What ARE we coming to???

[parsley]

Women didn't get to vote. Remeber?

There were consequences for attempting to vote. As you say.

But giving up does not bring about change.

Thousands of women bitching they couldn't vote, lobbying, being jailed, picketing, parading, did the job. Pars

[dalek]

And look what kind of messed up governments women voting have gotten us in the last century or so

(looking for a foxhole to duck into)

[TOM4CWB]

dalek,

You are really trying to get someones gander up!

We had tame geese... when i was small; and they would attack and bite my lip... and make it bleed.

I was sure 'happy' to see them become Thanksgiving dinner!

[oneoff]

You apparenttly don't acknowledge the difference betwee the following two groups of actions:

There isattempting to vote when not qualifiied, making a scene at the polling place; lying about your gender etc. etc.


Then there is legitimate lobbying (I guess); protesting and garnering support for changing the laws to allow a wommen's vote etc. etc.


I would have supported the second group of actions; but not the first unlawful and inappropriate actions.
The question is which ones of you would have supported the first group of actions?

[oneoff]

In other words we all can agree that that all forms of protest are legitimate.
It should be a given that those methods chosen are acceptable by our societies current laws and regulations.
Otherwise there are sure to be individuals who rationalize the "the end justifies the means" and any terrorist act; unlawful bombing; and criminal deed is warranted.

Ghandi probably knew the difference; but it certainly can't be assumed that all members of this forum; or Canadian society at large is as enlightened.

[TOM4CWB]

Oneoff,

Geese have more rights to grain than the farmer who grew it.

ONLY in Canada.

[checking]

Some for the bin, some for the banker, some for the birds. We all have to eat.

Where did your spirit of sharing fly away to this morning, Tom?

[parsley]

Men could vote because they were legally defined as "persons."

Women were not.

Men wrote the legislation. Men did not want change. In fact, they pulled every trick in the book to avoid change.

The law was wrong. No ifs or buts. You would have defended the status quo; the mantra, "A law is a law," all the way to the voting booth.

Sometimes the law is an ass. Pars

[parsley]

dalek
When your wife reads that comment, she's bound to suffer from a headache tonight. Pars

[parsley]

"decimate their nests with the air drill."

Ownership requires responsibility.

Part of the responsibility of land ownership is to view it as a living breathing parcel that sustains life.

Ownership also requires decency.

Will those farmers who level every tree and destroy all wildlife so that they can deposit a few extra dollars for each acre no longer available for wildlife actually realize a better capital gain 25 years from now when they sell their land?

How will land worth be evaluated in 2035?

Interesting question, isn't it. Pars

[ado089]

In the eye of the law even the act of disturbing wildlife is deemed hunting if you want to get technical. There is the law and then there is what is right and wrong, increasingly in this liberal, bleeding heart, legislated society that we live in today the two are increasingly divorced. Ohter than the indescression of shooting out the window of the truck, which in my opinion is a BS law providing the vehicle isn't moving, wrong was done. There are far more actual poachers out there that don't face any consequences because it's too much work to prosecute. It seems like if you're going to break the law these days you need to commit to it and break alot and frequently and you'll get left alone because it becomes too much work for the system.

[charliep]

Perhaps also need to recognize the opportunities for environmental goods and services. 2010 offers some real challenges but I note the work of Duck Unlimited over time in maintaining wet lands and in partnering with winter wheat growers. Can be a win win. Also will become increasingly important in the future.

Will note the new buzz word among consumers in the US is sustainability. Not sure what this means to a consumer but is on their mind.