Dissatisfied with Choices

H

Hard-Luck Henry

Council Member
Feb 19, 2005
2,194
0
36
I don't care what colour your neck is, Jay, but you do have the tendency to display 'a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude.'

And, as this seems to have become dictionary corner ...

Provincial: Limited in perspective; narrow and self-centered.

Consevative: Clinging to obsolete ideas; unimaginatively conventional.

Bigot: One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
 
T

Ted

Nominee Member
May 12, 2005
54
0
6
Vancouver
I'm sorry I ever started this thread. The responses and personal insults that have taken over underline what I said from the start:

See, this is another thing that gets my goat. ALL of the parties are full of crap. It never ceases to amaze me how few people out there GET THAT! Instead, they line up behind one or another party and spew bull crap. The arguments of ALL of them are just candy for public consumption. Most don't stand up in the face of unbiased analysis. That is when the insults start and the discussion ends. And the people in power love to watch us tear each other apart, because as long as we believe the lie that we can change things with our vote, we won't demand real change.
Click to expand...
 
Jay

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Re: RE: Dissatisfied with Choices

Hard-Luck Henry said:
I don't care what colour your neck is, Jay, but you do have the tendency to display 'a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude.'

And, as this seems to have become dictionary corner ...

Provincial: Limited in perspective; narrow and self-centered.

Consevative: Clinging to obsolete ideas; unimaginatively conventional.

Bigot: One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
Click to expand...

Andem said:
The site has recently undergone a flux of fighting, mudslinging, argueing and unnecessarily rude debating.

As of right now, any user joining these forums with the intent to get attention; to bash members based on their political views; purposely post to incite anger; post racist,
sexist, prejudice, bigotry or homophobic messages; bash members for any reason; or posting without the sole intent of creating a clean and on-topic political debate ...


WILL BE BANNED WITHOUT NOTICE.


This goes the same with anybody purposely trying to provoke members.
Click to expand...

You know Henry….. If I posted a comment like that Pea would be all over me...
 
H

Hard-Luck Henry

Council Member
Feb 19, 2005
2,194
0
36
Steady on, Ted! You asked a question, and received plenty of relevant responses, but it's a question that's been asked and answered ad nauseum elsewhere on the board.. 'It was good whilst it lasted', as they say, but people here have been discussing the election, and Canadian politics in general, for months. Threads occasionally go off on tangents; I've spent many a long moment composing intelligent, incisive, witty posts, only to have some humourless moron come along a post some remedial remark immediately afterwards, thereby condemning my efforts to be lost in the virtual ether. Such is life; one just has to get on with things. We could start a specific 'insult thy neighbour' thread, to warn those of a milder disposition away, but there's a difference between insults of a personal nature - say regarding one's race, appearance, sexual orientation and suchlike - and questioning another's political stance or worldview, and people shouldn't offer a view if they're not to have it questioned, and sometimes strongly. I can't help thinking that forum life would be dull indeed if two well-balanced adults couldn't launch a bit of sneakily aimed but good-natured banter at one another. Isn't that right, Jay, you neo-fascist misanthrope?
 
Jay

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Hard-Luck Henry said:
Steady on, Ted! You asked a question, and received plenty of relevant responses, but it's a question that's been asked and answered ad nauseum elsewhere on the board.. 'It was good whilst it lasted', as they say, but people here have been discussing the election, and Canadian politics in general, for months. Threads occasionally go off on tangents; I've spent many a long moment composing intelligent, incisive, witty posts, only to have some humourless moron come along a post some remedial remark immediately afterwards, thereby condemning my efforts to be lost in the virtual ether. Such is life; one just has to get on with things. We could start a specific 'insult thy neighbour' thread, to warn those of a milder disposition away, but there's a difference between insults of a personal nature - say regarding one's race, appearance, sexual orientation and suchlike - and questioning another's political stance or worldview, and people shouldn't offer a view if they're not to have it questioned, and sometimes strongly. I can't help thinking that forum life would be dull indeed if two well-balanced adults couldn't launch a bit of sneakily aimed but good-natured banter at one another. Isn't that right, Jay, you neo-fascist misanthrope?
Click to expand...

That's right you ol' communist pigdog....

(Just for that, we are sending your Queen right back to you!!)
 
Jay

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
peapod said:
Jay...there is not a hope in hell I would ever be all over you. :wink:
Click to expand...

Well I should hope not after I had to beat you off of me with that ugly stick....

fellas....never feed stray cats. :wink:
 
D

Derry McKinney

Electoral Member
May 21, 2005
545
0
16
The Owl Farm
RE: Dissatisfied with Cho

Just because Ted is right, and I'm happy he started this thread, I'd like to talk about choices too.

In Saskatchewan we have to choose between the Saskatchewan Party, which is really a bunch of buggers so crooked they had to change their name after Devine was done destroying the province; and the NDP.

Now I always vote for the NDP because they have proven themselves to be more than capable of running this province and because I'm scared of the Saskatchewan Party, having seen them in action (you think you have MLA problems, Ted? You should see mine).

If there were realistic choices I could vote for them though. So would a lot of people that usually vote either NDP or Saskatchewan Party. It likely wouldn't even change the government, but it would put both parties on notice that they'd better come up with some new ideas and start talking to their constituents.

Federally the NDP play that role at least some of the time. Provincially we are stuck without a real choice.
 
K

KariLynne

New Member
Jun 1, 2005
9
0
1
Yeah you def. don't want anyone that believes in god or has any type of morals running the country, better to have theives and liars. The only reason that our economy has survivied is because the US economy is doing so well, heaven help us if the Liberals are still in power and it collapses
 
Vanni Fucci

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Re: RE: Dissatisfied with Choices

KariLynne said:
Yeah you def. don't want anyone that believes in god or has any type of morals running the country, better to have theives and liars. The only reason that our economy has survivied is because the US economy is doing so well, heaven help us if the Liberals are still in power and it collapses
Click to expand...

Two things:

1. It is perfectly acceptable for a politician to believe in god, as long as they keep god out of their politics.

2. The American economy is not doing so great...
 
P

peapod

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2004
10,745
0
36
pumpkin pie bungalow
Before you get down on your knees there kari lynn, what are you saying?? Are you saying that only christians have morals?? Are you saying that only people who follow the bible have morals??
 
K

KariLynne

New Member
Jun 1, 2005
9
0
1
No I don't even go to church or belong to any type of religion. I just think that painting the conservatives as religous zealots is a bit far fetched.
 
Vanni Fucci

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Re: RE: Dissatisfied with Choices

KariLynne said:
No I don't even go to church or belong to any type of religion. I just think that painting the conservatives as religous zealots is a bit far fetched.
Click to expand...

They're not all religious zealots, but there are some...they are fanatics though, in the right-wing neoconservative sense...
 
Jay

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Re: RE: Dissatisfied with Choices

Vanni Fucci said:
Two things:

1. It is perfectly acceptable for a politician to believe in god, as long as they keep god out of their politics.
Click to expand...

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/

"Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
a) freedom of conscience and religion;"

The first expression in the Charter signifies that we, as a people, recognize the supremacy of God. The second clause signifies we have freedom of religion.

So why can't a politician bring God into politics? The answer is they can.

It's not our fault some people don't like it, but it is not only expressed, but guaranteed in the Charter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom