# Political Correctness gone too far?



## S McKee (14 Nov 2005)

PUBLICATION:  Calgary Herald 
DATE:  2005.11.14 
EDITION:  Final 
SECTION:  The Editorial Page 
PAGE:  A12 
SOURCE:  Calgary Herald 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forces drone on

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Speaking of pilotless drones, it is an irritating reminder of what Ottawa thinks is a military priority that gender-neutral language has been inflicted on ordinary soldiers who should have more pressing things to be thinking about. 

In military shorthand, these drones are referred to as UAVs -- Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Or they were. 

Now, thanks to super-sensibilities, they are Uninhabited Aerial Vehicles. As though anybody ever "inhabited" an aircraft. 

It is about what one would expect from a <DND> which has replaced the time-honoured term "infantryman" with infanteer (rhymes with mouseketeer), and serving personnel are referred to as members. 

In a naturally irreverent bunch, this has led to informal references to "members with members," and "members without members." 

Perhaps a better solution to this linguistic awkwardness would be to forget the silliness about keeping the letter U in the UAV, and call these vehicles what they really are -- dismembered. 

There's no life like it.

Please tell me this is a joke.....


----------



## George Wallace (14 Nov 2005)

Jumper said:
			
		

> PUBLICATION:   Calgary Herald
> DATE:   2005.11.14
> In a naturally irreverent bunch, this has led to informal references to "members with members," and "members without members."


I find this amusing, and think it will now become a target of the PC crowd.  The "members without members" must obviously refer to our Members of Parliament who condon such practices.

It sure doesn't feel like the 1st of April yet, but I could be wrong.....  :


----------



## midgetcop (14 Nov 2005)

Coming from a female, I'd say this sounds pretty superfluous. 

I'd hate to think that there are people out there sensitive enough to be offended by the word "unmanned".

 :


----------



## Sig_Des (14 Nov 2005)

This is getting ridiculous...

Anyone see the latest Gene Hack-Person movie?


----------



## George Wallace (14 Nov 2005)

Sig_Des said:
			
		

> This is getting ridiculous...
> 
> Anyone see the latest Gene Hack-Person movie?


Shame on you...Person......Gene Hack-uninhabitable!


----------



## career_radio-checker (14 Nov 2005)

From now on the 522 radio will be known as the "Person-pack"


----------



## George Wallace (14 Nov 2005)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> From now on the 522 radio will be known as the "Person-pack"


Once agin, you can't call it that......it has "son" in it....  :


----------



## Sig_Des (14 Nov 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Once agin, you can't call it that......it has "son" in it....   :



Individual-Pack?


----------



## George Wallace (14 Nov 2005)

Non-Gender Specific Pack.......an NGSP!



The 522 NGSP has a bit of a ring to it, no?


----------



## big_castor (14 Nov 2005)

Perhaps it's only a case of overly precise semantics : a UAV is "unhabited" but "manned" from the ground....


----------



## George Wallace (14 Nov 2005)

Squadron CO said:
			
		

> Perhaps it's only a case of overly precise semantics : a UAV is "unhabited" but "manned" from the ground....


I suppose now, we can change all our technical manuals and add in another line to replace a single word "UAV" with a long sentence stating it to be an "Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle Crewed From the Ground".   Now we will have to figure out if that translates well into French.     :

How thick are these manuals going to get?     :


----------



## career_radio-checker (14 Nov 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Non-Gender Specific Pack.......an NGSP!
> 
> 
> 
> The 522 NGSP has a bit of a ring to it, no?




 :-\ (siiiiiiiigh) Another tooth is pulled from the Canadian Armed..... wooops, I mean the Canadian Forces.


----------



## George Wallace (14 Nov 2005)

And some have asked why Canada doesn't have Marines.  Can you see it now;  "We Need A Few Good Men Non-Gender Specific People"?


----------



## Baloo (14 Nov 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> And some have asked why Canada doesn't have Marines.  Can you see it now;  "We Need A Few Good Men Non-Gender Specific People"?



Not so fast, you!

By asking for a "few good" people, you are discriminating against the majority of people who aren't as fit or able!

"We Request a Respectable Number of Non-Gender Specific People"


----------



## pbi (14 Nov 2005)

But, wait! Horrors! How can we impose our demands upon others by so forcefully stating "we need"? This could cause all sorts of unknown stresses and conflicting dynamic tensions in the interpersonal space of others exposed to the negative impact of that dialoguing!

Can't we say "we respectfully request that you consider, in view of all your life priorities and self-imaging, and with due respect for any cultural differences, different-ablement,   or feng shui, all of which make you the unique person you are; the possibility of an alternate military lifestyle". (No.....wait a minute....that's not what I meant....) The possibility of accompanying other like-minded individuals on a journey of discovery in the CF? In a totally constructive, non-violent and all-embracing way, I mean?"

Just think of the cool posters and movie ads. Or don't. Or whatever you prefer. It's your choice.


Cheers (or not....)


----------



## George Wallace (14 Nov 2005)

Let's see ?

We respectfully request that you consider, in view of all your life priorities and self-imaging, and with due respect for any cultural differences, different-ablement,  or feng shui, all of which make you the unique person gender non-specific individual that you are; the possibility of accompanying other like-minded individuals on a journey of discovery in the Canadian Forces in a totally constructive, non-violent and all-embracing way, in acordance with Canada's Charter of HumanGender Non-Specific Rights and Freedoms, Table X to Annex XX, Para XXX, Sub-para XXX, to Chapter XXX, Para XXX, Sub-para XXX, Sub-sub-para XXXX........

to replace:

We need a few Good Men.


----------



## GO!!! (14 Nov 2005)

> ...journey of discovery...like minded individuals...



Sounds like a navy thing to me... (cue "in the navy" - the village people)


----------



## midgetcop (14 Nov 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Sounds like a navy thing to me... (cue "in the navy" - the village people)



::looks for the boogie-down smilie::

 :rofl:

Close enough.


----------



## Glorified Ape (15 Nov 2005)

Jesus christ... thanks, feminists! Should the government find its testes, radical feminists should be the first ones under the CF boot. Time for a pogrom, methinks.  :threat:


----------



## The_Falcon (15 Nov 2005)

midgetcop said:
			
		

> Coming from a female, I'd say this sounds pretty superfluous.
> 
> I'd hate to think that there are people out there sensitive enough to be offended by the word "unmanned".
> 
> :



There are, trust me.  When I was in elemantary school, my grade 6/7 teacher was an ultra-hardcore feminist hippy (not a pseudo hippy, but real friggen hippy who never left the 60s/70s).  We had to refer to a snowman as a snowperson, policeman as police officer etc. The kicker was when my class went on a weeklong trip to an outdoor education centre (basically camping) we had to refer to the Coleman stoves and lanterns as ColePERSON.  For our school christmas open house for parents my class (both years I was in her class) acted out "The Night Before Christmas" (at the time the school and neighbourhood were quite WASPy so there was no need to accomadate other religions), both years she only let a girl play Santa.  Why? Well from what my parents told me in conversation years later, they asked my teacher and she had told the parents that Santa and Mrs Claus were negative gender stereotypes, and to make things more equal a female was going to be Santa.

So yeah there are people who are that uptight about trivial little things.


----------



## COBRA-6 (15 Nov 2005)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> There are, trust me.   When I was in elemantary school, my grade 6/7 teacher was an ultra-hardcore feminist hippy (not a pseudo hippy, but real friggen hippy who never left the 60s/70s).   We had to refer to a snowman as a snowperson, policeman as police officer etc. The kicker was when my class went on a weeklong trip to an outdoor education centre (basically camping) we had to refer to the Coleman stoves and lanterns as ColePERSON.   For our school christmas open house for parents my class (both years I was in her class) acted out "The Night Before Christmas" (at the time the school and neighbourhood were quite WASPy so there was no need to accomadate other religions), both years she only let a girl play Santa.   Why? Well from what my parents told me in conversation years later, they asked my teacher and she had told the parents that Santa and Mrs Claus were negative gender stereotypes, and to make things more equal a female was going to be Santa.
> 
> So yeah there are people who are that uptight about trivial little things.



People like that are alive only because it is illlegal to monkey-stomp them into the dirt...  the fact that they are allowed to indoctrinate children with their PC propaganda, unchecked by the school board, makes me want to vomit...


----------



## SHF (15 Nov 2005)

Not to piss on the flames of sarcasm and ridicule, the original editorial seems to be providing some mistaken facts to entice us members .  In a true google fashion, as best as I can tell the Americans started using the term uninhabited aerial vehicle as far back as 2001 and perhaps 1994.  I'm quite sure that the Canadian government's penchant for political correctness did not influence the US.  As to the term infanteer, it has been around at least since WWII and examples are listed for the infantry branches of several countries around the world.  The members with and without members may or may not be actual fact, it's hard to google that quote.  If the editorial was written to make us b**ch, it worked.  :  

Cheers


----------



## pbi (15 Nov 2005)

Speaking of unbridled political correctness, I offer two examples.

About ten years ago, in the Ontario town of Tweed (between Belleville and Ottawa), there was a municipal beautification program called "Adopt-A-Hydrant". If you had a fire hydrant on your front lawn, you could paint it up any way you liked, plant flowers around it, etc. So far, so good. Well, a couple in town wrote in to the local paper complaining bitterly that the use of the word "adopt" denigrated all people who were adoptive children by associating them with inanimate objects. How traumatic!

