Who's right to choose, a womans right to choose.

[Ariadne]

And you want us to believe that you are not bias and have some form of hate for men.

I'm glad I'm not your beau, I'm glad I don't know your beau. I couldn't bear to watch him cower to you.

Still nothing relevant, constructive, to the point, intellegent, meaningful, important, etc.

Have you noticed that you still haven't addressed the arguement or questions at all?

Based on your masterful command of the English language as you complain about the raw deal that men have in life, I'm pretty sure that nothing I write will ever appear as "intelligent" to you. It does amuse me that you use the tactic of insulting my intelligence and accuse me of hating men, but that's about as far as it goes. I have a funny feeling that if we were to compare academic credentials or even intelligence quotient scores, there wouldn't be any doubt as to who lacked intelligence.

Cheers

 

[selfactivated]

Uhm, I guess since this is a Canadian forum, I just assumed that the discussion was about Canada. I suppose I might be discussing human rights in Africa, but then my links would probably have led to African laws, not Canadian laws.

I wasnt aware cyberspace had bondries (kinda why I like it). I asked you a civil question in a civil manner and recieved a smart arse reply......hmmmmmmm do I wanna waste my time with someone that is not nice? Nope. See I have CHOICES! consider yourslf ignored

 

[CDNBear]

Based on your masterful command of the English language as you complain about the raw deal that men have in life, I'm pretty sure that nothing I write will ever appear as "intelligent" to you. It does amuse me that you use the tactic of insulting my intelligence and accuse me of hating men, but that's about as far as it goes. I have a funny feeling that if we were to compare academic credentials or even intelligence quotient scores, there wouldn't be any doubt as to who lacked intelligence.

Cheers

LOL, great come back, now how about you apply some of that oh so highly evolved intellect and answer one question in this thread instead of attacking it with your opinions and constant abortion rhetoric.

That is where your actions dictate to others how intellegent you are, not in quantity of rhetoric, but quality of thoughts

Try basing a reply on reality.
Btw, pointing out spelling, is the first sign your losing.

 

[selfactivated]

Bear? I liked the compromise you and Kreskin came up with. Im my faith when you put an intention (thought) into the cosmos you actually manafest it. The reason this subject is so hard is because everyone brings different baggage to the table. BUT if we could get rid of the baggage and think outside the box maybe just maybe we could change the way things are now. Which we all agree are pretty unfair and unworkable.

Now that idea of yalls, Who would you write or email it to to get it heard?

 

[CDNBear]

Bear? I liked the compromise you and Kreskin came up with. Im my faith when you put an intention (thought) into the cosmos you actually manafest it. The reason this subject is so hard is because everyone brings different baggage to the table. BUT if we could get rid of the baggage and think outside the box maybe just maybe we could change the way things are now. Which we all agree are pretty unfair and unworkable.

Now that idea of yalls, Who would you write or email it to to get it heard?

I'm not sure self. It is a good compramise. But compramise is not the choice of politicals will. That would be vote getting.

I do believe, if the idea formulated by Kreskin nad myself was put forth as a political platform, that politician would be trampled by people like Ad here.

You see, there are those that know the table is tilting in their favour, they have no intentions of giving up any ground, no matter how detrimental it may be to some one, other then themselves of course.

This would be a political suicide mission, for sure.

 

[selfactivated]

yes but what if you contacted a judge, someone that worked with these types of cases. MAYBE that person could advocate it? Give ME a name, I'll sell it to them!

 

[CDNBear]

yes but what if you contacted a judge, someone that worked with these types of cases. MAYBE that person could advocate it? Give ME a name, I'll sell it to them!

It would have to be a broad and sweeping change to the system.

Groups and organizations like FMEP, and OSAP, and other institutions would have to get onboard for it to work.

No matter how I feel about the lib left judges in this country, I would not wish the the righteous retrobution they would face from the fascist womans groups that would challenge this to no end.

btw, my wife read Ad's last post and wanted to know why a women would try and start a pissing contest. As that is such a male trait.

 

[selfactivated]

Well if yall dont mind I'd like to run it across a child advocate judge I know in Texas. Will that be ok?


(Im ignoring her remember )

 

[CDNBear]

Well if yall dont mind I'd like to run it across a child advocate judge I know in Texas. Will that be ok?


(Im ignoring her remember )

I have no problem with that, I doubt Kreskin would either. Anything that furthers the ablity of all involved to live in some form of harmony is OK with us.

I wonder where Ad's went. I guess our arguement was to strong for her. Oh well, gotta bring the A game to these sort of functions, lol.

 

[selfactivated]

LOL I can tell your military! LOL The thing about debate is listening. I dont always do well at it but you can tell Im genuine and I try. Like Ive said before this is a tough subject because EVERYONE has their own baggage to bring to the table.

 

[Ariadne]

It would have to be a broad and sweeping change to the system.

Groups and organizations like FMEP, and OSAP, and other institutions would have to get onboard for it to work.

No matter how I feel about the lib left judges in this country, I would not wish the the righteous retrobution they would face from the fascist womans groups that would challenge this to no end.

btw, my wife read Ad's last post and wanted to know why a women would try and start a pissing contest. As that is such a male trait.

I'm sure your wife knows better than to get in a "pissing contest" ... I guess some women just know their place when it comes to men. Nice choice of language for a lady, by the way. You must be very proud of her.

 

[CDNBear]

I'm sure your wife knows better than to get in a "pissing contest" ... I guess some women just know their place when it comes to men. Nice choice of language for a lady, by the way. You must be very proud of her.

