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 1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:06 pm    Post subject: What do you believe in? Reply with quote

1. Country

I believe that a country is a place for people who share the same values and speak the same language to reside. I don't believe that our immigration system should be a first come first serve system. We should return to the point system that places a high value on language. Currently, my neighbors on either side do not speak sufficient English for me to have a rudimentary conversation about the weather with them. And half the people on my street don't speak conversant English. I believe that a sense of country is eroded by allowing people into it that don't conform to western values and lifestyles.

2. Crime and Punishment

I believe that the more punishment you have the less crime you will have. And even if that idiom weren't true it should be adhered to as a matter of principle. Any argument about the cost of incarceration infuriates me. When I think of the family in Alberta killed by a teenager's boyfriend it makes me sick. The nine year old told his older evil sister that he didn't want to die and she allowed her boyfriend to slash his throat. It almost brings me to tears. I can't believe there are people in this country that oppose the death penalty in these instances. And I am not talking about a painless needle. I believe that pedophiles should be castrated.

3. Environment

I cheer for technological advances in environmental technologies even though the industry as a whole tends to be in opposition to conservative ideals. While I don't support the concept of AGW I do support initiatives and regulations with regards to clean air and clean water. I believe conservatives should strive to bring blue environmentalists into our tent.

4. Health Care

I believe that a citizen who is allowed to buy a Porsche 911 Turbo with their own money should be allowed to buy a life saving MRI with their own money.

5. Military

I believe that citizens who denounce their troops as murderers should not have been allowed to become citizens in the first place. I believe that a strong military is the basis for a strong and proud country.

6. Taxes

I believe that any country that takes 40% of the average citizen's income is committing pure and inexcusable theft.

7. Media

I believe that the era of the internet has made the need for a culturally driven, taxpayer funded national media outlet completely obsolete. I believe that there are at least a dozen ways that $1 billion per year could be better spent.

8. Abortion

I believe that the vast majority of abortions represent the very worst of human selfishness. The death of a 100% innocent living human child due to sexual weakness and impulsive gratification perfectly represents the complete lack of personal responsibility that has become a malignant cancer in our society. Everyone who commits this travesty due to a lack of judgment and restraint should be cursed to a life of regret and shame.

9. Equality

I believe that fighting for the equality of women and minorities while at the same time advocating race-based policies for select groups like natives is the very definition of hypocrisy and shameless political ideology. I believe that everyone should be treated equally and that policies like affirmative action are hypocritical and do more damage to race relations by causing resentment. Advocates of affirmative action are often the ones who say we should not stoop to the level of our enemies when engaged in combat. Affirmative action IS stooping to the level of racists.
thurmas





Joined: 04 Aug 2009
Posts: 227
Reputation: 36Reputation: 36Reputation: 36Reputation: 36
votes: 1

PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i agree with most of what you said expect for abortion, which i think is ok if for example a teenaged mother who is on welfare has an unexpected pregnancy and she is too imature and poor to bring in a child into what sure is to be a terrible life for that child than it should be her choice. on language i think that should be a province'sjurisdiction quebec being a french society has by all means to enforce the french language there because their society is a french one and by all means they should have the right to protect that. However that doesn't mean canada should have to be bilingual when 75% of us are english speaking. There should be french officals for quebecers who need to access federal services such as courts,federal depts... ect but that should not mean that every federal employee should be bilingual.it seems that the quebec soverignty movement really grew in the 60's and after after we kept giving quebec more and more but before the 60's and since harper gave up on quebec the seperatist movement is fading away.if you leave quebec alone they usually will settle down and not look to seperation.
don muntean





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 2262
Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9
votes: 8
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree cent percent with everything you've posted. Especially #2 #5 and #8!
DavidK





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

PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig for GG!
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thurmas wrote:
which i think is ok if for example a teenaged mother who is on welfare has an unexpected pregnancy and she is too imature and poor to bring in a child into what sure is to be a terrible life for that child than it should be her choice.


1. I'm not sure what you mean by "unexpected". If she has a penis inside her at any point she should be prepared for the consequences. There are so many contraceptive options out there that there should be no excuse for getting pregnant except weakness and selfishness which are not valid excuses for killing a child.

2. I worked with a guy who was an ardent NDP supporter. But he was prolife. His mother gave him up for adoption. Very few people in this world (and in Canada in particular) lead a life so awful that death would be a better option and NOBODY should have the right to make that decision on behalf of another life.
thurmas





Joined: 04 Aug 2009
Posts: 227
Reputation: 36Reputation: 36Reputation: 36Reputation: 36
votes: 1

PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

many people born to unwed teenaged mothers live a life of poverty and crime and become dependant on the welfare state to support them.
don muntean





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 2262
Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9
votes: 8
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thurmas wrote:
many people born to unwed teenaged mothers live a life of poverty and crime and become dependant on the welfare state to support them.


There is no doubt that there is a problem as you've described - what you seem to not see is that your remedy is extreme and selfish. Anyone who uses abortion as birth control is quite irresponsible.

Either prevent the pregnancy or put the child up for adoption. There are many couples who cannot have a baby who would give that child the life it's irresponsible parents couldn't.

Abortion is punishing the child for the mistakes of its parents. The most severe punishment - death! What self respecting person can defend this heinous practice?
queenmandy85





Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 224
Reputation: 94.4Reputation: 94.4
votes: 2
Location: Saskatoon

PostPosted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:11 pm    Post subject: 5 vs 6 Reply with quote

I agree with 5 but you contradict it with 6. You cannot build and maintain an effective military and keep taxes under 60%.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thurmas wrote:
many people born to unwed teenaged mothers live a life of poverty and crime and become dependant on the welfare state to support them.


You are right - killing them is best solution.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 8:00 pm    Post subject: Re: 5 vs 6 Reply with quote

queenmandy85 wrote:
I agree with 5 but you contradict it with 6. You cannot build and maintain an effective military and keep taxes under 60%.


60%?!?

Taxes currently consume 40% of our income. You think it needs to be 60%? Hmmm.

I think you vastly overestimate the cost of the military. It currently consumes about $18 billion per year out of a budget of $245 billion. We could raise that to $25 billion per year without breaking a sweat.
queenmandy85





Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 224
Reputation: 94.4Reputation: 94.4
votes: 2
Location: Saskatoon

PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:56 pm    Post subject: Re: 5 vs 6 Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
queenmandy85 wrote:
I agree with 5 but you contradict it with 6. You cannot build and maintain an effective military and keep taxes under 60%.


60%?!?

Taxes currently consume 40% of our income. You think it needs to be 60%? Hmmm.

I think you vastly overestimate the cost of the military. It currently consumes about $18 billion per year out of a budget of $245 billion. We could raise that to $25 billion per year without breaking a sweat.


The armed forces need to be able to take on all comers. The purpose of having a military is not just to project the will of the government, but to defend the country.
We need to be able to establish air superiority, naval power with a fleet air arm, armour and infantry and a full range of tactical and strategic weapons. Without these components, we are unable to defend ourselves. If the armed forces cannot defend us, they are a waste of money. Switzerland can deploy the largest army in Europe in 72 hours. There is no reason why Canada could not do the same in North America.
queenmandy85





Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 224
Reputation: 94.4Reputation: 94.4
votes: 2
Location: Saskatoon

PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And to answer the question of what I beleive in: God, Queen and Country.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:52 pm    Post subject: Re: 5 vs 6 Reply with quote

queenmandy85 wrote:
Switzerland can deploy the largest army in Europe in 72 hours


Source please. Besides - numbers don't mean much. If you are trying to tell me that Switzerland could beat Germany or France or England, or Spain in a war you are kidding yourself.

Quote:
There is no reason why Canada could not do the same in North America.


Ummm - we have 30 million people. Mexico has 110 million. The United States has 310 million. I can think of two reasons why we can't. Unless, of course, you are advocating conscription in which case either of the other two countries could do the same.

I advocate a strong military with respect to our obvious limitations in terms of people and money. I'm not advocating bankrupting our country so that we can compete militarily with the USA. That just doesn't make sense.
queenmandy85





Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 224
Reputation: 94.4Reputation: 94.4
votes: 2
Location: Saskatoon

PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Source: International Institute for Straegic Studies - Military Balance.
I advocate making five years military service compusory for every citizen at 17 years of age.
After service in the regular forces, two months service per year in the active reserve until age 35. That is what the Swiss do.
I also advocate the developement of the full range of tactical and strategic nuclear forces, particularly ERD's.
If Isreal can defend itsself, so can we.
If as is obvious, Canadians do not want to defend the country, why have a Defence budget at all. Having a few thousand people in uniform giving their lives because they are not given the resources needed is a waste of money. Either you make the commitment to defend the nation or put out the welcome mat.
thurmas





Joined: 04 Aug 2009
Posts: 227
Reputation: 36Reputation: 36Reputation: 36Reputation: 36
votes: 1

PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

israel has to because they are in real danger every day,canada is not in the same situation, we don't need such a large military we need a practical and efficient military, this isn't 1942 no one is looking to conquer canada or the world.we serve in tandem with our partners such as the uk and usa and the aussies. I beleive our military budget should go from 18 to 25 billion but no more that would be an effective canadian forces contribuiting our fair share to world peace.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3

Goto page 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 cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


What do you believe in?

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB