Getting religion

[silverback]

I personally doubt if Martin will call an election when the Gomery inquiry results are made public. Just because he has promised it, doesn't necessarily mean he will honor his promise !!

[farmers_son]

It is true that the testimony before Justice Gomery is available on the Internet at:
http://www.gomery.ca/en/rulingonstanding20040705/

I think we need to keep in mind that this testimony is often contradictory and some of it will be found to be outright lies. Justice Gomery will have the responsibility to determine what is truth and what is fiction. That is why I am withholding my judgment until his report is issued.

I am sure gay marriage would be voted down if it came to a referendum. But how do you uphold the Charter of Rights and Freedoms when the Courts have said that banning gay marriage is against their charter rights and apparently using the not withstanding clause is not an option? I personally like Klein’s suggestion that the provinces should not be in the business of marrying people and leave it to the churches to perform marriages. Government does not belong in the bedrooms of this country.

Emrald1: If you want to take issue with the way Ontario people vote in terms of their provincial leaders you could do so but it may be none of your business as an Albertan. However I am concerned that viewing federal politics in terms of which province voted which way is contrary to nation building. If we are to be a nation of one people united under one federal government then we need to accept the majority decision. When you say things like Ontario will vote for the Liberals it is stereotyping. It is no different than saying the blacks voted the government in or the gays voted the government in or big business or labour voted the government in and so on. The people of this country will vote the government in as long as you believe our voting system is fair and honest. Whether those people live in Ontario or Quebec or Alberta they are Canadians and in a democratic country the majority form the government. A Canadian is a Canadian no matter what province they live in or what other demographic you might want to look at and they are entitled to vote for who they want.

[farmers_son]

I don't know where you got the imprssion that I give a damn how citizens of Ontario vote provincially, its how they vote federally that affects me !!! Until the entire electoral system is changed our votes out west don't really count, so how Ontario votes certainly is my business !
I agree with Ralph on the marriage issue and also agree that the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation but lately it seems as though folks of a certain pursuasion have felt the need to flaunt their bedroom activites in the face of the nation. Hopefully, now they will all marry and live happliy everafter.,

[FarmRanger]

Public perception may have been that the gay marriage legislation was simply upholding a charter right, but that was not the case. Gay marriage was NOT deemed to be a charter right, and the courts threw it back into the hands of the politicians. So much for the democracy and the wishes of the majority. The simple fact is that most provinces gave all the same rights to gay couples anyway, only the marraige name was exclusively for traditional unions. Which is largely why I think the whole thing was a diversion of public attention from adscam and illegal diversions of taxpayers dollars to Liberal coffers.

You are right that there are conflicting stories in the Gomery inquiry, but since blame can't be assigned to individuals, it really won't accomplish much even if he does sort it out. When Gomery doesn't name names, (which he has not been explicitly given the power to do), the public will be expected to assume that no politicians are to blame, and it will be life as usual. The corruption will continue, with some modifications to procedure which will likely be ignored, like Canadian law was ignored in Chretians government, in which our current Prime Minister was a cabinet minister.

[farmers_son]

Actually how Ontario votes provincially does affect you as the provinces have considerable influence on federal policy through Ministers meetings and so on although they cannot decide who forms the government.

Maybe I am trying to make too fine a point which is viewing Federal politics in terms of Provincial voting patterns is contrary to nation building. Federally the Province of Ontario does not vote in a federal election. Neither does the Province of Alberta. The citizens of Canada do vote however. They reside in federal ridings not one of which is called Ontario or Alberta. The residents of Avalon, Beauséjour, Kings—Hants, Provencher, Blackstrap and Pitt Meadows--Maple Ridge--Mission to name a few decide who will be their Member of Parliament who then represents them in Ottawa.

Viewed this way, every Canadian’s vote counts. Your vote counts whether you vote for the successful candidate/party or not. Making broad statements about how a certain demographic votes only breeds discontent and division. If you insist upon stereotyping, 1.6 million Ontarioans voted Conservative in the last election, more than in the rest of the country combined. I for one think it is unfortunate these statistics are kept. Why not include demographic information on each ballot so we can really understand our country better? Do you think it would be useful to know how women vote versus men? Or by race or by annual income. How about education or language? It is just as counterproductive to view federal voting patterns in provincial terms and it is just as irrelevant.

