Freethought & Rationalism Archive

never been there · 08-25-2002, 09:07 AM

Please excuse any typos. I'm standing at attention humming "O Canada" (the old secular version) while I copy this over.

It's dated 2001, but I haven't seen it before:
<a href="http://family.org/fofmag/pp/a0016325.html" target="_blank">As Goes Canada . . . So Goes the United States?</a>

Good old FOTF. Makes me proud!

They have of course been speaking to Canadian sources:

Quote:

The third factor that sets Canada in faster political motion is the province of Quebec, which is far ahead of the rest of Canada when it comes to radical changes.

It's all Quebec's fault!! As usual!!!

Salut!

Toto · 08-25-2002, 05:27 PM

So it appears that Canada is more accepting of homosexual rights. I had no idea that Quebec was such a hotbed of liberalism.

Quote:

The past 20 years have seen a breathtaking political and social upheaval in Quebec. This so-called "Quiet Revolution" has undermined the influence of the church and traditional notions of morality. "Dr. Dobson has said that he fears the United States could follow Canada�s lead in social radicalism. The rest of Canada, it appears, could be following Quebec�s lead. When it comes to marriage, sexual mores and abortion, that�s not reassuring," Reid said.

FoE · 08-25-2002, 05:42 PM

Quote:

The past 20 years have seen a breathtaking political and social upheaval in Quebec. This so-called "Quiet Revolution" has undermined the influence of the church and traditional notions of morality. "Dr. Dobson has said that he fears the United States could follow Canada�s lead in social radicalism. The rest of Canada, it appears, could be following Quebec�s lead. When it comes to marriage, sexual mores and abortion, that�s not reassuring," Reid said.

It's pretty reassuring to me!

Undercurrent · 08-25-2002, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:
So it appears that Canada is more accepting of homosexual rights. I had no idea that Quebec was such a hotbed of liberalism.

The Quebecois I know comprise an ecclectic collection of flaming urban liberals and outrageous rural conservatives. The article could have said "Montreal" instead of "Quebec" and been even more right, methinks.

Of course, it's only compared to the U.S. that Canada is a bastion of liberal heathenism. Compared with western European nations, Canada is middle of the road at best most of the time.

m.

Mecha_Dude · 08-25-2002, 07:28 PM

Reassuring to me, too. Alright, it's settled, Canada or Australia....

Wyz_sub10 · 08-26-2002, 06:38 AM

Quote:

We are just a bunch of people who came over on boats from Britain or Scandinavia or wherever for free land, and we�ve learned to get along. We didn�t have any kind of rallying cause

How good of him to mention all the nice, white, Protestant countries.

Quote:

when activist governments have introduced radical ideas to Parliament in the past, rarely did anyone raise a fuss�either because they didn�t know what was happening or because they didn�t want controversy

...or because our government officials usually take their direction from the Canadian social climate. We don't raise a fuss because we don't object. Those who do (and there are often many, of course) raise a fuss.

Quote:

Parliament has five major parties, all of which see the world very differently. This makes it difficult to mobilize public opinion when it matters most.

Not exaclty. Most political parties in Canada (including the Bloc) are pragmmatic when necessary. The go along with the voters. Way back when, the Liberals backed free trade. The Conservatives opposed it. Then it flipped and it was the Conservatives that finally brought it in.

Quote:

Unlike the U.S. Constitution, Canada�s Constitution was rewritten and updated quite recently�in 1982.

Yes, it was updated to reflect greater independence from Britain, but it had little effect on the Canadian mindset. We didn't, all of a sudden, have different values.

Quote:

He [Trudeau] believed individual rights should be protected and enforced over group rights, even when they clashed with federal or provincial laws. As a consequence, when a conflict occurs today, judges often make the call.

And this differs from the US system...? Anyone remember Roe vs. Wade? I would guess that fewer issues (per capita) of individual rights make it to the Supreme Court of Canada than in the US.

Quote:

Focus on the Family called on Canadians to challenge the proposed law, demanding Parliament respect the distinct heterosexual nature of marriage, the benefits it brings and its biblical worldview," Reid said. "And grassroots Canadians responded. Members of Parliament were overwhelmed by public concern on the issue.

Polls suggest Canadians respect the idea of gay marriages. Whether the majority does, it will still happen. It's about the rights of the individual and not a biblical worldview. Canada has been very good (not perfect) in separating church and state. Public concern is not necessarily adversarial.

Quote:

we were successful in forcing a crucial acknowledgement from the government that this legislation did not affect the legal definition of marriage�that being the union of one man and one woman, to the exclusion of all others

He's talking out his ass here. What does this mean? The argument isn't closed and the definition will likely change in the very near future. (maybe in time for the Rapture?)

Quote:

And perhaps the United States can avoid the rocky path walked by its neighbor to the north.

Like they've avoided universal health care.

I'm just teasing on that last note.

Seriously, the only reason I'm making these notes is because it severly distorts the issues presented. Canada is not flawless, believe me, and we can be a little apathetic as a nation at times. But we are not a bunch of adversity-avoiding jellyfish who freely give the reins to government to act however it chooses. Ask yourself, why would a government embark on a program to "destroy the family" unless it had public support *or* ethical obligation (how often does the US refer to "constitutional rights"?) to address the underlying issues?

This would be a great piece of satire if it wasn't dead serious. Sounds like creationists' "evolution is dying and being abandoned by scientists" argument.

Saying something is a problem doesn't make it a problem. Inventing a make-believe solution to address a make-believe problem doesn't make one a hero.

[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Wyz_sub10 ]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-25-2002, 07:28 PM	#5
Mecha_Dude Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Everywhere... I'm Watching you... Posts: 1,019	Reassuring to me, too. Alright, it's settled, Canada or Australia....

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.