And, yesterday, I read in the Torono Star that some group of worthies has decided to complain about the use of the word "blind" as an adjective (i.e.: blind drunk, blind rage, etc). This, they apparently feel, is actually an insensitive linguistic assault on the vision-impaired.

Just where do these people come from, and why do they have nothing better to do?

Cheers.


----------



## The_Falcon (15 Nov 2005)

2332Piper said:
			
		

> Please, please tell me your joking. Please.
> 
> Coleperson??



I wish I was, this woman had a few screws loose.


----------



## George Wallace (15 Nov 2005)

On a serious side, Norad has made some changes in the recent past.  From earlier this summer: 





> Military commands drop Indian terms from exercise titles
> 
> By Rowan Scarborough
> THE WASHINGTON TIMES
> ...


----------



## career_radio-checker (15 Nov 2005)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> I wish I was, this woman had a few screws loose.



You can't use that word anymore: "wo*man*" is derogatory. It's Fe*male*... no wait... Ladies... no then la*dies* is disrespectful to dead people... :brickwall: "members without members" it is


----------



## Monsoon (15 Nov 2005)

Could someone explain to me again why we're getting all worked up into a froth over this?


----------



## George Wallace (15 Nov 2005)

hamiltongs said:
			
		

> Could someone explain to me again why we're getting all worked up into a froth over this?


Probably because we see the humour in how utterly stupid and a waste of our Tax Payer's Money it truly is.

What do you see in it?


----------



## Monsoon (15 Nov 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Probably because we see the humour in how utterly stupid and a waste of our Tax Payer's Money it truly is.


How much of our proverbial Tax Dollars do you think were spent deciding to name it an "Uninhabited" vehicle rather than an "Unmanned" one?  I'm pretty sure there wasn't a Working Group formed over the matter.



> What do you see in it?


I see it as a harmless submission to the small number of people who really care about gender neutral language.  I, for one, couldn't care less, so it doesn't bother me one way or the other.


----------



## George Wallace (15 Nov 2005)

I am sure that there were indeed some Working Groups convened to decide on what will be Gender Neutral in all of our speech and documentation.  There is no way that these decisions come "Out of the Blue".  People who take offence to words like: person, ladies, policeman, etc., do not write Government Policy without some form of Working Group or Committee.  That does burn up vast amounts of Tax Dollars.

As a harmless submission to the small number of people who really care about neutral language, it may be another instance of the Government bending to the whims of minorities, rather than doing the Democratic thing of ruling in favour of the majority....but what the hey, we're Canadian, eh!  The Majority will never notice.


----------



## 48Highlander (15 Nov 2005)

Every time you allow others to infringe on your rights, it becomes easier to do it again in the future.  Start of with something small, like forcing everyone to call a policeman a police-person, or a manhole cover a personhole cover.  Pretty soon you're banning books and punishing thought crimes.  I prefer not to take that first step.  If anyone finds my language offensive, they're welcome to leave.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (15 Nov 2005)

I would just like to find out what the salaries and overhead are for the group of twats who have nothing better to do in NDHQ but examine the world for this kind of crap.

I cannot believe there isn't a better use for this money....



Matthew.   :blotto:


----------



## S McKee (15 Nov 2005)

IMHO this whole gender neutral thing is all part of a vast international plot by hardcore feminists to emasculate the male species.  :-*


----------



## Scarlet (15 Nov 2005)

48Highlander said:
			
		

> Every time you allow others to infringe on your rights, it becomes easier to do it again in the future.



How are some name changes infringing on your rights?


----------



## GO!!! (15 Nov 2005)

Scarlet said:
			
		

> How are some name changes infringing on your rights?



Nice pic!

So let me guess, you are going to be the first womyn ninjaperson-nongenderspecificsniper? 

The first in herstory?


----------



## 48Highlander (15 Nov 2005)

Scarlet said:
			
		

> How are some name changes infringing on your rights?



FORCING me to use those words would be infringing on my rights.  For example, if I were in the class of the ultrafeminist teacher mentioned earlier, chances are I would be under pressure to conform to her standards of speech and behaviour so that I would not be unfairly graded.

As it stands right now, theres nobody around to "make" me use any of these PC terms, so no, my freedom of speech isn't being violated.  As long as it stays that way, we're ok   However, government agencies (or even corporations) don't have the same freedom.  While it's rather difficult for any groups to protest against the use of certain language by an individual, it's relatively simple for them to target large organizations.  As an example, look at the controversy over sports teams using American Indians as mascots.  When enough pressure is applied by special interest groups, organizations CAN be forced to make changes to things like mascots, names and terms, and can even be forced to implement "speech codes", as is the case at several US colleges.  Which eventualy translates into a limitation on the freedoms of the individuals who make up those organizations.

Clear as mud?


----------



## brin11 (15 Nov 2005)

Jumper said:
			
		

> IMHO this whole gender neutral thing is all part of a vast international plot by hardcore feminists to emasculate the male species.   :-*



Damn it, you found us out!  It doesn't seem to be working yet, though   ;D


----------



## George Wallace (15 Nov 2005)

48Highlander said:
			
		

> .....   As an example, look at the controversy over sports teams using American Indians as mascots.   When enough pressure is applied by special interest groups, organizations CAN be forced to make changes to things like mascots, names and terms, and can even be forced to implement "speech codes", as is the case at several US colleges.   Which eventualy translates into a limitation on the freedoms of the individuals who make up those organizations.


A la my Reply # 25 in this thread.


----------



## ZipperHead (15 Nov 2005)

Changing things for feminists, or any group, is rarely a good thing, including for religious reasons. Just be thankful that our "Bible Belt" is a lot smaller than the States. There was a movement to replace the greeting of "hello" with "heaveno". For those that need it spelled out, "hello" contains the word "hell"  > . And, ironically, the word I spelled out will be replace with "heck" because of the filtering on this site. Here's a link for some of the hub-bub it (heaveno) created: http://www.lubbockonline.com/news/020897/heaveno.htm 

Or the parent(s) who wanted the skateboard brand Natas banned (natas is satan spelled backward) even though it is the name of the founder/owner, Natas Kaupas.

When they change the name 'midwife' to something more neutral, I will be more inclined to even think about saying these other gender-neutral terms. Or herpes, to ourpes. Or hernia, to ournia. Or......

Al


----------



## teddy49 (15 Nov 2005)

I agree with 48Highlander, it's censorship at it's most basic level.   And it's most insidious level.   It offends me that people waste oxygen worrying about what we call the big steel plate that covers the sewer access in the middle of the street.   Or what we call the radio controlled airplane that takes pictures of the villains.   Can I call them villains, or are they just differently moralled? 

I'm not old by any stretch of the imagination but even I can remember a time in this country, where we were proud that people could spout the most hateful, despicable, vile crap.   Not because we agreed with anything they said, but because their ability to say it, meant that we were a free people.   IE:"I may not like what he has to say, but I will fight to the death his right to say it."   It used to be that if you disagreed with someone, you either, exercised your right to free speech and offered debate, or simply stopped listening.   It used to be the Right to Free Speech, not the Right to Not Hear Stuff You Don't Agree With.   Lately it seems to me that the only debate that is offered, is that an idea offends.   As if this is enough.

A democratic society should have it's values defined by that society, recorded by government, and enforced by the courts.   Instead, it seems to me that we are having values defined by the fringes of society, and enforced by they courts in the name of human rights legislation.

Now I agree that "educators" should not be allowed to extole the virtues of National Socialism, or expound on the threat that the Jewish people offer to "Aryan civilisation" to young captive classroom audiences.   But that is why we have curriculum's in our schools.

If you don't like what a politician has to say hold him or her to account at the ballot box.   Anyone else, debate them, or ignore them, but don't infringe on their right air their viewpoint.

It seems that Political Correctness hacks are trying to shape society into some kind of homogeneous, oppressive, Orwellian Utopia, where conflict is unknown, because competing ideas and speech are not tolerated, as they might "offend".   In a country as ethnically and culturally diverse as Canada, this is a pipe dream.   Conflict is guaranteed.   But this is good.

Societies that do not allow new debate over new and fresh, and maybe offensive ideas, will stagnate and rot.

We seem to have lost the ability to Agree to Disagree.   To respect the opinions of others.   And as a result a conformist mindset seems to have set in.   We as a society can in no way benefit from this.

The only way to combat this, IMHO is to call it what it is, censorship.

I guess that's just my $0.02

Final Note:   Just so that there is no misunderstanding, I DO NOT think that there are any virtues to National Socialism, or that the Jewish people offer any kind of threat to anyone.


----------



## GO!!! (15 Nov 2005)

teddy49 said:
			
		

> ... or that the Jewish people offer any kind of threat to anyone.



I can think of a large group of people in the middle east who might disagree...


----------



## teddy49 (15 Nov 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> I can think of a large group of people in the middle east who might disagree...



I won't defend all of the actions of the Israeli government, with regards to their handling of security issues with the Palestinians.  I've often heard it said that many people who visit Israel, go there supporting the Israeli's and return supporting the Palestinians.

That being said, it's never, to my knowledge, been the policy of the Israeli government, to destroy or commit genocide against the Palestinian people, or indeed the Arab world.  I believe that there has always been an understanding of the need for co-existence (if not peaceful) with the Palestinians and the rest of the Middle East.

The same can not be said for the Palestinians or many other Arab countries who's stated aim is the total destruction of the Jewish state.

