|
Conservative MP Cheryl Gallant is a FREAK (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Smitty20
Gay issue aside (I have no problems with homosexuals), anybody who votes for this "new" Conservative party is just plain STUPID. Either that, or they sure are selfish. I wouldn't even call them tories...the REAL tories didn't join the "canadian alliance in disguise."
Sure, let's have free votes on abortion and the death penalty...let's bring up issues that were SETTLED TWENTY ING YEARS OR MORE AGO. If Harper gets in, there is going to be voter discontent in Canada that will go far beyond what it is now against the Liberals. I really want to vote NDP, but voting for them is just handing Harper a vote. |
They were "settled" because they were resolved in a way that you like. But this isn't a dictatorship - this is a democracy. Let the people's representatives have their say... and if you don't like them, vote them out. |
|
|
| Dj Smitty20 |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
They were "settled" because they were resolved in a way that you like. But this isn't a dictatorship - this is a democracy. Let the people's representatives have their say... and if you don't like them, vote them out. |
Any sensible person wouldn't want MP's voting on controversial issues such as gay marriage, abortion or the death penalty. It should be resolved in the COURTS, where the judges are forced to adhere to the rule of law and the Charter of Righs and Freedoms. Politicians, on the other hand, are biased along party lines and/or religious views. The church and state are separated, no? And usually the religious right belongs to the CONSERVATIVE party! Religious views, as radical as they can be, should not dictate policy. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| right.... lets have UNELECTED judges determine the laws of the land. If we do this the government becomes moot doesnt it? Why have elections at all then? Let the courts decide!! |
|
|
| DarkWater |
| I wouldn't call her a freak tho...Just a pro-life advocate. All politicians over dramatize for effect. And I never actually saw this infamous quote in the article that you sited at the beginning of this thread. |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Smitty20
Any sensible person wouldn't want MP's voting on controversial issues such as gay marriage, abortion or the death penalty. It should be resolved in the COURTS, where the judges are forced to adhere to the rule of law and the Charter of Righs and Freedoms. Politicians, on the other hand, are biased along party lines and/or religious views. The church and state are separated, no? And usually the religious right belongs to the CONSERVATIVE party! Religious views, as radical as they can be, should not dictate policy. |
Do you seriously think judges arn't biased?
Those SOB's don't apply precedent, they make their own laws based on their own views.
But of course, their views coincide with yours so you're not complaining. |
|
|
| EvilTree |
I miss the Tories too.
Damn you Mulroney and Campbell for ruining the Tories.
I'm still voting Conservative because I won't vote left and I don't have much of a choice then. :whip: |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
right.... lets have UNELECTED judges determine the laws of the land. If we do this the government becomes moot doesnt it? Why have elections at all then? Let the courts decide!! |
AMEN to that...oh, you were joking.
Yes, I would rather have unelected judges than freaks like the Conservatives determine AND uphold the laws and rights of our country.
How does gov't become moot? Judges don't *make* law...they interpret and apply it. If some jackass like Harper enacts laws that run contrary to the superior principles contained in the Charter, for example, you're damn right I want judges to be able to strike them down. |
|
|
| Dj Smitty20 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
right.... lets have UNELECTED judges determine the laws of the land. If we do this the government becomes moot doesnt it? Why have elections at all then? Let the courts decide!! |
yes I would you dumbass. The S.C. judges are appointed by the PRIME MINISTER that the MAJORITY of the nation elects into office you wit. Judges are driven by their duty to uphold the rule of law and the guaranteed rights in the Charter. They are not seeking votes for election and do not base their decisions on what people want in any given year, but what is right. And that's the way it should be here. |
|
|
| musicsnob_NOT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
right.... lets have UNELECTED judges determine the laws of the land. If we do this the government becomes moot doesnt it? Why have elections at all then? Let the courts decide!! |
Yes, the Supreme Court should interpret the make the laws, espically on issues of human rights. We have all seen how smart the electrate is by voting in the Liberals for the last 3 elections. Most people have no clue who they are voting for, they vote for the party or the leader and get stuck with their local MP, MPP. I would think differently if we had a differant electoral system (similar to the States) where we voted for our Prime Minister and voted seperatly for out local representative. The government does not become moot, it is still there to determine fiscal policy, foreign policy and nation building. Look at the U.S., most of the progressive laws are made by the Supreme Court (nominated by the President, not elected).
It doesn't really matter that there are these ultra conservative idiots in the new Conservative/Alliance/Reform party because any change they try to make to the laws in terms of Abortion, Gay Marriage, etc. will ultimatly be decided by the courts. What they are missing in the party are "Red Tories" (fiscally responsible and socially progressive). I miss the PC's. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
Supreme court judges are a appointed by the prime minister this is true. But after that they are not required to be accountable for thier actions by the public. How do we know that judges dont have their own agenda? At least with an elected body we have the right to throw them out every 4 to 5 years!
Why not have elections for the supreme court if we are to give them so much power?
As for free votes in the legislature, anyone who is against that is against democracy. |
|
|
| starsearcher |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Supreme court judges are a appointed by the prime minister this is true. But after that they are not required to be accountable for thier actions by the public. How do we know that judges dont have their own agenda? At least with an elected body we have the right to throw them out every 4 to 5 years!
Why not have elections for the supreme court if we are to give them so much power?
As for free votes in the legislature, anyone who is against that is against democracy. |
A supreme court judge has his own agenda? And what kind of an agenda would he have? The reason there are a few and not just one is that if one does decide something stupid the others could argue and block...
And voting for supreme court judges? What kind of a stupid idea is that :stongue:
Maybe the fact that they are appointed by the PM is a bit strange, but what you propose is just retarded |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| Yes i guess the idea of democracy would be retarded to pinko socialists.... |
|
|
|
|
