Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Christy Clark's Religion Comments Spark Criticism From B.C. Atheists


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
368 replies to this topic

#31 Armada

Armada

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,471 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 08

Posted 03 August 2012 - 08:06 PM

Maybe you want your religion to influence your gov'ts policies, but I don't.


I'm not religious? Maybe the difference between you and I, is I'm not a sensitive ignorant person who doesn't respect people's beliefs. But too say her policies are all based on religion or will be, is a stupid statement.

Either way you're probably a hypocrite, someone who you have voted for previously has most likely been religious as well. Who knows, maybe you'll be voting NDP and I respect that but maybe Adrian Dix is a christian too, I know his wife is a pretty big christian.

Edited by Armada, 03 August 2012 - 08:18 PM.

1314_IProvo_1680x1050.jpg
______________


#32 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,742 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 03 August 2012 - 08:17 PM

Perhaps i should stick my fingers in my ears like you do?


lolz. Running out of material, Sharpie?

#33 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,742 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 03 August 2012 - 08:19 PM

How do you know she isn't making policy or gov't decisions based on her faith?


Care to point out any policies Clark has created spawned out of this Anglican faith of hers?

#34 JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo

JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,758 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 09

Posted 03 August 2012 - 08:26 PM

Has CDC ever forced a name change on someone?

Edited by JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo, 03 August 2012 - 08:26 PM.

Posted Image

#35 Armada

Armada

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,471 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 08

Posted 03 August 2012 - 08:33 PM

I remember when I was told by Sharpshooter I made the stupidest post on CDC. <_<

1314_IProvo_1680x1050.jpg
______________


#36 Standing_Tall#37

Standing_Tall#37

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,605 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 09

Posted 03 August 2012 - 08:59 PM






Invoking the Bible for votes??

:picard:

Give your soul to God Christy, because your $3,267-Oyster-eating-on-the-public-dime's ass belongs to the BC voters shortly.

Let me guess, the Endbridge Pipeline was ordained from God eh Christy? Moron....or is it Mormon? Hard to tell which label of stupidity to categorize her in.

I don't agree with what you say very much...however this is one of those rare occasions, you sir, have earned yourself a plus

#37 nucklehead

nucklehead

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,058 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 03

Posted 03 August 2012 - 09:16 PM

I don't see why people have to bring this up in interviews. You are religious? Good for you. I don't walk around the office telling people that the trade I made was because being Agnostic or Atheist or Catholic really helped me. Whether it did or not is not the point. Other's don't need to know because then you are imposing something, even if not intentionally.

Same argument as the gay pride thing. Good for you, but no one walks around shouting from the rooftops how gloriously straight they are so.... how about everyone just tones down their personal business. We are in an age of no filter.

um...to secure teh jesus vote? it worked for W and Stevo so why not.

 

 


#38 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,742 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 03 August 2012 - 09:25 PM

I don't see why people have to bring this up in interviews. You are religious? Good for you. I don't walk around the office telling people that the trade I made was because being Agnostic or Atheist or Catholic really helped me. Whether it did or not is not the point. Other's don't need to know because then you are imposing something, even if not intentionally.


But the interview was specifically about faith and was on a TV channel that talked about the Christian faith. It's not like CC was doing a press conference and out of the blue brought it up.

#39 Truculence

Truculence

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,311 posts
  • Joined: 09-March 04

Posted 03 August 2012 - 09:45 PM

She's campaigning. She's always campaigning.

Whelp, she's lost my vote. LOL

s_l_s.gif

 

burroes.gif


#40 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 03 August 2012 - 09:52 PM

I'm not religious? Maybe the difference between you and I, is I'm not a sensitive ignorant person who doesn't respect people's beliefs. But too say her policies are all based on religion or will be, is a stupid statement.

Either way you're probably a hypocrite, someone who you have voted for previously has most likely been religious as well. Who knows, maybe you'll be voting NDP and I respect that but maybe Adrian Dix is a christian too, I know his wife is a pretty big christian.


I don't know what makes you think I suggested that you weren't religious. Perhaps reading comprehension will be in your next grade's curriculum.

Ignorant? About what specifically?

I never said 'all' her policies were based on religion....again reading fundamentals are sorely lacking with you.

How am I a hypocrite for voting for someone who may or may not have been religious but who didn't go on television asserting that they used their religion to make policy decisions for me? The last person I voted for, indirectly, was Jack Layton. He wasn't religious as much as he claimed to have become more spiritual as he was fighting his illness. But, he never suggested that his policy platforms were decided on based on his spirituality.

She's a pretty big Christian? What, in girth or height?

Edited by Sharpshooter, 03 August 2012 - 09:55 PM.

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#41 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 03 August 2012 - 10:01 PM

lolz. Running out of material, Sharpie?


I have just enough for you....always.

Care to point out any policies Clark has created spawned out of this Anglican faith of hers?


You should probably ask her, since she's the one asserting her religion helped her with her decisions. Find out which policy decision specifically.

I remember when I was told by Sharpshooter I made the stupidest post on CDC. <_<


Judging from your previous posts in this thread, i'm sure it wasn't a statement of hyperbole.


I don't agree with what you say very much...however this is one of those rare occasions, you sir, have earned yourself a plus


Much obliged

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#42 hockeyfan87

hockeyfan87

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: 13-February 10

Posted 03 August 2012 - 10:12 PM

The key point that you may be overlooking is that having specific religious beliefs are not the issue. Basing secular decisions through religious interpretation of supernatural dogma is not in her office's mandate. We did not elect the Vicar of Christ here in British Columbia, which is the most secular province in Canada, we elected a secular representative to make secular decisions on secular issues, based on secular evidence, informed by secular facts.

She is being paid to represent the best future interests of B.C. regions and peoples, and not her own religious ones in her policy-making. That's not an expectation of intolerance, but of secular society holding a secular representative accountable for the manner in which she describes her decision and possibly her policy making process, which affects those of us who may or may not share her interpretations that inform her religious beliefs.

Making social decisions based on religious dogma is a recipe for poor governing in today's world.



I understand where you are coming from completely. If it was up to me I wouldn’t want her as our Premier but when the alternatives are a forger (Adrian Dix) and a lunatic (John Cummins) I still think she is the lesser of the three evils we have to choose from.

I think what exasperates this situation, at least in my eyes, is that she was never elected Premier of British Columbia. The Liberal Party chose her after Gordon Campbell’s resignation and the people of BC have yet to be given a chance to decide whether she should be our Premier. I think this is a flaw in our system personally. Consider that someone who has been essentially undemocratically chosen as our Premier has the fate of the Enbridge pipeline in their hands.

To anyone who chooses to read about Christy Clark’s background it becomes evident of the huge role religion has played in her life. She studied religious studies in university prior to dropping out. She has also decided to send her son to a private Anglican church. If people were open to these facts and then elected her to the office of Premier I think it would be much more palatable to find that she uses the bible to guide her.

Like I said I don’t have much respect for her or many politicians for that matter. If I had to forecast what happens she leaves politics again once the NDP win the next election. Personally I don’t want the pinnacle of BC politics to be an unelected university dropout who will likely quit at the first sign of adversity. That being said Dix or Cummins would likely say they look to the bible for guidance also or risk alienating a large part of the potential voting base.

#43 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 03 August 2012 - 10:27 PM

I understand where you are coming from completely. If it was up to me I wouldn’t want her as our Premier but when the alternatives are a forger (Adrian Dix) and a lunatic (John Cummins) I still think she is the lesser of the three evils we have to choose from.

I think what exasperates this situation, at least in my eyes, is that she was never elected Premier of British Columbia. The Liberal Party chose her after Gordon Campbell’s resignation and the people of BC have yet to be given a chance to decide whether she should be our Premier. I think this is a flaw in our system personally. Consider that someone who has been essentially undemocratically chosen as our Premier has the fate of the Enbridge pipeline in their hands.

To anyone who chooses to read about Christy Clark’s background it becomes evident of the huge role religion has played in her life. She studied religious studies in university prior to dropping out. She has also decided to send her son to a private Anglican church. If people were open to these facts and then elected her to the office of Premier I think it would be much more palatable to find that she uses the bible to guide her.

Like I said I don’t have much respect for her or many politicians for that matter. If I had to forecast what happens she leaves politics again once the NDP win the next election. Personally I don’t want the pinnacle of BC politics to be an unelected university dropout who will likely quit at the first sign of adversity. That being said Dix or Cummins would likely say they look to the bible for guidance also or risk alienating a large part of the potential voting base.


That large part of the voting base that you refer to vote secularly....and not because of someone's religion, or assertions of how religious beliefs will play into their policy making decisions. Christians, jews muslims voted for a Sikh and Sikhs have voted for Christians. At the end of the day, religion has never been at the forefront of voters minds in B.C politics when selecting a Premier, for as long as I can recall.

This Bev Oda of the West is the first that I can recall that actually stated frankly that her religion and her religion's scriptures could come into play into how she makes policy decisions. That's more than uncomfortable for those of us rational enough to see her religion and its dogma and its contradiction filled book of intolerance for what it is. Of course I recognize pandering when I see it, but Chrity Christ on a Cross, has gone beyond simply the regular photo-op pander and the 'I respect their beliefs schtick' into full on religious right speech. I don't even think I've heard Harper say anything of this sort even, and he's one chair short of sitting at the Last Supper.

Edited by Sharpshooter, 03 August 2012 - 10:28 PM.

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#44 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,040 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 03 August 2012 - 10:30 PM

To lighten the mood a bit:


RIP LB RR PD


#45 hockeyfan87

hockeyfan87

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,502 posts
  • Joined: 13-February 10

Posted 03 August 2012 - 10:42 PM

That large part of the voting base that you refer to vote secularly....and not because of someone's religion, or assertions of how religious beliefs will play into their policy making decisions. Christians, jews muslims voted for a Sikh and Sikhs have voted for Christians. At the end of the day, religion has never been at the forefront of voters minds in B.C politics when selecting a Premier, for as long as I can recall.

This Bev Oda of the West is the first that I can recall that actually stated frankly that her religion and her religion's scriptures could come into play into how she makes policy decisions. That's more than uncomfortable for those of us rational enough to see her religion and its dogma and its contradiction filled book of intolerance for what it is. Of course I recognize pandering when I see it, but Chrity Christ on a Cross, has gone beyond simply the regular photo-op pander and the 'I respect their beliefs schtick' into full on religious right speech. I don't even think I've heard Harper say anything of this sort even, and he's one chair short of sitting at the Last Supper.



I guess part of the disconnect between how you and I see this issue revolves around the importance in religion in one’s life. I just assume that if someone is religious and believes in God that it plays a central role in their life and shaping their outlook on issues.

I hate to take a jab at religious folk but if a person believes in God (and the bible) how can they just take some parts and leave others. If I believed in a supreme omnipotent being I would give full credence to their scriptures.

Even if I don’t understand it I realize that many people approach religion much more casually. Even so I expect that for the more casual believer their “faith” and religious belief still shapes their attitudes, beliefs and outlook. It’s a scary prospect but even if Christy hadn’t come out and said this I would have still assumed it to be the case.

Being religious is part of the core makeup of a human being. It usually plays an important role in their life. Even if they don’t disclose the degree to the role it plays in their isn’t it safe to assume that they can’t divorce themselves from it when they hold public office? I think those people who voted for Christy (oh right I forgot she wasn’t elected Premier) of other religious denominations wouldn’t expect her to divorce herself from her beliefs once she entered office.

It was an unwise move for her to comment on the role of religion in her life but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a calculated one. Things are looking bad for the Liberals and if they hope to win they need to minimize the appeal of the Conservative Party.

#46 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 03 August 2012 - 10:46 PM

Jai, Patton said it well, but Billy said it best. B)



Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#47 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,040 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 03 August 2012 - 10:56 PM

Jai, Patton said it well, but Billy said it best. B)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZw4I5qSOkY&feature=related


Definitely, I agree. Billy is great.

Patton's was more for comedic relief, though still rings true.

RIP LB RR PD


#48 :D

:D

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,175 posts
  • Joined: 14-August 03

Posted 03 August 2012 - 10:59 PM

Christy, if you're reading this, I find you very attractive for a middle-aged woman. Please PM me.