That said, I meant that statement to be more in the context of the average Nazi's view of Jewish People.


----------



## career_radio-checker (28 Jan 2006)

OMG our society has to be less sensitive. Just browsing threw the news and I came across this article 

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060128/woman_shooting_060128/20060128?hub=Canada

You have to watch the 1min and 11 sec video to catch political correctness at a new level

They describe the suspect as a "non-white male"!!!!!!! ???

So I guess that means he could be purple :blotto:


----------



## Conquistador (28 Jan 2006)

During my SHARP training last weekend, the instructor refered to colored people as "people with a different skin pigmentation", because he said during a previous session, a person got offended by using the term "colored".

 ???


----------



## FastEddy (29 Jan 2006)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> OMG our society has to be less sensitive. Just browsing threw the news and I came across this article
> 
> http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060128/woman_shooting_060128/20060128?hub=Canada
> 
> ...




Yes your probely right about the PC of the Newsman, but it could also mean that the victim was positive it was not a Caucasian, but not quite sure if it was a Light skin Blackman, Asian or Mid Eastern Man considering the Trauma of the incident.

However PC should have nothing to do with anything in Witness descriptions if you expect the public to be on the lookout for suspects.


----------



## Slim (29 Jan 2006)

Conquistador said:
			
		

> During my SHARP training last weekend, the instructor refered to colored people as "people with a different skin pigmentation", because he said during a previous session, a person got offended by using the term "colored".
> 
> ???



In the not too distant past a friend of mine who is in policing evicted a black make from the premises of a mall for somerthing or other and was accused of racism by the guy who had to leave.

My buddy, who is a bit of a joker at times, told the guy that; no, it wasn't true as all the white people had to leave as well...

Nothings come of it yet, despite the dire predictions of his partner who, apparently, stood there shaking her head the whole time the incident was happening .


----------



## 3rd Herd (29 Jan 2006)

I thought I had just about seen everything in political correctness until I checked the city of Calgary web site to find out their dog licensing structure. The height of political correctness has been achieved. Licence fees are based on two categories, unaltered and altered dogs. This discovery was worth the long distance phone call. Yes, in the city of Calgary the terms spayed and neutered are unpoliticaly correct and are gender discriminatory.


----------



## c_canuk (29 Jan 2006)

anyone else up for starting a lobbing group to have Mr George Carlin appointed head of all PC matters within Canadain Government?

Sure we'd have to convince him to apply for canadian Citizenship, but I'm sure the opportunity to put the "Go Frick Yourself" policy into a government's books would tickle him pink.


----------



## Blakey (29 Jan 2006)

> The Manitoba Museum of Man and Nature has adopted its corporate name for public use and is now The Manitoba Museum.


http://www.manitobamuseum.mb.ca/gi_logo_history.html
This happend some time ago, I guess _some_ people just couldn't get past the first part of the definition... :


> An adult male human.
> *A human regardless of sex or age; a person.*
> A human or an adult male human belonging to a specific occupation, group, nationality, or other category. Often used in combination: a milkman; a congressman; a freeman.
> *The human race; mankind: man's quest for peace.*
> ...


----------



## ChopperHead (7 Feb 2006)

Political correctness has gone way to far. politcal correctness has gone so far that politcal correctness is becoming unpolicaly correct. Do we really need to change our language and the way people speak because a few thousand people out of a few million get offended by the name Coleman?? I think not. Time for the government and other regulatory agencies to get some balls all tell these hippy feminists to go F themselves cause no one cares. 

Gender equality activists/Terrorists have now made men the ones discriminated against.
I dont know the numbers but not many Men get custody of Children because the Mother is almost always the better parent, Arent Men capable of careing for a child? Women are somehow now aloud to play MENS proffesional golf ???? Could a man go play on the LPGA?? No of course not. But a women can play in the Mens league because oooo women are just as good as men ooo we can do anything man can............... so what?  why are men now the ones being discriminated and why are women aloud to do things like play in mens leagues well because the people that dictate these policies are Feminist hippies and Men dont get offend by this Bull. 

I call a black guy a black guy
I call a white guy a white guy
I call a stewardess a stewardess
I call cops, cops or PoliceMEN
I call Firemen, Firemen
I say the words God, Church, religion in public places
I call Nefoundlanders Newfies. and so do they
Im not offended by hearing the words ass,butt,penis,Vagina etc 
I think Starbucks is the Nerve centre of the Hippie femminist evrioment nazis
I eat baken I eat chips I drink pop
I dont watch Entertainment tonight. I dont care what Jlo is doing in her spare time
I dont care what the latest Diet or health craze is because in a year there will be another study that says that the old diet is actaully not healthy for you and then in another year they will come back and say that it is in fact healthy for you. 
I dont think asking a women on a date is sexuall haressment ?????
I think the legal system is really messed up in this country when a burglar can break into your house, hurt himself and then he can sue you and your at fault for not providing a safe robbing enviroment like FUCK OFF.
I believe that if someone breaks into my house or trys to steal my property I have the right to do something about it.
I dont think that a blob on a page is art or means anything other then a blob on a page which some jackass starbucks junkie is going to sell for $10 000.

and if anyone out there doesnt like it then F-You cause I dont care. be offended all you want. go hang out in your van and smoke some more pot and shut up.


----------



## Armymedic (7 Feb 2006)

Chopperhead,

Great rant. Too bad you may have wasted it here, cause most of us might just agree with you. National Post maybe a better place for it.

BTW, its "Bacon"


----------



## Journeyman (7 Feb 2006)

So Chopperhead, stop beating around the bush here. What are you trying to say?


----------



## FastEddy (7 Feb 2006)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> So Chopperhead, stop beating around the bush here. What are you trying to say?




He sounds like a person who's certainly not beating around the bush. More like one of Milions that are pissed off the way Canada is slowly being eroded away by Special Interest, Ethnic,Religious, Pacifist Groups and Self Serving Politicians.

If this Young Gentleman is a cut and Sampling of the Youth of today, and is not influenced by the Limp Wrist and PC peer groups, maybe theres hope after all.


----------



## brin11 (7 Feb 2006)

3rd Herd said:
			
		

> Licence fees are based on two categories, unaltered and altered dogs. This discovery was worth the long distance phone call. Yes, in the city of Calgary the terms spayed and neutered are unpoliticaly correct and are gender discriminatory.



I think whoever you talked to at the city of Calgary is full of it.  The terms altered and unaltered are one set of proper terms and have been around longer than spayed and neutered.  For example, look to the Canadian Kennel Club's terms or any other kennel club for that matter and you will find altered and unaltered and they have been that way for years.  Either could be used but are obviously there so that terms like spaded, nutted, cut, snipped and fixed aren't.  Ya, I've heard them all.


----------



## Sig_Des (7 Feb 2006)

FastEddy said:
			
		

> If this Young Gentleman is a cut and Sampling of the Youth of today, and is not influenced by the Limp Wrist and PC peer groups, maybe theres hope after all.



As a member of that group, I find myself disgusted by a lot of the PC crap. I like being on courses where the staff doesn't fall for it. Hell, on my BMQ, my day wasn't complete until my MasterJack told me I was an ignorant/arrogant/ugly pr@ck. It was in jest, and we took it as such, but I can just imagine one of the Baby-pink t-shirt wearing Us against violence Special Interest, Ethnic,Religious, Pacifists standing there with their jaw on the floor if they'd seen it.

You should have seen the look on a medics face when they saw the staff giving us remedial PT in the form of "The Magic Chair"

I find a lot of us younger types who fall into this category tend to find themselves pulled towards jobs such as the military, as we think we will find a place in this type of environment. But SURPRISE! (or SHARP! if you so wish), it's a catch-22.

Society's assumption of the military, in general, is a bunch of crude roughnecks who drink and fight (oh, how I wish it were still so), and the Forces trying to move the complete opposite do dissuade the general view.

I love this non-gender specific, we're all friends, we're not really rough people, soft and cuddly Forces!  :


----------



## Bobbyoreo (7 Feb 2006)

Chopperhead,

Dont think I could say it better. Great rant...now lets put that in the Nations Newspapers!!!!


----------



## ChopperHead (7 Feb 2006)

lol ya thanks there Army Medic I thought that my spelling of bacon didnt look right.

ya i couldnt put that into the Globe and Mail. to much faul language. such as black,penis, Hippie Feminist Envrioment Nazis lol

and no i guess im not really like most youth at least where Im from im not. Most people my age are either Hippie Comunists or pretend to be or are just on drugs or drunk 90% of the time and dont care about anything and then finally the intellectual people. 

what does this all mean?? it means that there will be no shortage of starbucks customers.

heres a couple more:
I dont think my Grades are the most important thing in the world and if I get less then 90% that im doomed.

I dont go out and buy something because I saw puff daddy wearing one.

I dont think that a Honda civic with a big muffler from Canadian tire which sounds like a big vacumme cleaner is a formula 1 car. nor do i think it looks cool.

I dont think going hunting or fishing is somehow wrong or disgusting. 

I do not know what soy is and I have no idea why I see comletly un related things made out of it??? like soy milk, soy pasta??? wow it's magic .............. ya and it tastes like someone squeezed it out there butt.

I dont think that movies and other such things are whats messing up kids. whats messing up kids these days is crappy parenting. all the original hippys from the 60's well their kids are now having kids and look what happens. there are now laws against what you can and cannot do to raise your child........... I say to hell with that and it's none of your damn concern how anyone raises their kids. 