Actaully I am. Great mom, great wife. Contributes to the family on so many levels. She's the reason I'm not in jail or dead, because she will take no **** from no man.

Secure in her skin, loves herself, a true supporter of "woman power", sassy and out spoken, a keeper of the faith, an activist in the Native community(btw, in our Native community, women are the leaders and chose who would be chief, a very matriarchal society), a poet, and writer, an artist. She's a walking miracle. If she subscribed to your views, she likely wouldn't beable to look after herself without the support of a man. Can you hear laughing at you from here.

Still nothing to add?

Still not willing to answer the question?

Still just trolling?

Keep it up, I'm relentless.

 

[selfactivated]

Bear do you have a brother!????????????

 

[CDNBear]

Bear do you have a brother!????????????

Ya but he's broken at the moment.

He's where I was years ago, he's younger then me and a whole lot crazier,lol. Despite all I have attempted to do, he's not responding. But there is still hope.


Just a foot note, but it's funny how my wifes niks on line are "BearTamer" and "BearsBoss". Ya she sure sounds submissive to me. lol.

 

[selfactivated]

She NEEDS to be a bear tamer! Your too cute. Yall have fun Ive gotta go start a new site for Pagan Virginians.......LOL maybe I'll find a 6' 4" Viking eh?

 

[Ariadne]

Actaully I am. Great mom, great wife. Contributes to the family on so many levels. She's the reason I'm not in jail or dead, because she will take no **** from no man.

Secure in her skin, loves herself, a true supporter of "woman power", sassy and out spoken, a keeper of the faith, an activist in the Native community(btw, in our Native community, women are the leaders and chose who would be chief, a very matriarchal society), a poet, and writer, an artist. She's a walking miracle. If she subscribed to your views, she likely wouldn't beable to look after herself without the support of a man. Can you hear laughing at you from here.

Still nothing to add?

Still not willing to answer the question?

Still just trolling?

Keep it up, I'm relentless.

I'm very happy for you. I'm sure she is completely sassy and outspoken until someone starts "pissing" and then she knows better than to display "male" traits and see who can "piss" better. That's great.

Back to the discussion at hand, Judges don't make law, they interpret it.

 

[CDNBear]

I'm very happy for you. I'm sure she is completely sassy and outspoken until someone starts "pissing" and then she knows better than to display "male" traits and see who can "piss" better. That's great.

Back to the discussion at hand, Judges don't make law, they interpret it.

As usual nothing new here.

Umm, fyi, interpreting laws, can and has formed new case law. Challenged, it can end up in an Appeals court, if they do not over turn it, it can ened up infront of the supreme court, where the Justices can and have up held new interpretations, thus creating new laws. Prime examplee Gay marriage.

What were you saying about comparing "intellects"?

btw, I was challenging the intellegence that was coming from your posts, if any insecurities made that seem as an attack on your person, my apologies.

And still nothing from you about the question.

 

[Ariadne]

As usual nothing new here.

Umm, fyi, interpreting laws, can and has formed new case law. Challenged, it can end up in an Appeals court, if they do not over turn it, it can ened up infront of the supreme court, where the Justices can and have up held new interpretations, thus creating new laws. Prime examplee Gay marriage.

What were you saying about comparing "intellects"?

btw, I was challenging the intellegence that was coming from your posts, if any insecurities made that seem as an attack on your person, my apologies.

And still nothing from you about the question.

"The judge's duty is to apply the law independently and impartially, without fear or favour."
http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/aboutcourt/judges/speeches/independence_e.asp

But hey, maybe you know better.

 

[CDNBear]

"The judge's duty is to apply the law independently and impartially, without fear or favour."
http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/aboutcourt/judges/speeches/independence_e.asp

But hey, maybe you know better.

But hey maybe you missed it in the news when the Supreme Court of Canada, made it legal for gay marriage and the insuing fire storm of complaining about unelected Judges making law.

Nice try though.

I'm not holding out hope that you understand that, it is modern history, by your posts, you seemed to have stopped learning around the middle ages.

And we're all anciously awaiting your answer to the big question. No ones holding their breath. The thought of anything constructive seem to be a foriegn thought to you.

What were you saying about your superior intellect?

 

[Ariadne]

But hey maybe you missed it in the news when the Supreme Court of Canada, made it legal for gay marriage and the insuing fire storm of complaining about unelected Judges making law.

Nice try though.

I'm not holding out hope that you understand that, it is modern history, by your posts, you seemed to have stopped learning around the middle ages.

And we're all anciously awaiting your answer to the big question. No ones holding their breath. The thought of anything constructive seem to be a foriegn thought to you.

What were you saying about your superior intellect?

This is where same sex marriage law was introduced:

"The Liberals' controversial same-sex marriage legislation has passed final reading in the House of Commons, sailing through in a 158-133 vote.
Supported by most members of the Liberals, the Bloc Québécois and the NDP, the legislation passed easily, making Canada only the third country in the world, after the Netherlands and Belgium, to officially recognize same-sex marriage."
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/06/28/samesex050628.html

The courts interpreted the law: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/samesexrights/2004scc079.wpd.txt
... especially all that religious freedom stuff.

Just in case you don't read this far:
"1 On July 16, 2003, the Governor in Council issued Order in Council P.C.
2003-1055 asking this Court to hear a reference on the federal government's
Proposal for an Act respecting certain aspects of legal capacity for marriage
for civil purposes ("Proposed Act").

Please take note of who is making the proposal and why the courts are a part of the decision.