#49 Bob.Loblaw

Bob.Loblaw

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,295 posts
  • Joined: 24-November 09

Posted 03 August 2012 - 11:02 PM

I don't see why people have to bring this up in interviews. You are religious? Good for you. I don't walk around the office telling people that the trade I made was because being Agnostic or Atheist or Catholic really helped me. Whether it did or not is not the point. Other's don't need to know because then you are imposing something, even if not intentionally.

Same argument as the gay pride thing. Good for you, but no one walks around shouting from the rooftops how gloriously straight they are so.... how about everyone just tones down their personal business. We are in an age of no filter.


You seem to not understand the whole gay pride thing. As for religion.... I'll pick Judaism, since they've had a long history of oppression. It is because for VERY LONG stretches of time, these two groups were forced to hide their affiliations.

Think of it this way. Right now, the words "gay" and "Jew" are still pejorative terms to a lot of people. Unless that changes, they are right to be overt about their beliefs or orientations.

In any sense, I've no idea why you're comparing Clark's comments to gay pride. She's saying this because she knows a lot of people vote just based on religious background. The fact that 50% of BCers are Christian might just be enough to get her in. Or at least, that's her line of thought.

#50 Buggernut

Buggernut

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,526 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 03

Posted 04 August 2012 - 07:23 AM

Welcome to 1986, Christy Vander Clark.

#51 Slaytanic Wehrmacht

Slaytanic Wehrmacht

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 861 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 11

Posted 04 August 2012 - 09:39 AM

"When did I realize I was god? well, one night I was praying and I realized I was talking to myself." - Peter O'Toole
Posted Image

#52 Guest_BuckFoston_*

Guest_BuckFoston_*
  • Guests
  • Joined: --

Posted 04 August 2012 - 09:41 AM

You seem to not understand the whole gay pride thing. As for religion.... I'll pick Judaism, since they've had a long history of oppression. It is because for VERY LONG stretches of time, these two groups were forced to hide their affiliations.

Think of it this way. Right now, the words "gay" and "Jew" are still pejorative terms to a lot of people. Unless that changes, they are right to be overt about their beliefs or orientations.

In any sense, I've no idea why you're comparing Clark's comments to gay pride. She's saying this because she knows a lot of people vote just based on religious background. The fact that 50% of BCers are Christian might just be enough to get her in. Or at least, that's her line of thought.


Most of my family was exterminated like vermin by Stalin's firing squad in 1937 because they belonged to an invisible minority. We can't even visit anyone because they were all thrown in mass graves and no one knows where they are. Oppression is nothing new here, but despite our tragic history I don't go around waving flags and being "overt" about my affiliations . Nor do I find it appropriate to use the oppression of my ancestors as a giant soap box for own agenda.

As for the gay pride thing, it's like a rags to riches story. You were in rags all your life and suddenly you win the lottery so you go on and buy the tackiest most expensive junk to show off how much money you have now. You just can't be modest about it. Nobody likes that kind of showing off. If you are able to come out now as never before, that is great, but it is still only one part of you and often many make it the only part about them. Basically you determine how much of a big deal it is to others by how much of a big deal it is to you. It's come to the point where quite a lot of it is imposing. Like meeting someone and they shake your hand and say "Hi, I am Christy and I am a lesbian." Uhm, okay. But I'm not sure how that is going to help me order lunch.

#53 Slaytanic Wehrmacht

Slaytanic Wehrmacht

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 861 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 11

Posted 04 August 2012 - 09:59 AM

I guess part of the disconnect between how you and I see this issue revolves around the importance in religion in one’s life. I just assume that if someone is religious and believes in God that it plays a central role in their life and shaping their outlook on issues.

I hate to take a jab at religious folk but if a person believes in God (and the bible) how can they just take some parts and leave others. If I believed in a supreme omnipotent being I would give full credence to their scriptures.

Even if I don’t understand it I realize that many people approach religion much more casually. Even so I expect that for the more casual believer their “faith” and religious belief still shapes their attitudes, beliefs and outlook. It’s a scary prospect but even if Christy hadn’t come out and said this I would have still assumed it to be the case.

