Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Forward





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 293
Reputation: 59.2
votes: 2

PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DavidK wrote:
Speaking as a social conservative more than anything else… I don’t think that in today’s world (and certainly not in North America), you will see a lot of policy put forth to appease so-cons.

The line between morality and right and wrong, at least socially, has pretty well been erased. Or at the very least, we’re told it is improper and politically incorrect to say what’s right and what is not. The problem with that idea is that there have always been laws and morals to tell people what they can and cannot do. We’re being told that laws like that are unnecessary, and that we can’t ‘impose our morals’ – So what happens after that?


Bravo! I agree with this entire post.

Basically, if you want to live according to your beliefs then you must say "Screw the government - whether that government be Liberal or "conservative" :roll: .

The CPC has become a party of the "anything goes" crowd.
So don't play the game according to some amoral lawyer's rules.

Bottom line. If you have a tenant you find you don't want to rent to and you want to get rid of them, then find an excuse that can't be successfully challenged and proceed.

If you are a public official who is asked to perform a duty that is against your morality then call in sick, lose the file, screw up the paperwork - whatever it takes. Simply DON'T DO IT. Make sure that your STATED reason has nothing to do with morality.

If you have an employee you have a moral objection to then find an excuse that has nothing to do with that objection, document it carefully and fire them for that reason.

They can run blubbering to the courts all they want. If you've covered your ass then sucks to be them. :P

With a little determination, a little imagination and plausible deniability you can get away with it if you are performing the rest of you duties well.

If you are a businessman who does not wish to do business with a certain individual due to moral reasons then simply find ways to do the business in such an expensive or unsatisfactory way that the undesireable will choose not to do business with you.

Don't admit you are doing anything for other than your stated reasons. Don't brag or reveal secrets. Simply make up your own mind - in the privacy of your own mind and make it happen.

The progressives and "anything goes" crowd can pass all the laws they want.

FUCK 'EM.
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you've misinterpreted Mac's comments.

I think he meant to say that he's open to all religious seasonal displays, not just Christian ones.

On the topic, I think something like this could be a double edged sword; you'd open the door to businesses discriminating against Christians.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that if you open a business expressly catering to a religious community, you shouldn't be forced to accept customers contrary to your beliefs. If this is the case it should be made clear to the public.

For example, a Christian bookstore shouldn't be made to order books contrary to Christian beliefs just because somebody walks in off the street and demands it.

However, you can't offer services to the general public but not certain segments of it IMO.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrsocko wrote:
Your not okay with seasonal Chistian displays but you are okay with atheists seasonal displays. :?

I can imagine what type of display that would be. Perhaps a sign on a city bus telling the world how stupid Chistian beliefs are, right around Christmas time.

Why are an atheists beliefs acceptable to you while a Christians beliefs are not. Just because the Chistians beliefs have something to do with God?

The atheists beliefs have something to do with God to!

You misread my words. I'm okay with any kind of religious displays. If Christians are allowed to do seasonal displays, why shouldn't Jews, Hindus or Muslims be allowed to do so? The atheist display of nothing whatsoever (their supposed belief) was a mild attempt at humour.

Personally, I believe it takes more faith to be an atheist then to be a Christian but that's off topic...

-Mac
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

potan wrote:
Why is believing that certain things are right or wrong qualify as "cramming" my beliefs down everyone's throats? You might not mean that, but in our relativist culture for the most part believing the statement that "Jesus is the only way to heaven" or "homosexuality is a sin" qualifies as forcing my religion on others. I am sick of this bigoted rhetoric, lets face it, conservative christians in Canada face more discrimination than fundamentalist muslims or any other group in Canada. I feel like a second class citizen in my own country having to face the things that I face everyday because of my beliefs.

Believing is one thing. Enacting legislation to enforce those beliefs is something else altogether... and I agree that Christians face more discrimination than any other group in Canada. Use your freedom of expression and tell everyone that Jesus is your saviour. Don't use selected sections of the Bible to justify trying to enact legislation to make life miserable for homosexuals.

Is that plain enough? Am I still a rhetorical bigot? :lol:

-Mac
Forward





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 293
Reputation: 59.2
votes: 2

PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A couple of years ago the SCOC was hearing a case on the legality of spanking. The SCOC "legalized" it by a 1 vote magin (hardly a rousing victory for parent's rights).

Just before we read about the result in the paper my wife & I talked about it. We have a four year old daughter.

I asked "What if they declare it illegal?" I asked, knowing fully well what my wife would answer.

"Both of us will go to jail" my wife replied.

"Both of us?" I asked, amused.

"Yes, both!"
she answered. "One for spanking and the other for comtempt of court when we both tell the judge to go to hell."


In short we have decide to live our life according to certain freedoms we believe are right.

If others don't like it - tough.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forward wrote:
In short we have decide to live our life according to certain freedoms we believe are right.

If others don't like it - tough.