I tell racist jokes. am I raciast??? no of course not well if you want to call Hippies a race then I could be one I guess  > 

I dont think that because someone is to lazy to get off their *** and work that they should get welfare and other government money to live for free. my niegbour was on welfare before and they would have nicer stuff they I did???????? and both my parents worked like what the hells that about?

has anyone noticed how there are completely opposite diets out there and both seem to work? ones called Atkins which I dont rember which one that is and I cant rember the name of the other one. but anyway one is High Carbs low fat  and the other one is Low Carbs High Fat............. so how could both be right????? well because if you read a pamplet or something from them it says to be combined with EXCERCISE. thats why they work cause people are bloody exscersing.

I dont call gas pumpers, Patroleum Transfer Technictians lol yes that is really the polically correct name for that position now.

I call a secretary a secretary not an assitant or whatever else your supposed to call them now.

I use the term fisherman and not fisherperson.

I say hey man or lets go guys to my friends even when there are girls there or even when it's all girls. I havent had anyone ever get offended by that??? I wonder why?

I think Ralf Klein should be PM 

I think political parties should stop moving around. what i mean is when the hell did Conservatives become a centralist party????? like whats with that. I am an Alliance Supporter and this new PC party is not really even right winged anymore.

I'll say some more after because I got lots just ready to spew lol but thats all for now.
all I can say to people is RELAX and stop worrying about everyone else."


----------



## Bobbyoreo (7 Feb 2006)

"I say some more after lol cause I got lots just ready to spew lol but thats all for now.
all I can say to people is RELAX and stop worrying about everyone else."

Now if we did that, what would I do with all this extra time in Shilo?


"I think Ralf Klein should be PM "

Was with you....but that man scares me..... :-\


----------



## Hansol (7 Feb 2006)

Chopperhead, um, i don't know if you know this, but um, Puff Daddy is now just "Diddy". C'mon now, aren't you hip with the times? Didn't you catch this weeks Entertainment Tonight at the local Starbucks? It's been all over the news for the last 6 months. Apparently "Puff Daddy" is just too long and difficult for the fans to pronounce. 

And you mean those 85 horsepower fart can ricer mobiles with type-R stickers on them (Which, by the way, must add at LEAST 6 horsepower to the car. Christ, I should stick 5 of em on my truck. Horsepower will go up by 30... bloody ingenious) just doesn't do it for you? How strange.

Hell, if everyone is going to rant, I'm going to rant too. God damn this politically correct nonsense. I think the best way to put this is that I want my MCpl to swear at me when I'm on course. So there. 

And yes, all hail King Ralph. That man is amazing.


----------



## 3rd Herd (7 Feb 2006)

Well Chopper it is said every once in a while that the light bulb does come on. Spelling mistakes included excellent post, or I mean rant.
Cheers


----------



## ChopperHead (7 Feb 2006)

thanks Herd Im glad you can look past the spelling mistakes lol yes I forgot to do the spell check again.

This stuff just really gets me going. It's so retarded. Sometimes I wish I could just pick up and go live in the 50's.


----------



## ZipperHead (7 Feb 2006)

Ah, the '50's......... the good old days........ the anti-Communist witch-hunts (in the US) ........ segregation/institutional racism still rampant (US and Canada).... Tommy Prince returns from Korea a war hero, only to have an uncaring country turn it's back because he was a Native, and allow him to sink into the abyss (link on Tommy Prince: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/~jeffrey1/prince2.htm..... 

Be careful what you wish for, as the good old days weren't always so good. You must obviously be a member of the elite: white (European), male (straight presumably), english speaker. I don't think many women, Natives, french speakers, gays, etc would want to turn back the clock to the 50's. 

Don't get me wrong, the PC shit has gone overboard (and yes, I am a member of the 'elite' that I described above), but you don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's not going to kill anybody to refer to recently neutered dog by the new PC terms (which I can't remember a the moment, and too lazy to look). But I'm sure that people that belong to the formerly "oppressed" groups certainly enjoy the freedoms that they enjoy today compared to what it was like 50 years ago. And for those that don't appreciate it, maybe a little time travel might be in order.

Al


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (7 Feb 2006)

Allan,

Well said, most who would wish to return to the "old ways" are those who think they have lost something....


----------



## ChopperHead (7 Feb 2006)

In the 50's people werent sissys, People trusted their governments and they actually acomplished things. People had respect for one another and their country. with a WW still fresh in the mind you apreciate that freedom. This was the Golden age of Rock and Roll and high time for the economy. Kids werent going to school and shooting people. 

and yes I am of the Elite Race and I do think I have lost something.
of course feminists and Gays wouldnt want to live in the 50's because people wouldn't bloody listen to them then and this crap thats going on now where our country is turning into a big gay parade of feelings and crying on peoples shoulders wouldnt be tolerated.
it's the Feminists and the gay people who have caused all this BS that im talking about.

so yes i would like to live in the 50's thank you very much.


----------



## winchable (7 Feb 2006)

People were "sissys" they just weren't able to talk about it because they'd get beaten into a pulp; See the many works of Alfred Kinsey if you think being gay is a "new" thing.
People trusted their governments too much and the average man could do little; We have unprecedented access to the mainstream media through blogs and the internet, something they didn't have in the fifties.
People had respect for each other as long as they were white and male; 
The Golden Age of Rock and Roll was the 60's and onward, make no mistake about it; The Beatles, Dylan, Hendrix, Clapton, etc.
The world economy was in tatters from those great wars and the collapse of empires.

You're 17 years old and you're nostalgiac for an era that you never lived in.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Feb 2006)

ChopperHead said:
			
		

> In the 50's people werent sissys, People trusted their governments and they actually acomplished things. People had respect for one another and their country. with a WW still fresh in the mind you apreciate that freedom. This was the Golden age of Rock and Roll and high time for the economy. Kids werent going to school and shooting people.
> 
> and yes I am of the Elite Race and I do think I have lost something.
> of course feminists and Gays wouldnt want to live in the 50's because people wouldn't bloody listen to them then and this crap thats going on now where our country is turning into a big gay parade of feelings and crying on peoples shoulders wouldnt be tolerated.
> ...




{begin sarcasm}
awwwwww.......my virgin ears !!

Where is the PC police when you need it ?

{end sarcasm}


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (7 Feb 2006)

Quote,
and yes I am of the Elite Race  

I now hope those of you who were liking his rant now take a deep breath and exhale slowly......


----------



## aesop081 (7 Feb 2006)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Quote,
> and yes I am of the Elite Race
> 
> I now hope those of you who were liking his rant now take a deep breath and exhale slowly......



Didnt mean to say i liked his rant........was just waiting for the PC lightning bolt to come down !!


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (7 Feb 2006)

Didn't mean you aesop, you posted while my fat slow fingers were still typing.....

...and Chopperhead, please explain the _elite race_ thing, I'm really interested.


----------



## Armymedic (7 Feb 2006)

Chopperhead,

We have a saying at work that politely means "you have made your point, now shut up", that I think applies to you right now:

TOO MANY WORDS.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Feb 2006)

It's "italian-canadian sauce-bread" night at my house....anyone care to join me ?


----------



## GO!!! (7 Feb 2006)

"Altered" dogs can mean a variety of things, including cropped ears, removed dew claws, or surgical correction of a genetic fault (like hip or knee dysplasia).

So the term "altered" is both stupid and sissy-ish, and incorrect. 

And bobbyoreo, why does Lord Ralph scare you?

The man is elected by a margin that would be considered a landslide in any other part of the country, immediately after he gets loaded, heads to a shelter and tells the bums to get a job!

His idea for solving homelessness in Edmonton a few years back was to buy them all one way bus tickets to BC!

The man is a legend, with common sense as his right hand man, and political correctness as an ashtray. You could only be so lucky as to have a man like him in charge.


----------



## aesop081 (7 Feb 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> "Altered" dogs can mean a variety of things, including cropped ears, removed dew claws, or surgical correction of a genetic fault (like hip or knee dysplasia).
> 
> So the term "altered" is both stupid and sissy-ish, and incorrect.
> 
> ...




BRAVO !!!


----------



## Steel Badger (8 Feb 2006)

Bruce....perhaps Herr Ubergruppenchopper is referring to the elite HUMAN race......ya know?

If he is, God forbid,  referring to some bizarre ubermensch idea then I say we introduce him to a friend of mine.........PL Sgt ( WW2 ) and CQMS (Korea) who would be glad to edumicate him about silly ideas...........

Course it would be hard for Chopper ( if he has been silly) to keep mobile afterwards with an aluminum walker rammed up his fifth point of contact.


----------



## COBRA-6 (8 Feb 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> The man is a legend, with common sense as his right hand man, and political correctness as an ashtray.



Outstanding, I might have to steal this...  ;D


----------



## ChopperHead (8 Feb 2006)

what did I get a Warning for??

and the elite race thing was not my word I was just replying to someone who said that i obviously must be of the Elite.

And the 50's were the Golden age of rock. Elvis, Richie Valens, Buddy Holly, etc but whatever thats not the point.

and I just said that every now and then i wanted to step back into the 50's for awile to get away from all the PCness and sappyness that i was originally complaining about. Whats the problem with that? every era has it's pro's and cons.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (8 Feb 2006)

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/36422/post-332795.html#msg332795

If you have to ask.....