[FarmRanger]

If current polls are right, Ontario and the maritimes will be almost exclusively Liberal, the west will be almost exclusively Conservative, and Quebec will be almost exclusively Block. You can’t tell me that provincial voting patterns don’t make a difference.

Nation building is done with equitable treatment of all regions with justice being meted out fairly, while trying to uphold decent values we can all agree on. Unfortunately the Liberal governments we’ve been getting do none of the above and its fractionating the country to the point where we are going to have even more divisiveness and unrest because of it. There is no widespread acceptance of separation, and other such ideas in a well governed democracy. Time to cut the Liberals loose, and get some kind of government restructuring in this country before its too late. This fiddling while Rome burns, and pitting one area of the country against another has got to stop. It may get many people to vote Liberal out of fear, but its going to tear the country apart.

[silverback]

F_s, I don't believe our election system is fair at all.

The first past the post system does not accurately reflect the wishes of the public. The best system would be representation by population whereby if 30% voted liberal, 30% voted conservative, and 30% other, that would be how the makeup of parliment would be set at.

And as Ranger said, the gay marriage issue had nothing to do with their legal rights, they already had those in place. The issue is the ability of churches and other organizations to freely express their views without being drug out in front of the human rights commissions for disagreeing with what they want to.

[ivbinconned]

Debateing Farmers-son reminds me of the wise words of my dad.
"do not waste your time having a war of wit's with someone who is unarmed"

farmers-son I do wish your research and opinion went a little deeper than what the CBC regurgatates for you every day. Your obvious grasp of canadian history is very shallow.

I would urge you to read my last two posts of Mark Steyn...I hope you find them enlightening. But please don't then try to convince us that you are smarter than him.

[farmers_son]

ivbinconned: I was debating in this thread and I thought it was a pretty good discussion. Good comments from FarmRanger, Silverback and Emrald1.

Obviously the Liberals would not stand a chance in the next elecion if there was a unified opposition. But with the Bloc in Quebec and the Conservatives a non issue east of Manitoba the next election is the Liberals to loose. If there was a stronger opposition that offered a genuine threat of forming a government the gay marriage thing would not have happened.

I particularly liked silverbacks and FarmRanger's last posts.

[cowman]

Farmers son: Where did I advocate a theocracy? Or a dictatorship?
The present Conservative party is a watered down version of what the west really wanted...and even that isn't acceptable?
A triple E senate could have saved this country but unfortunately Martin couldn't even acknowledge the "democratic rights" of the people of Alberta to elect their senators!
Democracy, as we know it is mob rule! Without the most important right(the right to own property) the Charter of Rights is a sham! A republic is what the people should demand where the "rights" of the individual take precedent over the wants of the majority. If the individual has certain unchangeable rights then it doesn't really matter who is leading the country?
The only question I might ask about gay marriage is why do gays want the state meddling in their business? In fact why do hetrosexuals? Why do you need to sign a contract(license) with the state to get married? I thought the church and God sanctified marriage...not the state?
If you ever get a chance, read the book "Back to Slavery" by Gerry Spence. It gives one pause to realize how far we have slipped back under the control of our old masters! Everytime we give up some more of our freedom in the interests of "society", we diminish our ability to live as free men.

[ivbinconned]

What you think and what is reality can often be two different things. This is a truth that as you get older becomes more and more obvious and easier to admit. Hence my handle.

Debateing minor points and avoiding the major thrust of an artical is a tactic used by liberals to deflect attention...cute but unproductive!

[farmers_son]

Cowman: I agree with your statement on the State and marriage.

Democracy is more illusion than fact. If we do not get to elect our Senators I would point out that the Americans do not elect their President. Just like when Albertans voted for a Senator in the last Provincial election, when U.S. citizens vote for President they are just offering a suggestion to the Electoral College who are the ones who really decide who the President of the United States will be.

There can be no question that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms places limits and restrictions on the ability of our democratically elected Members of Parliament to represent the views of their constituents.

It has occurred to me that if property rights had been included in the Charter would that not have created a special right for some people, those people with property, that other people, those without property, did not have? The Charter as it is written includes rights that every Canadian can claim. Still too often we see the Charter being twisted by politically influential groups to achieve their ends.

You did not advocate a theocracy or dictatorship. The article was hinting at a theocracy where government policy is determined by religious doctrine. You did use the revolution word though.