How will a Conservative government be better?

[bluealberta]

Re: RE: How will a Conservati

Our 7$ a day daycare system in Québec is working wonders.

How would you know? Your provincial auditor general last year criticized the government for not doing anything to measure it's effectiveness! The program is costing $1.4 billion a year and growing, and no one is even checking to see if you are getting value for your money!

Yet this is the system we are supposed to emulate and take to the rest of Canada. Again, I reiterate there is a program in place that works, and we do not need another government program to replace an existing government program, especially given the financial mismanagement this government has exhibited over the past few years. Let's get back to policies for actual priorities for this country instead of social engineering.

 

[Reverend Blair]

I do not want to abolish abortion, but also don't want it to be used as form of continuing birth control.

A large portion of the Conservative Party does. You have as much right to make any decision about a woman's body as a woman does castrating you.

I do not support the gun registry. The money that was spent on that program could have put tens of thousands of actual police officers on the street.

Most police forces support the gun registry and use it regularly.

I will not support Kyoto until there is no argument about the benefits of it.

The only ones arguing against the benefits of it are those that stand to gain financially from polluting and are terrified of the competition that alternative energies represent.

I don't want to put gays in jail, and am not opposed to SS unions, but I do want to maintain the tradional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

So you admit to being a bigot then...good for you.

I do support increasing military spending, as I don't think a country can be called fully sovereign unless they can at least start to defend themselves.

Every party has increased military spending as part of their platform. The problem with the Harperite version is that it will be done to the detriment of other progams and turn our military into nothing more than an arm of the US military.

I support the Canada Health Act,

Stephen Harper doesn't. Neither do his financial backers.

I do not want to legalize pot, nor do I want to legalize prostitution. It is my belief that pot use can and does in many cases, lead to more drug use, and prostitution has many detrimental affects on society.

Marijuana prohibition and laws against prostitution have done massive amounts of harm to our citizens. Your purtanical belief in protecting people from themselves will harm many more.

The Conservative Party represents nothing but greed and corruption.

 

[LadyC]

I do not want to abolish abortion, but also don't want it to be used as form of continuing birth control.

A large portion of the Conservative Party does. You have as much right to make any decision about a woman's body as a woman does castrating you.

Not in the same league, Rev. You'd do better to liken castration with, say, forced hysterectomy or maybe genital mutilation. Castration and abortion aren't a fair comparison.

I do not support the gun registry. The money that was spent on that program could have put tens of thousands of actual police officers on the street.

Most police forces support the gun registry and use it regularly.

Not really they don't. The average cop on the street as well as the Chiefs oppose it. The Canadian Police Association (CPA) supports it, its members do not. Why? Because of the costs, as well as the fact that most criminals won't bother registering their weapons.

I will not support Kyoto until there is no argument about the benefits of it.

The only ones arguing against the benefits of it are those that stand to gain financially from polluting and are terrified of the competition that alternative energies represent.

The only ones? Lots of regular Joes oppose Kyoto, too.

I don't want to put gays in jail, and am not opposed to SS unions, but I do want to maintain the tradional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

So you admit to being a bigot then...good for you.

I agree with SSMs. I fail to see where someone who opposes it but supports SS unions is a bigot.

I do support increasing military spending, as I don't think a country can be called fully sovereign unless they can at least start to defend themselves.

Every party has increased military spending as part of their platform. The problem with the Harperite version is that it will be done to the detriment of other progams and turn our military into nothing more than an arm of the US military.

He said HE agrees with it. He doesn't appear to be speaking for Harper.
Regardless of which party they support, I don't think anyone agrees 100% with the platform.

I support the Canada Health Act,

Stephen Harper doesn't. Neither do his financial backers.

Same response as above.

I do not want to legalize pot, nor do I want to legalize prostitution. It is my belief that pot use can and does in many cases, lead to more drug use, and prostitution has many detrimental affects on society.

Marijuana prohibition and laws against prostitution have done massive amounts of harm to our citizens. Your purtanical belief in protecting people from themselves will harm many more.

Massive amounts of harm, eh? How so?

The Conservative Party represents nothing but greed and corruption.

What party doesn't?

 

[no1important]

RE: How will a Conservati

"It's past time the feds scrapped the Canada Health Act."