----------



## ChopperHead (8 Feb 2006)

ok I still dont see what a got a warning for?? can you be alittle more specific as in tell me and not give the If you dont know im not telling you thing.


----------



## DBA (8 Feb 2006)

I guess they didn't like your referring to yourself by that term, it's just supposed to be an insult leveled at you which your not supposed to dare use to label yourself in a rhetorical construct. Welcome to the PC world were the rules are different depending on your race, sex and sexual orientation which is sad because it used to be about equality.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (8 Feb 2006)

Actually DBA, you are quite wrong, as far as I'm concerned its this part here,
Quote,
_of course feminists and Gays wouldnt want to live in the 50's because people wouldn't bloody listen to them then and this crap thats going on now where our country is turning into a big gay parade of feelings and crying on peoples shoulders wouldnt be tolerated.
it's the Feminists and the gay people who have caused all this BS that im talking about_

Why is it so hard for some to stop whining about equality, when all they really want is to be superior?


----------



## ChopperHead (8 Feb 2006)

so? 

and why are you answering DBA?? it's me you gave a warning to and it's my posts that you dont like and it's me who doesnt know why I got a warning cause you wont tell me.


----------



## ChopperHead (8 Feb 2006)

Im going to be up for awile now cause im quite pissed about this. so if you want Bruce lets take this into the chat so we can talk about it.


----------



## ChopperHead (8 Feb 2006)

Sry about the bunch of posts in a row but I cant modify my posts anymore so I have to do this.

anyway ya I just found out that I can no longer acesse the chat room so thank you very much Bruce.


----------



## winchable (8 Feb 2006)

Chopperhead,

This was not just Bruce's decision, there was a consensus among the staff and we took the appropriate actions in your case to enforce the qualities and ideals of the board.

Moderators get called out for their actions all the time; Now ask how many times this has succeeded in changing a decision! The answer is z-e-r-o. Normally this only results in the poster taking it a step too far and getting banned outright.

Appeal your decision to the site owner if you want, *this* is the appropriate course of action and has ben outlined countless times.

Once again I'd like to point out that the number of times what you're trying has worked is zero.


----------



## ChopperHead (8 Feb 2006)

Im not calling him out in the way you think im trying to. I just want Bruce to tell me why I got a warning that was all. and I do want to seriously talk to him about it. Because i dont think that I deserve it. Also Iwant to know why you guys skipped the verbl warning and just whent straight to recorded??? but anyway I will take it to Mike.


----------



## winchable (8 Feb 2006)

> I will take it to Mike



There you go.


----------



## Bobbyoreo (8 Feb 2006)

Political Correctness gone too far?

In the 50's you would have got away with all those rants.... :-X


----------



## GO!!! (8 Feb 2006)

so bobbyoreo - I have to know - why does Ralph Klein scare you?

Was this just something the Lieberal media fed you, or do you have a beef?


----------



## Cannonfodder (8 Feb 2006)

GO!!! , I think allot of people are afraid of Ralph Klein because they are fed a constant  diet of negative news from a Liberal orientated media . I personally think he is a dick , but at least you know what he is thinking .Old Ralph will just tell you what he is thinking without giving you a scripted answer , he is a brutal and honest man .

     Political correctness is a new way of avoidance of hot button issues , issues become so mired in PC BS that people do not address them . A person should be able to speak there mind without fear of being slandered  as being intolerant ,or ignorant . Now , by no means should a person be able to preach hate or discriminate against others . Too often source issues are ignored because it may be deemed too risky to deal with them .

    It is easier to be politically correct than it is to be a good person , you are just playing the game  by a rule book . To be politically correct is insincere and lacks honesty , you are not being truthful with whoever you are talking too . It is far better to be open with your thoughts than to disguise them with false prose .


----------



## ChopperHead (9 Feb 2006)

Nicely put Cannon


----------



## Bobbyoreo (9 Feb 2006)

"so bobbyoreo - I have to know - why does Ralph Klein scare you?

Was this just something the Lieberal media fed you, or do you have a beef?"

 I just think he is way out is some field....not left or right. I thnk his views are for one place in this country and he is just like the separatist in Quebec. Just my views nothing else...and no the liberals never helped me out on this.. ;D... Now back to the forum....


----------



## GO!!! (9 Feb 2006)

That is why Ralphie is so adored here in Alberta.

You might not agree with him or his policies, but he has the cojones to tell you what his position is, unlike so many of our federal politicians.

He is a straight shooter - like him or not.

PS - I bought an iPod with my prosperity cheque!   ;D


----------



## ChopperHead (9 Feb 2006)

you bastards are lucky. I want a damn prosperity check. $400 is flippin great specially if you have a bunch of young children lol then you get their checks to.


----------



## COBRA-6 (9 Feb 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> PS - I bought an iPod with my prosperity cheque!   ;D



iPod? I thought an Albertan would have spent it on whiskey, chew, and ammo...  ;D  good call though, iPods rock.



			
				GO!!! said:
			
		

> You might not agree with him or his policies, but he has the cojones to tell you what his position is, unlike so many of our federal politicians.
> 
> He is a straight shooter - like him or not.



I miss Mike Harris and his common sense revolution...


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (10 Feb 2006)

Trust me, you have no idea how the poor application of those good ideas cost.....and in the court and correctional systems, are still costing.


----------



## ChopperHead (10 Feb 2006)

I don't know why people dont like Harris. He was one of the few politicians that actually did what he said he was going to do. People voted him in on his promises, He does what he said he would and people are shocked and hate the guy. makes no sense. 

Makes you wonder what people are actually thinking when they vote. It turns out they dont even want what they voted for.


----------



## Thompson_JM (10 Feb 2006)

the problem with old mikey was that although he did what he promised, he didnt do it in a way that the people of ontario wanted him to. and he did it way to quickly... 

along with that, people were all to happy to have Mr. Harris come in, Just to get Rid of Bob Rae. (I remember hearing something about Rae Days... those who are a bit older will know exactly what im talking about. but the gist of it is that Bob Rae Basically Bankrupted ontario, and is one of the biggest reasons that the NDP will never from a federal government anytime soon.)

the other argument is that ontario wanted a strong leader. Harris provided that. Dalton seemed weak and befuddled during the debates, and howard hampton looked like he was going to cry...

after harris, eves came in and in my opinion seemed to be doing  a decent job without being too crazy when it came to Mike the Knifes "Common Sense" revolution, but the damage was done, and in the next election Dalton won out in a majority.  if you want more information on harris, Rae, or McGuinty i found some good info on google after typing in "ontario Premiers" Answers.com has a large amount of information which is pretty much unbiased. 


People do think about alot of things when they vote. whether its the right thought or not....

the fact is that a party should also listen to its constiutents...

Harris did not..

from Answers.com:

Upon election, the Harris government immediately began to attract controversy. Its policies involved steep cuts to education, welfare, and Medicare, and the forced amalgamation of municipalities. Welfare rates were slashed by 22%, and provincial income taxes were also cut by 30%. Municipal leaders complained because many of the cuts were "downloading" the costs of services that the province had formerly paid for onto local city and municipal governments. It was this government that announced the secondary school reform to eliminate grade 13 that created the "double cohort."

A separate controversy occurred shortly after the Harris government took office, involving events at Ipperwash Provincial Park. Ontario Provincial Police Acting Sgt. Kenneth Deane fired on First Nations demonstrators who had occupied the park, killing an unarmed protester named Dudley George. The government and the OPP maintained that there was no political involvement in the shooting, but many were suspicious. In a court case that went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, Deane maintained that he was not under orders to shoot and was convicted of criminal negligence causing death. Inside the Legislature, several opposition politicians suggested that the attack may have been ordered by the Premier's office, and called for an independent judicial inquiry. This inquiry was finally called after the government of Dalton McGuinty was elected in 2003. it has not yet delivered a finding.

On November 28, 2005, former Attorney General Charles Harnick testified before the inquiry that Harris had shouted "I want the f---ing Indians out of the park" at a meeting with Ontario Provincial Police officer Ron Fox, hours before the shooting occurred (Canadian Press, 28 November 2005, 12:45 report).



In 1997, *Ontario's teachers held their largest walkout in history*, but *were unsuccessful in getting significant changes to government policies*. At Queen's Park, the site of the Ontario Legislature, there were several large protests and near-riots. In 1998, much negative sentiment for Harris was expressed by elementary school students during the "Mandela and the Children" event at SkyDome when he was greeted with enthusiastic booing. Amid the general rise in the North American economy, economic indicators in Ontario improved dramatically, and while the Ontario provincial budget was still in deficit by the end of Harris' first term, he was able to portray himself as responsible on fiscal issues.

In 2001, the Harris government introduced a plan to give a tax credit for parents who send their children to private and denominational schools (*despite having campaigned against this in 1999*). Many believe that this issue damaged the party's reputation for supporting "ordinary Ontarians".

Im not going to go into the Walkerton Scandal or the Ontario Hydro issues either....
but needless to say, his legacy is by no means something to be proud of.... 

read his Bio on Answers.com.... its pretty objective and just tells it like it is...


regards
  Josh


----------



## ChopperHead (10 Feb 2006)

I lived there i know what he did and who he is.

The point is if im running for election and I say im going to cut programs, raise taxes, do this and do that whatever it may be and I get elected then to me that would mean thats what my constituents want me to do. If I do it then I would expect people to be happy about it.

 I dislike how people turned on him so fast. he was actually a good politician. the minute he got into office he started doing everything he was promising, not 3 years down the road, not a month before the next election, he got to work right away. He was honest about his intentions and was clear on what he planned to do. People continued to vote for him and in my eyes that would mean they supported what he was proposing and the manner in which it was being carried out. problem is people dont really know what they want.


----------



## midgetcop (10 Feb 2006)

ChopperHead said:
			
		

> I lived there i know what he did and who he is.
> 
> The point is if im running for election and I say im going to cut programs, raise taxes, do this and do that whatever it may be and I get elected then to me that would mean thats what my constituents want me to do. If I do it then I would expect people to be happy about it.



I wasn't voting age at that point, so I don't know the real reason why people voted for Harris. If I had to wager a guess, I'd bet it's because they wanted the NDP out and we looking to swing as far in the other political direction as possible. 

But political climates change and voters change their minds, or get sick of the ruling party. Ontarians generally didn't like the results of the Common Sense Revolution, even if it sounded appealing at the outset. I think that Cpl Thompson provided some pretty good examples of the problems that occurred.


----------



## geo (10 Feb 2006)

Let's face it, under Bob Rae - after the NDP blew the treasury, Gov't employees at all levels experienced "bob rae days" where they were "given" time off without pay...

After a while - it sort of became..... anybody else but the NDP..... which brought you Mike Harris & his team. It's not that Mr Harris wanted to hack & slash BUT.... when the cupboard is bare - you gotta learn to live within your means.


----------



## Thompson_JM (10 Feb 2006)

ChopperHead said:
			
		

> I lived there i know what he did and who he is.



thats pretty impressive that you had such a keen interest in politics between the ages of 6-13. When I was that age I spent most of my time watching cartoons and playing GI Joes and Lego....

During the Time Harris was  in i didn't even spend that much time really looking into it... I was too busy trying to get through those 5 (now 4) crappy years called high school. (thanks to the Harris Gov. students are now being thrown into post secondary with even less of a clue of what they want to do with there life...) 

If I were you Id read the Bio's on Rae, Harris and McGuinty. 

Rae didn't make all the right decisions but he also had to deal with a MAJOR reccession... not something anyone would really want to have to deal with... 

I think the big problem people had with Harris was that he said he would use common sense to trim the fat....

then he made single moms work for their welfare, and cut day care (who the hell takes care of their kid? the dad whose already knocked up 3 other women? yeah right....) He introduced an entirely new curriculum to the school system... All at once with no chance to really review it.... and appointed a high school dropout as education minister.. (John Snobellen did not get an OSSD... by all accounts I am a better Educated and more qualified man to be the minister of education then he is...)  lets face it... Harris was not the best man for the job... he was a failed teacher come Golf Course Pro/Manager.....   

So why did he win?

well Geo pretty much hit the nail on the head...  People wanted Rae out, and during the leadership debates he proved himself to be the most worthy leader. he sounded strong, confidant, and gave answers people liked. McGuinty was too new, and Hampton was just useless... and that was the case in both elections that he won. 

It can be argued that this was the same reason Stephen Harper won the last election, albeit by a minority... people were sick to death of the Liberals, and of Paul Martin. Given the options Canadians really only had one choice...

I do have to disagree with Geo that Harris had to make cuts where he could. I think some of it may have been the case, but he definitely had a serious hard-on for messing with the teachers.... he did everything he could to make them look like they were just wasting taxpayers money and basically turned everyone against them... and i mean come on.... 





> "In 2001, the Harris government introduced a plan to give a tax credit for parents who send their children to private and denominational schools (despite having campaigned against this in 1999)."


 The reason he did this is cause he knew the public system went to S@#T under his government, and he wanted to send his kids to the better schools. he just didn't want to pay full price....    

fact is, if parents can afford to send there kids to private schools they make enough to NOT need the tax credit...  how many moms have you seen pick up their kids from a Montessori school while driving a beat up rusted out Honda? 

by the time he left office he had no integrity left.... i mean we shouldn't look too much into a politicians personal life but yikes... 





> "Harris has been married three times, and has two children"


  three times... he left politics because his wife left him.... the man couldn't manage a relationship... why  should we trust him with a province?  



> ..In late 2003, he made a speech in Halifax which many believed was the unofficial launch of a campaign to lead the new Conservative Party of Canada. Within weeks, however, he unexpectedly announced his decision to drop out of the race.
> 
> Many believe that heightened media attention on Harris's private life was the reason for his decision. *He had recently separated from his wife a second time and was in a relationship with Laura Maguire*, the ex-wife of hockey player and referee Kevin Maguire. *It was alleged, through court documents relating to a custody battle, that Laura had spent lavishly and neglected her three children while dating Harris*. Faced with this negative publicity, Harris decided to stand aside; he later endorsed former Magna International President and CEO Belinda Stronach, in the 2004 Conservative Party of Canada leadership election.



OK... yes it is only alleged, but at the same time, it does make you have to question the integrity of this guy... there are more then enough other bad decisions he made, or ethical quagmires in his political history, but I'm not going to draw out every single one..

The Simple Fact of the matter is. Harris promised to cut waste within the government... He didn't state that he would do that by drastically slashing pretty much any program he had control over, privatising Ontario Hydro. which his friends made ALOT of money off of.





> "During his tenure, *a number of his close aides* such as Jaime Watt, Deb Hutton, Tom Long and Paul Rhodes *benefited from millions of dollars in untendered contracts with government agencies, particularly Hydro One, which operates the province's electricity grid*. This resulted in a major scandal for the party when the details of these arrangements were revealed in late 2003 (i.e., just after the Tories were removed from office)."


 AND downloading too much onto municipalities without really increasing the amount of money given to them by the Government of Ontario...

Yeah real great guy.... I wonder if i can get him to watch my house while im away, I mean come on... he seems _really_ trustworthy...

Regards
     Josh

*** Edited to clean up and add quote bubbles***


----------



## ChopperHead (10 Feb 2006)

I didnt have to have a keen interest in politics I saw the end result of the actions. I was the second class year to be put through the new curiculum. I personally think it was a good move to update the education system. At first it was not very well put together and there were alot of people running around with their heads cut off sorta speak but now it's getting most of those kinks out and is settling in. Other provinces are following suite and mkaing changes and upgrades to their education systems as well.


----------



## nULL (10 Feb 2006)

...you just had nothing to compare and contrast it with, which makes all the difference. Changes to an institution such as an education system should be GRADUAL, lest the initial test subjects (that's you) end up with a sub-par education during one of the most important periods of their lives.

there's a joke here, but I'm not touching it.  ;D


----------



## Thompson_JM (11 Feb 2006)

If this curriculum is so great then why is it we seem to have stupider youth then ever before.... or maybe I'm just starting to get old and crusty....

nULL hit the nail on the head. you have nothing else to base it on...


----------



## ChopperHead (11 Feb 2006)

I never said it was all great and wonderfull. I hated it because it's harder lol from a student stand point it sucks cause you have to work harder but the world is changing and the education system has to too. doing the same curriculum that my parents did really isnt going to be as efective or as usefull anymore. it's diffrent times and a diffrent world.

we have an abundance of stupider kids now because we have an abundance of lazy ass retarded parents and the school systems are so caught up in political correctness and zero tolerance policys.


----------



## aesop081 (11 Feb 2006)

ChopperHead said:
			
		

> we have an abundance of stupider kids now because we have an abundance of lazy *** retarded parents



Agreed



			
				ChopperHead said:
			
		

> the school systems are so caught up in political correctness



Again, agreed



			
				ChopperHead said:
			
		

> zero tolerance policys.



Now, what wrong with zero tolerance *POLICIES* ?


----------



## Kat Stevens (11 Feb 2006)

Ah, yes, blame Mummy and Daddy for everything.... Dr Freud, table for one?   :


----------



## aesop081 (11 Feb 2006)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Ah, yes, blame Mummy and Daddy for everything.... Dr Freud, table for one?   :



I know what you mean Kat but in alot of cases if mom and Dad got themselves involved in raising their kids, things would turn out different.  i am not saying parents should shoulder the blame for everything.

Anyways, this is way off the "political correctness" topic


----------



## ChopperHead (11 Feb 2006)

The problem with Zero tolerance policies is that just send people home all the time for the smallest idiotic things. It's badly put together and school these days is more like prison then a school. Things that when you whent to school you would have just got a little talk and sent back to class well we get suspended for a week for that.

Also where is the logic in suspending people for skipping school?


----------



## aesop081 (11 Feb 2006)

ChopperHead said:
			
		

> The problem with Zero tolerance policies is that just send people home all the time for the smallest idiotic things. It's badly put together and school these days is more like prison then a school. Things that when you whent to school you would have just got a little talk and sent back to class well we get suspended for a week for that.
> 
> Also where is the logic in suspending people for skipping school?



maybe one day when you are all grown up you will realize why things are the way that they are.  yes in my school days we just got a little talk.  Now think of all your schoolmates and ask yourself how many of them would listen to that "little talk" and actualy change their behaviour.  Schools have had to take drastic measures because the methods of yore are lost on kids these days.

Topic ?


----------



## ChopperHead (11 Feb 2006)

they havent really taken drstic measures. all they do is send kids home for a week or 2 to sit around and do nothing or go out and cause trouble. since when does a school need 42 security cameras? and then have the balls to compain about not having enough money to buy this and that for students. At my sisters school the students dont have any labtops to do inclass work with because the teachers have all taken them for their personal use? this is what Im saying schools are more focused on making out side interest groups and other people happy then actually trying to teach kids.


----------



## Kat Stevens (11 Feb 2006)

I went to my kids school, and laid out what I would prefer to see.  A day off for negative behavior is exactly that.  I work, and there is no other parent here to supervise them.  So, here's what they do with my kids:  They are handed over to the custodial staff at the school for their suspension time, and I ensured that it was understood by all that they were to perform every nasty, grungy job available, even to save them up if possible.... It worked great.


----------



## Scott (11 Feb 2006)

> since when does a school need 42 security cameras?since when does a school need 42 security cameras?



You can't be serious. Since some kids decided to arm themselves and bring arms to school!!!



> At my sisters school the students dont have any labtops to do inclass work with because the teachers have all taken them for their personal use?



If your sister is in high school then what does she need a bloody laptop computer for?


Bah, I see little sense trying to reason with you, just get this back towards topic please?


----------



## ChopperHead (11 Feb 2006)

ok you cant be serious scott you actually think that kids dont use labtops in school? give me a break I used them all the time and are important tool. the main point to that comment was that they are for the students and the teachers took them. 

no school needs 42 secruity cameras. when our shops are all closed down or barley working, after school programs now cost the students hundreds of dollars just to participate, the schools are in need of major repairs, many schools dont have enough books to go around to everyone, classes filled to the brink, and there are empty classes down the hall, principles have the latest greatest $3000 computers, oh ya art programs are being shut down now as well. and why is this? suposedly because there isnt enough money well I say thats Bull. Schools just spend it on crap they dont need and it gets all passed around and by the time it gets to the students there aint much left.

if people want to continue to talk about this topic im fine with continuing but if you think this is off topic (which I dont think it is as they sort of go hand in hand) then fine back on topic


----------



## Scott (11 Feb 2006)

Chopperhead, I am always very serious when I ask a question. It's not that long ago that I was in school and we had zero _need_ for laptops. Do you have a _need_ for them? If not then the discussion is over. I wasn't debating wether or not you use them but what the need was.

I don't think I need to explain the difference between luxury and need. You spend extra money on luxuries and remove them if they are needed elsewhere or if someoen can use them better or has more need for them. Kind of sounds like the teachers in this case.

Schools need cameras today, that's a fact of life in these days and you whining about it will do nothing to change that. Everything you mention is true, I won't argue that, it's true accross the country, because tax dollars are spread thinner and demands for things like cameras is higher. Blame the kids who bring guns to school, they're responsible for this. Your principals need things like computers to get by, they are managers of sorts and find computers a valuable tool. You are there to learn, to an extent, how to do things without relying on computers, they need them to teach you to do that. Wierd but true. When I was in school we had Computer Lab, that was when we arsed around with computers.


----------



## westernarmymember (11 Feb 2006)

There are very few jobs in today's society that do not require some level of computer competency. I can't see the logic in asking if there is a "legitimate need" for them in schools. My wife is a university graduate and in her chosen line of work, every interview she goes to, the interviewer asks if she is capable on a computer. Computers were not available when she was in school, even though they should have been. This is the computer age and the demand for computer knowledge will only continue to grow. (off topic, but I just figured I'd throw that into the mix)

Back to watching the discussion.


----------



## Scott (11 Feb 2006)

Points to which I completely agree. However, there is a time and place for that. The impression I was getting was that all kids are armed with laptops to do their schoolwork and the poster was upset because they were taken away in a cash crunch. Computer literacy is paramount in getting the jobs of the future and even the ones now, I wasn't raising issue with having the machines in schools, just at the need for them to be posessed by the kids.

I know pleanty of people, as a matter of fact I live under the same roof with one, who have made it through four years of University (She's a BscN) without having full time access to a computer. If the students at that level can manage it then I am sure most of the high school kids will survive. 

My point, again, was merely this: If it is classified as a luxury, which IMHO laptops are, then they can do without. Security cameras, again IMO, rank a bit higher on the importance scale. If a kid gets into your school with a gun you ain't gonna need yer shiny new Dell!

I think we've heard both sides fairly and cleared up any misunderstanding, now methinks it's time to steer this back on topic.


----------



## Thompson_JM (12 Feb 2006)

To answer the initial question, 

Yes. Political Correctness Has gone too far.

its Christmas Dammit! not festive holiday!  

I think the problem is that we have in some cases gone from recognizing, and making some accommodations for special interest groups, to flat out catering to their needs. and neglecting ours....

your thoughts? (without turning this into a hate-fest...)


----------



## ChopperHead (12 Feb 2006)

yes i agree, and in fact when you do this it really makes for more racism and whatever cause when you think about it if you cater to a certain race or religion or whatever and give them special privilages arnt you just recognising that they are diffrent from other people and further segregating them by singling them out?


----------



## George Wallace (12 Feb 2006)

Cpl Thompson said:
			
		

> To answer the initial question,
> 
> Yes. Political Correctness Has gone too far.
> 
> ...



You do have a point; to a certain extent.  We do have a problem if we are to treat these different holidays by "excluding" others.  There is a way to turn it all around though and that is to find ways to "include" others.  

Take the example of "Mens' Christmas Dinner" held at a Unit in early December before sending everyone off on "Christmas Leave".  There are ways to be inclusive in these celebrations and still be respectful of others beliefs and cultures.  I am not saying to deny Christian values for anyone else, but to be creative and include others' values in the celebrations.  Does the celebration have to be held at a certain time?  No, other than it is held before everyone goes on Leave.  Does it have to be a certain type of food?  Not really, but Turkey has been the traditional food and is usually not an offensive meat to any religion.  Does the Grace and/or Prayer have to be only a Christian one?  No, there can also be a 'Neutral Blessing' or a series of Grace/Prayers from the different Religions.  Do many of the symbols or Christmas really have any Religious significance?  Christmas Trees are from long dead Pagan rituals.  Jingle Bells has no religious connotations.  Christmas Holly and Mistletoe are not really 'religious symbols'.  Nor are 'snowmen', or Santa Claus.  If Christian Religious Symbols are present, can not other Religions' Symbols also be present?  Can not the Star of David, the Crescent, and other symbols just as easily be displayed?   There really is no need to take away or hid ones beliefs for another, just be tolerant and understanding of their beliefs too.  "Include" vis "Exclude". 

Actually it is really more 'Christian' to be 'inclusive' at this time of year than to be 'exclusive'.


----------



## Kat Stevens (12 Feb 2006)

Muslim rights, gay rights, women's rights, native rights, animal rights........WTF ever happened to human rights?


----------



## geo (13 Feb 2006)

their union isn't as strong ;|


----------



## NL_engineer (13 Feb 2006)

Copperhead, going back to your post's about laptops What do you think the majority of students will be doing during class? Yes computers are required in todays society, but they cause unnecessary distractions to learning in the class room.


----------



## ZipperHead (13 Feb 2006)

I thought that the role of the majority (or the strong) was to look after the minority (or weak). Maybe I'm getting old and soft, but that's what I thought true strength was, not lording our superiority over people.

Al


----------



## Kat Stevens (13 Feb 2006)

I think you're misreading me, Allan.  If we applied HUMAN rights, then everyone would be on the same footing,  special interest be buggered.


----------



## ZipperHead (13 Feb 2006)

I'm on your page, Kat (in regards to treating everybody the same), but some of the other's comments strike me as a little too superior ("the rule of the majority" sounds a little ominous).

Al


----------



## ChopperHead (13 Feb 2006)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> Copperhead, going back to your post's about laptops What do you think the majority of students will be doing during class? Yes computers are required in todays society, but they cause unnecessary distractions to learning in the class room.



Not really. you dont use them all the time and when you do get to use them there is usually a purpose like a project or whatever and all your time is devoted to working on the computers and most kids will take that time with those tools and be productive others wont but thats the same with everything in life.


----------



## NL_engineer (14 Feb 2006)

Copperhead, think from the teachers point of view, they can control what you do in a computer lab via programs such as LAN School, they can't do that on something that students take home, and are not on the server. Also, the fist thing tough in courses about industrial training (it apples to schools too) is to eliminate as much of the distractions as possable; number one on the list is laptops, followed by windows. After talking to a few of the guys in my unit that are in high school they say, that he few people with laptops spend most of the classes, on the web (there school has an unsecured network), or playing games. So you tell me that students would not be doing that through class, just like people don't use there cell phones (text messaging/web/email) during class.

Kat, as said above interest are protected under sect. 2  & 15 of the Charter; the courts have also ruled that sexual preference is included under section 15. Just so you know, cocaion heterosexual males, can be discriminated against in the recruitment process for a job (forget the case, this came out of)


----------



## ZipperHead (14 Feb 2006)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> Copperhead, think from the teachers point of view, they can control what you do in a computer lab via programs such as LAN School, they can't do that on something that students take home, and are not on the server. Also, the fist thing tough in courses about industrial training (it apples to schools too) is to eliminate as much of the distractions as possable; number one on the list is laptops, followed by windows. After talking to a few of the guys in my unit that are in high school they say, that he few people with laptops spend most of the classes, on the web (there school has an unsecured network), or playing games. So you tell me that students would not be doing that through class, just like people don't use there cell phones (text messaging/web/email) during class.
> 
> Kat, as said above interest are protected under sect. 2  & 15 of the Charter; the courts have also ruled that sexual preference is included under section 15. Just so you know, _*cocaion heterosexual males*_, can be discriminated against in the recruitment process for a job (forget the case, this came out of)



I have to ask: did you mean Caucasian (i.e white European), or cocaine (using)?


