closer to the original sentiment than a grab for shiny packages wrapped in ribbon.

I would also agree that they should have to speak one of our languages. That no doubt flies in the face of some right somewhere, but rights and freedoms are something which should be examined from time to time for evaluating, especially where new citizens to our country are concerned. This is most definitely a point I would agree on. If the accidents are as bad as you say, perhaps that should be indicitive of where our policies are failing. I would have thought that the drivers schools would teach them to recognize what the sign means, I mean even if you can't speak the language, after seeing a sign enough times and being told what it means, you should be able to comprehend it's meaning.

The problem is that not all signs are just stick drawings or symbols. Some are worded. My favourite and the cause of at least half of the accidents i have witnessed is, "Right lane must exit". Seems simple enough, but when the investigating officer has to call for a translator, you know there is a problem.

I still dissagree with your take on languages tought in schools. To me it is interesting that one of the official languages is not manditory in a special interest province.

 

[gc]

I think the Liberal mill school system has done a fine job on both of you. A country should be the reflection of the will of the people, period. Be it Capital punishment or SSM.

Making comments like "Sometimes it's better that the majority does not get it's way" is just wrong. That flies in the face of the democratice proccess.

Maybe I should turn the question around on you: If 50% + 1 of this country decides that we should bring back slavery based on race, how would you feel about that? Do you think the government should respect the will of the people and bring back slavery?

We have democraticly elected terrorist parties running countries in the ME, defended by a couple people on this board, why haven't either of you come and voiced this opinion on the majority shouldn't always get what it wants in those threads?

I don't read or reply to all threads, I don't have time for it, and I don't think there's anything wrong with not answering every thread. But I'll say it now: If a democratically elected party is commiting terrorist acts, that is NOT Ok with me. I guess I could turn that question around on you too: Is it Ok for democratically elected governments to commit terrorist acts??

 

[gc]

or a rotator cuff, patting yourself on the backs, telling us all you told us so.

Harper is re-addressing the SSM issue because of the will of the people.

The poll, conducted by the CBC. April 2005.

That's more then 50% + 1, so if that is what it takes for Quebec to seperate, then it sure seems fitting that it be enough to re-address the issue. The people have spoken.

The percentage of people who want to keep SSM: 58%
The percentage of people who want to repeal it: 36%

I imagine even fewer would want to re-open the issue. Take Colpy for example, he has said that given the choice he would vote to repeal SSM but would NOT vote to re-open the debate. The majority does not want to re-open this issue and does not want to take away SSM. The people have spoken, let's not re-open the debate.

Link

 

[Tonington]

Well they're voting right now.

 

[Tonington]

Neys 175 Yea 123

5 cabinet ministers against it.

 

[Colpy]

Let me blow my own horn.......exactly as I predicted, not even close.

Harper has kept his promise, and the issue is now dead........

Five cabinet ministers voted against it.

So much for the "far-right" agenda.

 

[Andem]

Darn it.. a bug in linux. 1969.