- Stephen Harper, then Vice-President of the National Citizens Coalition, 1997.

here

I agree with SSMs. I fail to see where someone who opposes it but supports SS unions is a bigot.

Discrimination is illegal in this country. Marriage is marriage, whether it is two women, two men or one man one women. SCOC ruled ssm constutional and is all but legal in Canada anyways.

Maybe you anti ssm people better get your own house in order first, last time i looked straight marriage is nothing to brag about, what, about 50% failure rate? Last time I looked.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Not in the same league, Rev. You'd do better to liken castration with, say, forced hysterectomy or maybe genital mutilation. Castration and abortion aren't a fair comparison.

I never said they were the same, C. I said, "You have as much right to make any decision about a woman's body as a woman does castrating you."

Not really they don't. The average cop on the street as well as the Chiefs oppose it. The Canadian Police Association (CPA) supports it, its members do not. Why? Because of the costs, as well as the fact that most criminals won't bother registering their weapons.

So they don't use it then? Never reference it?

The only ones? Lots of regular Joes oppose Kyoto, too.

The money for spreading the lies comes from the oil companies. There are several links in the Kyoto thread showing that.

I fail to see where someone who opposes it but supports SS unions is a bigot.

Discriminating against somebody on the basis of sexual orietation is bigotry. Trying to use subterfuge to keep them from being equal is discrimination. It is no different than saying that black people can't marry white people. It is bigotry, pure and simple.

He said HE agrees with it. He doesn't appear to be speaking for Harper.
Regardless of which party they support, I don't think anyone agrees 100% with the platform.

His post is on why he supports the Conservatives.

Massive amounts of harm, eh? How so?

Sending people to jail and forcing them into dangerous situations.

 

[LadyC]

Maybe you anti ssm people better get your own house in order first, last time i looked straight marriage is nothing to brag about, what, about 50% failure rate.

Perhaps you missed the part where I said I support SSMs. How, I don't know... not only was it in the post you quoted, but it's splattered over about a half dozen other boards.

I'm in that 50% bracket... was there a point to that?

Arguing semantics doesn't equate to bigotry. Whether it's called marriage or anything else, so long as they're equal in every other way there's no bigotry.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: How will a Conservati

Denying people equality is bigotry, C. Denying gays the use of the word marriage is denying them equality.

 

[LadyC]

Not in the same league, Rev. You'd do better to liken castration with, say, forced hysterectomy or maybe genital mutilation. Castration and abortion aren't a fair comparison.

I never said they were the same, C. I said, "You have as much right to make any decision about a woman's body as a woman does castrating you."

And I never said you said they were the same. I said it wasn't a fair comparison... and compare them you did. Why else would you have used it as an example?

Not really they don't. The average cop on the street as well as the Chiefs oppose it. The Canadian Police Association (CPA) supports it, its members do not. Why? Because of the costs, as well as the fact that most criminals won't bother registering their weapons.

So they don't use it then? Never reference it?

I'm sure they do. How does that show they support it?

The only ones? Lots of regular Joes oppose Kyoto, too.

The money for spreading the lies comes from the oil companies. There are several links in the Kyoto thread showing that.

You say they're lies.
The fact remains, you claimed that the only ones who oppose Kyoto are those who will benefit financially. That simply isn't true.

I fail to see where someone who opposes it but supports SS unions is a bigot.

Discriminating against somebody on the basis of sexual orietation is bigotry. Trying to use subterfuge to keep them from being equal is discrimination. It is no different than saying that black people can't marry white people. It is bigotry, pure and simple.

To be clear... I think arguing over the word is silly. But how is it bigotry to allow all the same rights, regardless of what the union is called?

He said HE agrees with it. He doesn't appear to be speaking for Harper.
Regardless of which party they support, I don't think anyone agrees 100% with the platform.

His post is on why he supports the Conservatives.

Yes, and he pointed out a few areas where he differed in his beliefs. I can't fault anyone for that.

Massive amounts of harm, eh? How so?

Sending people to jail and forcing them into dangerous situations.

Forcing them into dangerous situations equates to massive amounts of harm? Who forced them to break the law in the first place?
Really, though, how many people go to jail nowadays for simple possession?

 

[LadyC]

Re: RE: How will a Conservati

Denying people equality is bigotry, C. Denying gays the use of the word marriage is denying them equality.

No, it isn't.
Dignity I'll buy, but equality? No.

It's just a word.

 

[no1important]

RE: How will a Conservati

Equality- The state or quality of being equal.

So by denying them the legal constitutional right to call SSM what it is, marriage, is not equality, It is bigotry.

Bigotry-The attitude, state of mind, or behavior characteristic of a bigot; intolerance.

t.

 

[LadyC]

Re: RE: How will a Conservati

Equality- The state or quality of being equal.

So by denying them the legal constitutional right to call SSM what it is, marriage, is not equality, It is bigotry.

Bigotry-The attitude, state of mind, or behavior characteristic of a bigot; intolerance.

t.

Be that as it may, so long as no-one is denied any of the benefits, how are they being discriminated against?

 

[MMMike]

Quote:
Not really they don't. The average cop on the street as well as the Chiefs oppose it. The Canadian Police Association (CPA) supports it, its members do not. Why? Because of the costs, as well as the fact that most criminals won't bother registering their weapons.

So they don't use it then? Never reference it?

It's not the point whether they reference it or not. The point is whether it saves lives. There is not a single life saved by this gun registry, after a cost of $2 billion and counting. What else could we have done with that money? How many lives could we have saved? That is the real issue. It's not enough to say a policy has some vague, ill-defined benefit - you need to be able to measure the results and compare it with other options.

 

[Reverend Blair]

It's not the point whether they reference it or not. The point is whether it saves lives. There is not a single life saved by this gun registry,

Says who? If they are using it, then there is every chance that they handled a situation differently as a result. You are making a claim that cannot be proven.

And I never said you said they were the same. I said it wasn't a fair comparison... and compare them you did.

Wrong again.

You say they're lies.

So do real scientists.

The fact remains, you claimed that the only ones who oppose Kyoto are those who will benefit financially. That simply isn't true.

Okay...and those who believed their lies.

To be clear... I think arguing over the word is silly.

All words?

Forcing them into dangerous situations equates to massive amounts of harm?

Yes.

 

[MMMike]

It's not the point whether they reference it or not. The point is whether it saves lives. There is not a single life saved by this gun registry,

Says who? If they are using it, then there is every chance that they handled a situation differently as a result. You are making a claim that cannot be proven.

Look at the statistics. There is no evidence at all of a drop in gun violence as a result of this registry. If you are going to spend my tax dollars on this thing, the onus is on you to show that it will save lives, and save more lives than if it had been directed into, say... medical research.

The registry does not work, and the reasoning behind it defies logic. Criminals won't register their guns. Let's put this experiment out of it's misery.

 

[LadyC]

Says who? If they are using it, then there is every chance that they handled a situation differently as a result. You are making a claim that cannot be proven.

As are you.

Wrong again.

If they do "A" they might as well do "B".
You did make the comparison.

So do real scientists.

Real gosh darn scientists?
Real scientists also make the opposite claim.

All words?

What's this, Blair? When you get backed into a corner with an argument you can't win you try to shift the argument?
I said the word. We're discussing the word marriage. Try to focus.

So long as the union between any couple is equal in every way.... inheritance rights, ability to make medical decisions, etc. .... why quibble over the word? It makes me wonder what's being hidden behind the smokescreen.

 

[Reverend Blair]

As are you.

I have the advantage of logic. They use it because it benefits them.

Real gosh darn scientists?
Real scientists also make the opposite claim.

Find me one not paid by the oil companies.

I said the word. We're discussing the word marriage. Try to focus.

So you pick and choose the words? What gives you the right?

So long as the union between any couple is equal in every way.... inheritance rights, ability to make medical decisions, etc. .... why quibble over the word?

Because the attempt to keep a portion of our society in a lesser position is an exhibition of prejudice.

If you are going to spend my tax dollars on this thing

How about if we spent that money checking every vehicle coming up from the US? That is where most of the illegal guns come from, after all.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Remember who Harper really is.

 

[MMMike]

How about if we spent that money checking every vehicle coming up from the US? That is where most of the illegal guns come from, after all.

Or how about we spend that money setting up a knife registry as well - something else for the police to reference before they bust down your door.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: How will a Conservati

So you are as afraid to address the real problem as the Liberals and Conservatives. Good for you.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Of course there's always The Man Behind Stephen Harper.