Good for you! By the way, I agree with your position on spanking (and contempt for that matter) since the state has no business telling me how to raise and discipline my children. Religious zealots aren't the only ones who keep trying to use the coercive power of government to push their agenda by a long stretch.

-Mac
Forward





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 293
Reputation: 59.2
votes: 2

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 12:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am becoming less & less respectful of the law in Canada even though I am generally a law abiding person.

I guess I would have to sum up my feeling about the law in this way.

It's an obvious truth that when something exists in overwhelming abundance it becomes worthless.

If everyone in the world had a truckload of diamonds they would be considered sand.

If we all had Da Vinci paintings we'd be using them for doormats.

And the politicians just keep cranking out those statutes .........

Thanks, but I'll make up my OWN MIND about how I want to deal with people.
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
Quote:
Enacting legislation to enforce those beliefs is something else altogether... and I agree that Christians face more discrimination than any other group in Canada. Use your freedom of expression and tell everyone that Jesus is your saviour. Don't use selected sections of the Bible to justify trying to enact legislation to make life miserable for homosexuals


This is what I what a discussion on. Is it forcing your beliefs on someone if you refuse to rent them your business space or hire them for a job because you feel their lifestyle is immoral. This is your own personal building or business remember. Can a religious person use it as a means to express their personal moral and religious beliefs since increasingly they cannot do so in the public sphere?

In Canada I don't think you can. Would that change if property rights were enshrined in the Constitution. You hear all the time about people in the States shooting burglars or even trick or treators(extreme example) for going on their property and getting off on charges. They have property rights in their constitution.

They have freedom from government restricting religious expression. We don't. Should we?
They also have freedom of expression enshrined. Do we? If the HRC's are any indication we don't. And I know they are just kangaroo courts but they have powers and if used correctly by certain groups they can chill politically incorrect dissenting voices.

Is freedom of religion and expression a right if the only place you can ascert said right is in the confines of your own home. In Canada you can't even do that sometimes.
DavidK





Joined: 22 Nov 2008
Posts: 1520
Reputation: 68.5
votes: 5
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 8:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrsocko wrote:
Mac wrote:
Quote:
Enacting legislation to enforce those beliefs is something else altogether... and I agree that Christians face more discrimination than any other group in Canada. Use your freedom of expression and tell everyone that Jesus is your saviour. Don't use selected sections of the Bible to justify trying to enact legislation to make life miserable for homosexuals


This is what I what a discussion on. Is it forcing your beliefs on someone if you refuse to rent them your business space or hire them for a job because you feel their lifestyle is immoral. This is your own personal building or business remember. Can a religious person use it as a means to express their personal moral and religious beliefs since increasingly they cannot do so in the public sphere?

In Canada I don't think you can. Would that change if property rights were enshrined in the Constitution. You hear all the time about people in the States shooting burglars or even trick or treators(extreme example) for going on their property and getting off on charges. They have property rights in their constitution.

They have freedom from government restricting religious expression. We don't. Should we?
They also have freedom of expression enshrined. Do we? If the HRC's are any indication we don't. And I know they are just kangaroo courts but they have powers and if used correctly by certain groups they can chill politically incorrect dissenting voices.

Is freedom of religion and expression a right if the only place you can ascert said right is in the confines of your own home. In Canada you can't even do that sometimes.


I have this same argument with a lot of people. And usually in the end they can’t say anything because they realize this whole thing of being publically correct doesn’t work.

It is almost like we’re told that we can’t say something or express beliefs that might offend someone, but in turn, we have to accept some peoples believes and ideas regardless of if we’re offended by them or not, all in the name of being PC.

In a way, I think we’re our own worst enemy. And by we, I mean western society. We’ve made it so that everyone is scared to move (or feel as though they need be) because someone might not agree with them.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrsocko wrote:
This is what I what a discussion on. Is it forcing your beliefs on someone if you refuse to rent them your business space or hire them for a job because you feel their lifestyle is immoral. This is your own personal building or business remember. Can a religious person use it as a means to express their personal moral and religious beliefs since increasingly they cannot do so in the public sphere?

Good question. I don't have an answer. I believe the SCC has supported property rights when such cases reached them but I'm not certain.

mrsocko wrote:
In Canada I don't think you can. Would that change if property rights were enshrined in the Constitution. You hear all the time about people in the States shooting burglars or even trick or treators(extreme example) for going on their property and getting off on charges. They have property rights in their constitution.

Property rights were in Dief-de-Chief's Bill of Rights but Trudeau made sure to remove property rights from his flawed Constitution because they interfered with his vision of socialism.

mrsocko wrote:
They have freedom from government restricting religious expression. We don't. Should we?

The First Amendment of the American Constitution...

Quote:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."


Section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...

Quote:
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.

The only difference is we're stuck with assorted human rights legislation and the HRCs across the country. Golden intentions; very bad idea.

mrsocko wrote:
They also have freedom of expression enshrined. Do we? If the HRC's are any indication we don't. And I know they are just kangaroo courts but they have powers and if used correctly by certain groups they can chill politically incorrect dissenting voices.

As above... We've allowed the leftards to steal our liberties on at a time...

mrsocko wrote:
Is freedom of religion and expression a right if the only place you can ascert said right is in the confines of your own home. In Canada you can't even do that sometimes.

I hear you...

-Mac
potan





Joined: 30 Jul 2007
Posts: 582
Reputation: 36.3Reputation: 36.3Reputation: 36.3Reputation: 36.3
votes: 2
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
potan wrote:
Why is believing that certain things are right or wrong qualify as "cramming" my beliefs down everyone's throats? You might not mean that, but in our relativist culture for the most part believing the statement that "Jesus is the only way to heaven" or "homosexuality is a sin" qualifies as forcing my religion on others. I am sick of this bigoted rhetoric, lets face it, conservative christians in Canada face more discrimination than fundamentalist muslims or any other group in Canada. I feel like a second class citizen in my own country having to face the things that I face everyday because of my beliefs.

Believing is one thing. Enacting legislation to enforce those beliefs is something else altogether... and I agree that Christians face more discrimination than any other group in Canada. Use your freedom of expression and tell everyone that Jesus is your saviour. Don't use selected sections of the Bible to justify trying to enact legislation to make life miserable for homosexuals.

Is that plain enough? Am I still a rhetorical bigot? :lol:

-Mac


Sorry, I didn't mean to refer to you as a bigot and I would appreciate it if you stop accusing me of using "selected sections of the Bible to justify trying to enact legislation to make life miserable for homosexuals." I do not support enacting any legislation that encroaches on the real human rights of homosexuals or any other individual. I do however think that human rights should be equally respected. I just feel certain groups' rights are highlighted too often while other groups not so popular media and politics are seen as deserving of discrimination.
potan





Joined: 30 Jul 2007
Posts: 582
Reputation: 36.3Reputation: 36.3Reputation: 36.3Reputation: 36.3
votes: 2
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DavidK wrote:
mrsocko wrote:
Mac wrote:
Quote:
Enacting legislation to enforce those beliefs is something else altogether... and I agree that Christians face more discrimination than any other group in Canada. Use your freedom of expression and tell everyone that Jesus is your saviour. Don't use selected sections of the Bible to justify trying to enact legislation to make life miserable for homosexuals


This is what I what a discussion on. Is it forcing your beliefs on someone if you refuse to rent them your business space or hire them for a job because you feel their lifestyle is immoral. This is your own personal building or business remember. Can a religious person use it as a means to express their personal moral and religious beliefs since increasingly they cannot do so in the public sphere?

In Canada I don't think you can. Would that change if property rights were enshrined in the Constitution. You hear all the time about people in the States shooting burglars or even trick or treators(extreme example) for going on their property and getting off on charges. They have property rights in their constitution.

They have freedom from government restricting religious expression. We don't. Should we?
They also have freedom of expression enshrined. Do we? If the HRC's are any indication we don't. And I know they are just kangaroo courts but they have powers and if used correctly by certain groups they can chill politically incorrect dissenting voices.

Is freedom of religion and expression a right if the only place you can ascert said right is in the confines of your own home. In Canada you can't even do that sometimes.


I have this same argument with a lot of people. And usually in the end they can’t say anything because they realize this whole thing of being publically correct doesn’t work.

It is almost like we’re told that we can’t say something or express beliefs that might offend someone, but in turn, we have to accept some peoples believes and ideas regardless of if we’re offended by them or not, all in the name of being PC.

In a way, I think we’re our own worst enemy. And by we, I mean western society. We’ve made it so that everyone is scared to move (or feel as though they need be) because someone might not agree with them.


Political correctness won't last forever, thanks to rampant relativism there is a void that is needing to be filled. I actually think that since we've rejected our own traditional western values we will have to import new values from elsewhere, its only a matter of time.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

potan wrote:
Sorry, I didn't mean to refer to you as a bigot and I would appreciate it if you stop accusing me of using "selected sections of the Bible to justify trying to enact legislation to make life miserable for homosexuals." I do not support enacting any legislation that encroaches on the real human rights of homosexuals or any other individual. I do however think that human rights should be equally respected. I just feel certain groups' rights are highlighted too often while other groups not so popular media and politics are seen as deserving of discrimination.

Sorry, I didn't mean to accuse you of being authoritarian. I was speak in general rather than specific terms.

There's no question that some advocacy groups and special interests seem to have media sympathy as well as political support from the leftards. I wish there was a different word to describe the assorted whims and wishes which these groups like to call "rights" which are not the self-evident fundamental rights of a free society. For a while, I thought of calling them "lefts" but I didn't think most folks would understand or appreciate the play on words.

-Mac
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think 'Entitlements' has just the right connotations...
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FF_Canuck wrote:
I think 'Entitlements' has just the right connotations...

Good point. I like it!

-Mac
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Social Conservativism

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB