Croyez-vous à l'évolutionl? Do you believe in evolution?

[Cyrus]

And hamburgers eat people!

[ToxiK]

I believe you have stated that the federal Conservatives are typical examples of the religious right. I disagree. The federal Tories are a big tent party. You have libertarians like Maxime Bernier alongside religious conservatives like Stockwell Day. To unite all of these different ideologies, you might have noticed that they don't seem to bring up social conservative issues that often.

 

I think that the Conservatives don't bring social conservative issues because they are a minority governement. If they get a majority, I am affraid that all the social conservatives nuts will get out of their hiding place and rule the political agenda. Harper is very controlling, I think it is because he knows that if he isn't controlling, those nuts will speak out and ruin any chances of the Conservatives to gain a majority.

[MTLskyline]

I think that the Conservatives don't bring social conservative issues because they are a minority governement. If they get a majority, I am affraid that all the social conservatives nuts will get out of their hiding place and rule the political agenda. Harper is very controlling, I think it is because he knows that if he isn't controlling, those nuts will speak out and ruin any chances of the Conservatives to gain a majority.

 

Still though. The religious right is nowhere near as large, or as powerful in Canada as it is in the US. I won't deny that they exist here - because they do, but there are some important differences. In the US, a very large percentage of the population are Evangelicals (26%). In Canada, there are fewer Evangelicals (7%). I'm the guy who voted for creationism (but only because there was no choice for believing in aspects of evolution and intelligent design), and even I'm not an Evangelical - I'm a mainline Presbyterian.

[ToxiK]

Still though. The religious right is nowhere near as large, or as powerful in Canada as it is in the US. I won't deny that they exist here - because they do, but there are some important differences. In the US, a very large percentage of the population are Evangelicals (26%). In Canada, there are fewer Evangelicals (7%). I'm the guy who voted for creationism (but only because there was no choice for believing in aspects of evolution and intelligent design), and even I'm not an Evangelical - I'm a mainline Presbyterian.

 

I agree that we don't have as many social conservatives in Canada then they do in the United States. But they are there. And we don't know how many are in the Conservative Party. I am affraid of the damage they can do if the Conservatives get a majority. Especially since the social conservative know they are not that many, they will try to do as much changes as they can while they have the chance.

[MTLskyline]

Here is food for thought (its from 2007):

 

A Canadian Press-Decima Research poll has revealed that Canadians are strongly divided on the question of human origins.

 

Asked to choose the statement which "comes closest" to their views, 26 percent of those polled said: "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so." Another 29 percent declared: "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process." The largest group (34 percent) held a middle position: "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process." The survey said nothing about the opinions of the remaining 11 percent of Canadians. The poll of 1,000 Canadians was conducted June 21-24.

 

It differs considerably from a similar poll in the United States (done by Gallup for Newsweek March 28-19), in which 45 percent said God created human beings in their present form, 40 percent said God guided human evolution, and only 15 percent said God played no part in human development.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/03/17/jonathan-kay-on-the-globe-amp-mail-s-appalling-front-page-smear-on-religious-christians.aspx

 

In short, 60% of Canadians believe God played a role in our creation, including 34% who believe in a combination like I do.

 

In the US, that figure is 85%.

[MTLskyline]

I agree that we don't have as many social conservatives in Canada then they do in the United States. But they are there. And we don't know how many are in the Conservative Party. I am affraid of the damage they can do if the Conservatives get a majority. Especially since the social conservative know they are not that many, they will try to do as much changes as they can while they have the chance.

 

What changes do you think they'll make?

[ToxiK]

What changes do you think they'll make?

 

Try to restrict abortion, get death penalty back, ban gay marriages.

 

They can also try to influence provincial policies by holding back some transfert payments and then maybe impose more religious teaching in school or ban sex-ed altogether (well, sex-ed that doesn't limit to abstinence). Or force clinics and hospitals to call the parents on teenagers under 18 when they get a STD, or raise the legal age for sexual relations to 18 (or 21).

 

I know some of those things are unlikely, but many peoples would love to impose them. How many of those people are involved with the conservatives?? And the fact that Harper is so controlling is scaring me. What is he affraid of about his party?

[Cyrus]

Try to restrict abortion, get death penalty back, ban gay marriages.

 

They can also try to influence provincial policies by holding back some transfert payments and then maybe impose more religious teaching in school or ban sex-ed altogether (well, sex-ed that doesn't limit to abstinence). Or force clinics and hospitals to call the parents on teenagers under 18 when they get a STD, or raise the legal age for sexual relations to 18 (or 21).

 

I know some of those things are unlikely, but many peoples would love to impose them. How many of those people are involved with the conservatives?? And the fact that Harper is so controlling is scaring me. What is he affraid of about his party?

 

I don't think any of those things could happen even with a majority... the social conservatives in Canada are generally blue but there isn't enough to go that far, they'd need +50% of the caucus on side and there just aren't enough hard-line social conservatives there. Plus things like sex-ed would never pass because of education being a provincial issue, and in Canada, you can't touch provincial issues or even think about it...

 

Now if they proposed holding back on transfer payments, this I can get interested in

 

I found this article on the "controlling" interesting:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/11/13/jon-ivison-larry-miller-%E2%80%94-the-voice-in-harpers-ear/

 

Discipline was rigidly imposed after the party lost the 2004 election but the caucus has now bought into that arrangement because it has been proven to work. It is a culture that remains hidden from the view of most Canadians because its members remains intensely suspicious of the media. But it is wrong to suggest that this is entirely because the Prime Minister’s Office has warned against talking to the press.

 

Mr. Miller himself plays down the suggestion that the caucus is cowed by the PMO. “Nobody every told me I can’t do this or that. You can get into trouble at any level of politics by saying stupid things to the media. But it’s not about control by the PMO, it’s about discipline and self-control.”

 

But considering how Maxime Bernier flies around Canada speaking his mind regardless of what the actual policy of the government is, I don't think there is much "controlling" happening (at least not against him). Compare that with the Liberals who are always going out and saying the most stupid things, like when they were complaining that somehow Harper had control over the Hudson Bay Company and made them put the Conservative logo on all the 2010 Olympics clothing, it was "C" for Canada not Conservative, freaking idiots

Modifié 14 novembre 2010 par Cyrus

[ToxiK]

I don't think any of those things could happen even with a majority... the social conservatives in Canada are generally blue but there isn't enough to go that far, they'd need +50% of the caucus on side and there just aren't enough hard-line social conservatives there. Plus things like sex-ed would never pass because of education being a provincial issue, and in Canada, you can't touch provincial issues or even think about it...

 

Now if they proposed holding back on transfer payments, this I can get interested in

 

I found this article on the "controlling" interesting:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/11/13/jon-ivison-larry-miller-%E2%80%94-the-voice-in-harpers-ear/

 

 

 

But considering how Maxime Bernier flies around Canada speaking his mind regardless of what the actual policy of the government is, I don't think there is much "controlling" happening (at least not against him). Compare that with the Liberals who are always going out and saying the most stupid things, like when they were complaining that somehow Harper had control over the Hudson Bay Company and made them put the Conservative logo on all the 2010 Olympics clothing, it was "C" for Canada not Conservative, freaking idiots

 

The government could hold back transfert payments to force the provinces to do what Ottawa will order them to do. Not a good thing...

 

The Conservative do try to impose their views into provincial matters. Just think about the federal security commission they want to impose.

 

And for Maxime Bernier saying what he wants, well, Harper just can't stop him. Beauce is sold to him, if he gets fired the conservative will lose Beauce. So it's easier for Harper to let him talk then to lose an otherwise easily won seat in Québec. Harper can ignore Bernier now and dismiss him later.

Modifié 15 novembre 2010 par ToxiK

[Cyrus]

The government could hold back transfert payments to force the provinces to do what Ottawa will order them to do. Not a good thing...

 

Could you imagine the chialage that would produce? It would be a political shitstorm of unimaginable magnitude, even just consider the reaction of Quebec (but every other province will be just as mad) Just look how the federal Conservatives folded on that Potash Corp. deal, going against everything they stand for because the premier of Saskatchewan wanted them to...

 

The federal securities commission is a bit different, but even there, they are only going for an "opt-in" kind of regulator (which makes no sense)