Being religious is part of the core makeup of a human being. It usually plays an important role in their life. Even if they don’t disclose the degree to the role it plays in their isn’t it safe to assume that they can’t divorce themselves from it when they hold public office? I think those people who voted for Christy (oh right I forgot she wasn’t elected Premier) of other religious denominations wouldn’t expect her to divorce herself from her beliefs once she entered office.

It was an unwise move for her to comment on the role of religion in her life but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a calculated one. Things are looking bad for the Liberals and if they hope to win they need to minimize the appeal of the Conservative Party.


Thank you for this. I know you hate to take a jab at religious folk...but I certainly do not. What I find mildly amusing is when these Christian athletes and others are successful in something they partake in (see Tim Tebow) they are very quick to thank "god" or "my savior jesus christ" for granting them the strength to win....yet when they lose...or fail...miserably...the accolades and appreciation are conspicuously absent. You never hear "I'd like to thank god for allowing us to finish the season 0-16, his guiding light made our misery all the more special".
Posted Image

#54 Satan's Evil Twin

Satan's Evil Twin

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,028 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 06

Posted 04 August 2012 - 10:05 AM

Most of my family was exterminated like vermin by Stalin's firing squad in 1937 because they belonged to an invisible minority. We can't even visit anyone because they were all thrown in mass graves and no one knows where they are. Oppression is nothing new here, but despite our tragic history I don't go around waving flags and being "overt" about my affiliations . Nor do I find it appropriate to use the oppression of my ancestors as a giant soap box for own agenda.

As for the gay pride thing, it's like a rags to riches story. You were in rags all your life and suddenly you win the lottery so you go on and buy the tackiest most expensive junk to show off how much money you have now. You just can't be modest about it. Nobody likes that kind of showing off. If you are able to come out now as never before, that is great, but it is still only one part of you and often many make it the only part about them. Basically you determine how much of a big deal it is to others by how much of a big deal it is to you. It's come to the point where quite a lot of it is imposing. Like meeting someone and they shake your hand and say "Hi, I am Christy and I am a lesbian." Uhm, okay. But I'm not sure how that is going to help me order lunch.


No, it isn't like winning a lottery... unless the prize is the ability to get a job like everyone else. In which case yeah, I'd say celebrating newly attained equality is a-okay.

Modest? One day in a year there is a gay parade. Damn, I guess them Chinese with their New Year's parade are immodest too. Oh how about them Irish? Well I guess they're okay since it's a day to get drunk and everyone has fun drinking. And what about every other parade everywhere? Mardi Gras?

Nor does having a parade make it "the only part about them". The gay people I've known aren't suddenly going to become 2-dimensional caricatures of homosexuals if they participate in the parade. What an absurd thing to say. What gay person do you know who made their sexual orientation the only part about them?

A gay parade is imposing? Jesus farking Christ, I hope you never get stuck behind a cyclist on a road.

I wonder, have you EVER had a gay person tell you they're gay when they met you or are you just blowing more smoke? Most gays I've only figured out by hearing them mention their girlfriend or boyfriend in a way one would mention a partner of an opposite sex. That is to say, they don't flaunt having a boyfriend or girlfriend anymore than any heterosexual person.

Your post reads like gays are parading on a weekly basis and wear pink ribbons on the off-days to make sure everyone can recognize their sexuality.

Basically you determine how much of a big deal it is to others by how much of a big deal it is to you.


Indeed. Seems like a big deal to you.

Posted Image


Father (Peace be upon You) Satan (Peace be upon You), I call to you (Peace be upon You) from the deepest parts of my heart, I praise your (Peace be upon You) name with every breath of my body, I worship you (Peace be upon You) with every fiber of my being. You (Peace be upon You) shown me what true strength is. You (Peace be upon You) have shown me what true love is. Out of the darkness you (Peace be upon You) came to show me the true light.


My master (Peace be upon You), my father (Peace be upon You) and my friend (Peace be upon You) what a great gift that is.


Posted Image Hail to the King (PBUH)! Posted Image


#55 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,319 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 04 August 2012 - 10:08 AM

Most of my family was exterminated like vermin by Stalin's firing squad in 1937 because they belonged to an invisible minority. We can't even visit anyone because they were all thrown in mass graves and no one knows where they are. Oppression is nothing new here, but despite our tragic history I don't go around waving flags and being "overt" about my affiliations . Nor do I find it appropriate to use the oppression of my ancestors as a giant soap box for own agenda.

