• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: Politics & News... Have at it.

TheCountofMonteCristo said:
not at all, but I would not expect a government to determine policy based on whether big name athletes will sign with a pro team in Canada or not
Click to expand...

fair enough, but you will support policy that upholds foreign 7th century AD practices while at the same time (wait for it)...

you all lose your shit complaining about the conservative boogie man wanting to take you back to the 1950's.
 
Niqabs are silly but who am I to tell a woman what she can or cannot do religiously? Women siy separately in sikh hindu temples synagogues, many right wing christians prefer women to be stay at home types. The only reason many are against niqabs is because it is worn by muslims
 
is that opinion or science?

and who you kidding, liberals tell people what to do, how to behave, how to speak .... all in the name of political erectness....all the time.

This is a progressive nation is it not? If so it has no business advocating by law, foreign 7th cent AD practices that were put in place....by......men. lol. Go ahead twist yourself into a liberal pretzel....I enjoy.
 
TheCountofMonteCristo said:
Niqabs are silly but who am I to tell a woman what she can or cannot do religiously? Women siy separately in sikh hindu temples synagogues, many right wing christians prefer women to be stay at home types. The only reason many are against niqabs is because it is worn by muslims
Click to expand...

Wearing a Niqab or a Veil Is Not a Requirement of Islam

But the advocates, including a federal judge, for the right of Muslim women to wear veils ignore one basic reality: This is not about Islamic faith....

The Quran doesn't require Muslim women to cover their faces. Women in Prophet Muhammad's times were allowed to work with open faces.

The vast majority of Muslims think that the traditional veil is clearly a mark of separation, and consider it an element of the fanatical side of Islam.
Click to expand...

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/tahir-gora/niqab-canada_b_6712172.html
 
northernlou said:
fair enough, but you will support policy that upholds foreign 7th century AD practices while at the same time (wait for it)...

you all lose your shit complaining about the conservative boogie man wanting to take you back to the 1950's.
Click to expand...

The 1950's?

You mean when the wealthiest people were taxed at 95%? when 1/3 of the entire workforce belonged to unions and had good paying jobs with benefits and pensions? The era when there was a real middle class that wasn't financing their lives on credit? When people owned homes instead of just mortgages? The era when big government built trans-continental highways and other large public works projects? That 1950's? Because that's not what I'm hearing from the current GOP candidates and it isn't what the Harperites were talking about last month either.

Conservatives like the 50's because racism, sexism and homophobia were met with a shrug (and pretty much protected by law) and because racial, ethnic and religious minorities were marginalized. They want the mythical world of white male privilege to come back but I don't think they're very much interested in raising taxes on the richest 1%, cutting back on outsourcing to allow for unions to flourish once again or have the government initiate large-scale projects like fixing that 50 year old infrastructure.

The problem with today's conservatives is that they're only in favour of moral conservatism. They love it when government interferes with people's private lives by telling them who they're allowed to marry or to deny them the right to an abortion. But when it comes to monetary policy they want government to disappear so they can turn Wall Street into a casino. Then when they inevitably mess things up they want the government to magically reappear and hand them a corporate welfare cheque so they can still fly in their private jets.
 
so much verbal diarrhea, wehave. You still can't explain justifying the 7th century practice....just a tirade from you.

well done
 
The niqab is a red herring. It was just a wedge issue for angry white people to obsess over. If Harper wants a "barbaric practices hotline" established he should be prepared to get complaints about the church he and his wife attend. Their published views on the role of women are pretty barbaric if you ask me.

I wonder if that church of his has figured out that Laureen is gay yet?
 
northernlou said:
red herring that you support as a progressive.

liberals own this
Click to expand...

The issue was propogated by Linton Crosby who was working for Harper. It was only an issue because the Conservatives made it one. Nobody else cared. The Liberals and NDP only addressed it because the Cons went at it like dogs on a bone.
 
They defended it because the Cons tried to make it an issue. That's why they hired Crosby in the first place. He's the guru of wedge politics. And the people who voted based on the niqab weren't doing so on behalf of equal rights for women or anything so noble. They just don't like foreigners and Harper was giving them a convenient excuse to act like racists by couching it in code words like "barbaric cultural practices". The niqab was a dog whistle to the Conservative base: ignorant, angry white xenophobes from the Prairies.
 
All I know is the promises that were made, if they are kept, will leave an even more bankrupt country for my kids' generation.

I hope half of what was promised doesn't come to be
 
Rolex said:
All I know is the promises that were made, if they are kept, will leave an even more bankrupt country for my kids' generation.

I hope half of what was promised doesn't come to be
Click to expand...

It's called buying an election, but don't tell a lib that because they already used that on Harper.
 
northernlou said:
indulge me, I do asswipe
Click to expand...
Basic logic: why was is it necessary to fund the US military to more than $600B-$700B at a time of severe debt, complaints of lack of monies for Medicare, social security et al? Where's the logic, when $200B would've sufficed?

I know.. I know Liberal dogma...
 
xposbrad said:
It's called buying an election, but don't tell a lib that because they already used that on Harper.
Click to expand...
Harper should be hung by his testicles at center square for daring to use "God bless" Canada...

Governing of people in a democracy has no place for tinker bells in the sky - separation of church & state is paramount to governing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top