> what's wrong of having morals, obviously your voters dont't have any.
Really? You want people to take you seriously when you categorically equate religious fundamentalism with "having morals", such that not being religious and fundamentalist means you have none? I suggest learning a little before making snide comments on the Internet, because even as far as trolling goes yours was especially lazy.
James - 14 years ago
As someone who was interviewed for "The Armageddon Factor", I couldn't agree more with Ms. McDonald's contention that social conservatives, and in particular, the Christian Right are now and have been having undue influence on the Harper Conservative policies. Personally, I have seen what a powerful force social conservatives can be whan they believe their right to control power is threatened. If you think they have too much influence now, wait until Harper gets the majority he so desperately craves!
Michael - 14 years ago
Considering that the Catholic school system and Public school system get EQUAL money, even though the public school serves more student and does not guilt the public into donations, is a great example of how sick the Canadian political system is with the sickness that is religion. Religion has no place in government policy, no important decisions should be influenced by personal superstition.
Sprocket - 14 years ago
Having religious beliefs is one thing, but letting them influence decisions in Government is another. To me, that is tantamount to prosthelytizing. I'll continue to support a 'religious-neutral' party going forward. I'll have nothing to do with the Christian Right. I'm not interested in reviving the days of Oliver Cromwell.
Michael T - 14 years ago
It is a question of putting religious principles into law and being forced to act in the way dogmatic fundamentalists want upon pain of penalty from the state - the government enforces some religious ideas and penalizes others by withholding funding, grants and loans, throwing some in prison, taking their children away and censoring information they deem blasphemous.
We don't want that in Canada - if you have faith, have faith, stop pushing your beliefs upon everyone else and stop trying to get the government to force us all to march in lockstep.
I Sharp - 14 years ago
How can a group of voters have too much influence? If the influence is gained by backdoor deals, bribes, blackmail or other illegal ways, then it is definitely wrong. But, when a group of people have gained the attention of the government after they have excercised their right to free speech, have spoken out and others have sided with them, that is called democracy.
To attempt to paint this group as somehow unworthy of voicing their opinion and protecting what they count as important, that is wrong. Is an attempt at promoting fear of religion, a crime? Would we call this religion-phobic? If this book was written about some other "special interest groups' it would most likely be onsidered as a potential hate crime. Perhaps this double standard is one of the foundational platforms that these conservative religious groups are united by.
If we look at the history of some of Canada's most impacting institutions - they were established by these same religious groups (hosptals, education, charities, etc.). For all the good they have done in the past, perhaps they are exactlhy the group we should be paying attention to right now. Especially when we consider how for off the rails we may have gone in today's society.
Shaun McKinnon - 14 years ago
I enjoy the fact that in Canadian politics we keep 'God Talk' down to a minimum. Personal beliefs (religious or secular) have zero impact on the ability of a person to do their job and outrageous displays of them are best left to our neighbours to the south!
Louis Massey - 14 years ago
Fundamentalism of any kind evacuates both rational thought and openness to others' opinions, and we all know where that leads. There is no room for fundamentalism in democratic society, other to remind us of its fragility.
Oliver - 14 years ago
As if morality stems from religion alone. Morality stems from our sentient ability to feel compassion, an ability much older than the most ancient religious belief. I think that religious fundamentalists have too much influence period. They have absolutely no place in politics because their theistic prejudices are far too dangerous, and threaten the individual rights of citizens everywhere. Fantastical beliefs and the convictions spurned from them should be nowhere near any piece of legislation. That's what I think.
John - 14 years ago
It's not about morality, you don't need religion to be moral...actually just the opposite, moral choices should be based on humanity, not superstition.
Lucy Brownrigg - 14 years ago
what's wrong of having morals, obviously your voters dont't have any.
> what's wrong of having morals, obviously your voters dont't have any.
Really? You want people to take you seriously when you categorically equate religious fundamentalism with "having morals", such that not being religious and fundamentalist means you have none? I suggest learning a little before making snide comments on the Internet, because even as far as trolling goes yours was especially lazy.
As someone who was interviewed for "The Armageddon Factor", I couldn't agree more with Ms. McDonald's contention that social conservatives, and in particular, the Christian Right are now and have been having undue influence on the Harper Conservative policies. Personally, I have seen what a powerful force social conservatives can be whan they believe their right to control power is threatened. If you think they have too much influence now, wait until Harper gets the majority he so desperately craves!
Considering that the Catholic school system and Public school system get EQUAL money, even though the public school serves more student and does not guilt the public into donations, is a great example of how sick the Canadian political system is with the sickness that is religion. Religion has no place in government policy, no important decisions should be influenced by personal superstition.
Having religious beliefs is one thing, but letting them influence decisions in Government is another. To me, that is tantamount to prosthelytizing. I'll continue to support a 'religious-neutral' party going forward. I'll have nothing to do with the Christian Right. I'm not interested in reviving the days of Oliver Cromwell.
It is a question of putting religious principles into law and being forced to act in the way dogmatic fundamentalists want upon pain of penalty from the state - the government enforces some religious ideas and penalizes others by withholding funding, grants and loans, throwing some in prison, taking their children away and censoring information they deem blasphemous.
We don't want that in Canada - if you have faith, have faith, stop pushing your beliefs upon everyone else and stop trying to get the government to force us all to march in lockstep.
How can a group of voters have too much influence? If the influence is gained by backdoor deals, bribes, blackmail or other illegal ways, then it is definitely wrong. But, when a group of people have gained the attention of the government after they have excercised their right to free speech, have spoken out and others have sided with them, that is called democracy.
To attempt to paint this group as somehow unworthy of voicing their opinion and protecting what they count as important, that is wrong. Is an attempt at promoting fear of religion, a crime? Would we call this religion-phobic? If this book was written about some other "special interest groups' it would most likely be onsidered as a potential hate crime. Perhaps this double standard is one of the foundational platforms that these conservative religious groups are united by.
If we look at the history of some of Canada's most impacting institutions - they were established by these same religious groups (hosptals, education, charities, etc.). For all the good they have done in the past, perhaps they are exactlhy the group we should be paying attention to right now. Especially when we consider how for off the rails we may have gone in today's society.
I enjoy the fact that in Canadian politics we keep 'God Talk' down to a minimum. Personal beliefs (religious or secular) have zero impact on the ability of a person to do their job and outrageous displays of them are best left to our neighbours to the south!
Fundamentalism of any kind evacuates both rational thought and openness to others' opinions, and we all know where that leads. There is no room for fundamentalism in democratic society, other to remind us of its fragility.
As if morality stems from religion alone. Morality stems from our sentient ability to feel compassion, an ability much older than the most ancient religious belief. I think that religious fundamentalists have too much influence period. They have absolutely no place in politics because their theistic prejudices are far too dangerous, and threaten the individual rights of citizens everywhere. Fantastical beliefs and the convictions spurned from them should be nowhere near any piece of legislation. That's what I think.
It's not about morality, you don't need religion to be moral...actually just the opposite, moral choices should be based on humanity, not superstition.
what's wrong of having morals, obviously your voters dont't have any.