As for the gay pride thing, it's like a rags to riches story. You were in rags all your life and suddenly you win the lottery so you go on and buy the tackiest most expensive junk to show off how much money you have now. You just can't be modest about it. Nobody likes that kind of showing off. If you are able to come out now as never before, that is great, but it is still only one part of you and often many make it the only part about them. Basically you determine how much of a big deal it is to others by how much of a big deal it is to you. It's come to the point where quite a lot of it is imposing. Like meeting someone and they shake your hand and say "Hi, I am Christy and I am a lesbian." Uhm, okay. But I'm not sure how that is going to help me order lunch.

This rant is hardly in the realm of realistic..

I've never ever met someone say "hi my name is ______ and I'm gay/a lesbian.", and I've lived in ???? San Francisco.

You have a mindless belief that is nothing to be confused with some type of understanding about gay pride, or pride in general that derives from one form of singling a group of people out and treating them as inferior. Once people are singled out by such criteria they form a group and form an identity based on said criteria and it becomes a source of pride now. I'd suggest educating yourself on the issue but from the looks of it you'd rather just nonsensically rant.

Edited by Templeton Peck, 04 August 2012 - 04:24 PM.
censor bypass

4JGASNR.png


#56 Slaytanic Wehrmacht

Slaytanic Wehrmacht

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 861 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 11

Posted 04 August 2012 - 10:11 AM

This rant is hardly in the realm of realistic..

I've never ever met someone say "hi my name is ______ and I'm gay/a lesbian.", and I've lived in ???? San Francisco.

You have a mindless belief that is nothing to be confused with some type of understanding about gay pride, or pride in general that derives from one form of singling a group of people out and treating them as inferior. Once people are singled out by such criteria they form a group and form an identity based on said criteria and it becomes a source of pride now. I'd suggest educating yourself on the issue but from the looks of it you'd rather just nonsensically rant.


LOL agreed I can't understand the mindset of some...it's not like the gays and lesbians need to stand up at a meeting (in the vein of A.A or N.A) and say Hi, my name is ______ and I'm gay/a lesbian.
Posted Image

#57 Bill Sikes

Bill Sikes

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,983 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:27 AM

:lol: at atheists. - From an atheists.

Oh no! She said something.. Lets not respect her belief...

Face it Christianity/Catholicism have played a pretty large role in Canadian politics since the start of this country.

How about our anthem:

"O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee."

To make a big deal over this is ludicrous and silly Sharpshooter. As far as I'm concerned she can believe whatever she wants as long as she doesn't make us all forced to become Christians.

That line was actually added some time in the late 1970's, I remember there was another Oh Canada where that line now is

#58 Slaytanic Wehrmacht

Slaytanic Wehrmacht

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 861 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 11

Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:31 AM

That line was actually added some time in the late 1970's, I remember there was another Oh Canada where that line now is


Wow...I did not know that Norman...it's kind of like the fact that before the year 1954 the words "under god" did not appear in the US Pledge of Allegiance then, yes?
Posted Image

#59 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,319 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:35 AM

Wow...I did not know that Norman...it's kind of like the fact that before the year 1954 the words "under god" did not appear in the US Pledge of Allegiance then, yes?

That was only when it was technically official. It was less than a century earlier when it started being used, although it's usage wasn't all that much until the 1950s, and the policy making it official was conveniently square in the middle of the Red Scare era of paranoia and jingoism, the same of which followed 9/11.

Edited by zaibatsu, 04 August 2012 - 11:36 AM.

4JGASNR.png


#60 Slaytanic Wehrmacht

Slaytanic Wehrmacht

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 861 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 11

Posted 04 August 2012 - 11:36 AM

That was only when it was technically official. It was less than a century earlier when it started being used, although it's usage wasn't all that much until the 1950s, and the policy making it official was conveniently square in the middle of the Red Scare era of paranoia and jingoism, the same of which followed 9/11.


Scare the crap out of people for long enough and they'll believe anything, eh?
Posted Image




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.