Mark, it is religious angst.
If one supports left liberal causes like abortion on demand, SSM, etc. one is considered 'progressive'.
If on the other hand one supports some restrictions on abortion, traditional marriage, family values one is considered 'unCanadian'; a pariah and worthy of contempt. In short, one is the political equivalent of a Neanderthal.
Darryl Reid being in the environment ministry was 'scary'; because according to the leftist lexicon he is a fascist who might get the animals to march two by two just like Noah did.
It is as if the Hutterites were plotting an insurrection, to topple the government when this closed community had the temerity to tell PM Paul Martin not to pass SSM.
Hey that is quite the assertion:
A closed Christian community publicly repudiated PM Paul Martin's SSM. The pacifists are secretly insurrectionists!! It is a hidden agenda, but the LIEberals can never find it.
It's a double standard about the height of the Rocky Mountains.
On the other hand, one might be more concerned with the quality of a person in a minister's office where there is an opportunity to shape policy than with a candidate for the third party which will never form the government.
Posted at 2006-11-09 16:50:19 [PermaLink]It's hypocritical.
Especially since the NDP are enamoured with religious zealots who would murder gays and treat women like cattle. In fact these religious fundamentalists would just as soon kill anyone not like them because they consider the existence of anyone who doesn't hold their beliefs as a stain on their fundamentalist religion. But liberal leftists have all sorts of excuses for these guys, even womyn who call themselves feminists will make excuses for them.
Leftists are nasty hypocrites.
I don't have the exact reference nor the date, but I read in a sidebar article in The Montreal Gazette that, contrary to initial reports, the Catholic Church had not YET given its permission for M. Gravel to run for office, according to that "priest's" bishop.
I say "priest" - between quotes - because M. Gravel does not appear to follow all the Church's teachings. He appears to cherry pick the rules he agrees with and disregards others. So is he really a priest? What about the vow of obedience, has that rule been abolished?
I wonder if anyone ever bitched about the separation of church and state when the Rev. Tommy Douglas was running for Prime Minister.
www.roadhammer.blogspot.com
I'm wondering, too, about the NDP running Mrs Arar as a candidate in the last election. Did they ask her about whether she agreed with the party policy on same-sex marriage? On abortion? Probably not.
Posted at 2006-11-09 22:42:56 [PermaLink]Why would the NDP ask Mme Arar anything? She's a 'she', fashionably ethnic, anti-American, and a subscriber to a belief system that promotes exciting violence (very Fanon-ian!). What the hell else did they need to know?
Posted at 2006-11-10 08:23:51 [PermaLink]