----------



## NL_engineer (14 Feb 2006)

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> I have to ask: did you mean Caucasian (i.e white European), or cocaine (using)?


Caucasian, just me not reading back over what I written.


----------



## midgetcop (15 Feb 2006)

Piper said:
			
		

> x2
> 
> What happened the rule of the majority? Last time I checked, democracy was rule by majority...not "held by the dangly bits by various interest groups".



Canada is a constitutional democracy. There are limits put in place to protect the rights of individuals/certain groups from majority rule.


----------



## ChopperHead (15 Feb 2006)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> Copperhead, think from the teachers point of view, they can control what you do in a computer lab via programs such as LAN School, they can't do that on something that students take home, and are not on the server. Also, the fist thing tough in courses about industrial training (it apples to schools too) is to eliminate as much of the distractions as possable; number one on the list is laptops, followed by windows. After talking to a few of the guys in my unit that are in high school they say, that he few people with laptops spend most of the classes, on the web (there school has an unsecured network), or playing games. So you tell me that students would not be doing that through class, just like people don't use there cell phones (text messaging/web/email) during class.
> 
> Kat, as said above interest are protected under sect. 2  & 15 of the Charter; the courts have also ruled that sexual preference is included under section 15. Just so you know, cocaion heterosexual males, can be discriminated against in the recruitment process for a job (forget the case, this came out of)



Well you cant take them home first off. But when there are 1500 students and 2 computer labs there is alot of competition for those labs. The labtops are on carts of around 30 that can move around from class to class. This means that where there would be no access to computers students now have that opurtunity. Most students when we get to use the labtops do actaully work with them as there is usually a specific reason why we have them in the first place such as a progect or whatever, It's not like they just hand them out to people everyday to have while the teachers are teaching. that would distract people but when your assignment for the day is to use them then I really dont see what the problem is.


----------



## NL_engineer (15 Feb 2006)

ChopperHead said:
			
		

> Well you cant take them home first off. But when there are 1500 students and 2 computer labs there is alot of competition for those labs. The labtops are on carts of around 30 that can move around from class to class. This means that where there would be no access to computers students now have that opurtunity. Most students when we get to use the labtops do actaully work with them as there is usually a specific reason why we have them in the first place such as a progect or whatever, It's not like they just hand them out to people everyday to have while the teachers are teaching. that would distract people but when your assignment for the day is to use them then I really dont see what the problem is.



Ok, I see what your saying; I thought you were talking about schools issuing out laptops to students.The only way to get what you want to happen is if you get your pearents (I am assuming you are in High School), and maybe other students pearents to lobby the School Council and the School Board.


----------



## missing1 (31 Oct 2007)

Recital while folding of the American flag at funerals. Heard on FOX NEWS, notice this was started from ONE complaint

Story found at  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,306186,00.html


_A complaint was filed to the White House after one of those recitations was read incorrectly. Steve L. Muro, the director of the National Cemetery Administration's field programs office, ordered cemetery directors to stop the readings.

 "There are no federal laws related to the flag that assign any special meaning to the
individual folds of the flag," Muro wrote in a memo obtained by FOXNews.com. "The National Cemetery Administration must not give meaning, or appear to give meaning to the folds of the flag by endorsing or distributing any handouts on 'The Meaning of Each Fold of an Honor Guard Funeral Flag."

The stopping of the recitations has caused a furor among veterans. Members of the American Legion have been flooding national headquarters since the decision, according to Ramona Joyce, an organization spokeswoman.

"To me, it's a slap in the face for every veteran, every member of the Memorial Honor Detail and every family of the deceased veteran," said Rees Lloyd, a member of the American Legion's Memorial Honor Detail for services at Riverside National Cemetery in California.

At issue are secondary meanings attached to the folding of the flag. As the honor guard makes the 13 folds — traditionally representing the original colonies — they recite "the first fold of our flag is a symbol of life, the second fold is a symbol of our belief in the eternal life, etc."

A complaint about the recitation for the 11th fold — "in the eyes of a Hebrew citizen, represents the lower portion of the seal of King David and King Solomon, and glorifies, in their eyes, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" — garnered a complaint and prompted the ban._

Dave


----------



## GAP (31 Oct 2007)

We are daily becoming a more tepid society....


----------



## geo (31 Oct 2007)

well... when you institutionalize something... might as well expect that there will be at least one person (or group) who will challenge.

If it was 13 folds for the 1st 13 colonies, that should have been good enough & there was no reason to go on and give each another additional meaning.

Tempest in a teacup if you ask me


----------



## Strike (31 Oct 2007)

> in the eyes of a Hebrew citizen, represents the lower portion of the seal of King David and King Solomon, and glorifies, in their eyes, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob



I'd like to know the religion of the person putting in the complaint.  If they are from one of the two most popular religions in the world then they need to do some deeper reading and are ignorant of their own faith.  (Suspect the complainant was not Jewish and so not including them in this query.)


----------



## CougarKing (31 Oct 2007)

Strike said:
			
		

> If they are from one of the two most popular religions in the world then they need to do some deeper reading and are ignorant of their own faith.



Slight hijack- if you think the "two most popular religions in the world" are Christianity and Islam, that point is debatable. Hinduism and Buddhism (all sects- Hinayana and Mahayana) have quite a large number of followers.


----------



## vonGarvin (31 Oct 2007)

Christians, by far, make up more than any other religion at around 33% of people world wide.  Next is Islam, which is around 20%.  Hindus make up perhaps 13%.  

Christianity, Islam and Judaism together are known as "Abrahamic" religions (don't know why?  Check it out)

Back on track: yes, it goes too far when the desire of the ONE outweighs the desires of the MANY.  (hint: that's called tyranny)


----------



## geo (31 Oct 2007)

Mortarman Rockpainter said:
			
		

> Christianity, Islam and Judaism together are known as "Abrahamic" religions (don't know why?  Check it out)



They all hold the old testament as gospel.  three traditions with a single origin ... Abraham 

It is the choice of Abraham as a common label that makes them Abrahamic. It stems from his reputation as the "Father of many" (which is the literal meaning of his name). Since he is claimed by Jewish tradition as the ancestor of the Israelites, and his son Ishmael (Isma'il) by Muslim tradition as the ancestor of the Arabs, and by Christians as a "father in faith" (see Romans 4) the phrase may be meant to suggest that all three religions come from one source.


----------



## Strike (31 Oct 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> They all hold the old testament as gospel.  three traditions with a single origin ... Abraham
> 
> It is the choice of Abraham as a common label that makes them Abrahamic. It stems from his reputation as the "Father of many" (which is the literal meaning of his name). Since he is claimed by Jewish tradition as the ancestor of the Israelites, and his son Ishmael (Isma'il) by Muslim tradition as the ancestor of the Arabs, and by Christians as a "father in faith" (see Romans 4) the phrase may be meant to suggest that all three religions come from one source.



Which is why I am curious as to what religion was held by the person who made the complaint.


----------



## geo (31 Oct 2007)

.... obviously someone who doesn't like the reference to Judaeism...
Many christians scorn the Jews... cause they were responsible for Christ's death
The fact that Christ and his disciples were all Jews is discounted as irrelevant


----------



## medaid (31 Oct 2007)

That is the funny thing about organized religion. In order for one to exist most of the time the other MUST be wrong! That's why true warriors should follow the path of pastafarianism. 'He' is the one true deity... Have YOU been touched by his noodle like appendage? Okay okay hijack off.


----------



## xena (31 Oct 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> Many christians scorn the Jews... cause they were responsible for Christ's death
> The fact that Christ and his disciples were all Jews is discounted as irrelevant



You sure about that?  Okay, there might be a few wing-nut types,  :  but the overwhelming majority of Christians who have two consecutive clues know better.

The fact that Christ and most of (not all however! - Luke was a Gentile physician) his disciples were all Jews is very relevant.

Actually, one could claim that Italians were responsible for Christ's death.  There is that little detail of the crucifixion being carried out by the *Roman* army and all...   ;D

But trying to claim that would be just as ridiculous...


----------



## vonGarvin (31 Oct 2007)

How ironic.  Consider the mystery of faith, (which is one of the following four) proclaimed by the congregation at Roman Catholic Masses:
"*Christ has died*, Christ is risen, Christ will come again."
"*Dying you destroyed our death*, rising you restored our life. Lord Jesus, come in glory."
"When we eat this bread and drink this cup, *we proclaim your death*, Lord Jesus, until you come in glory."
"Lord, *by your cross * and resurrection, you have set us free. You are the Savior of the World."

So, the basis of Roman Catholics (if not all Christians) is the death, sacrifice of Jesus.  Those who would defile the Jews, the Romans or whomever for the crucifixion of Christ just aren't being, well, very Christian now, aren't they?

_(Edited for spelling)_


----------



## xena (31 Oct 2007)

Exactly Mortarman.

The theological point (at least in Eastern Orthodoxy) is that _*my/your * _ sins caused the crucifixion of Christ, and there is no one to blame but ourselves.  That's kind of the point of calling for repentance.

Oh, and sorry to everyone else for the hijack.  I'll be quiet now.


----------

