Subject:
|
Re: Once again, even with all our problems, Canada--a great place to live...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 3 Feb 2004 21:43:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
321 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
> > http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/sa.html
> >
> > Ahh Canada, where you can walk around topless, if you're female and you so
> > choose (k, that's Ontario only right now, but as yet I have seen no evidence of
> > women excercising that legal right), where you can have on your person under 15
> > grams of wacky tobacky without it being a capital offence, and where you can get
> > married to someone of the same sex...
> >
> > Though the last two may not last too long in Martins regime... we shall see what
> > transpires there...
> >
> > But overall, those wacky Canadians, with their liberal laws and all!!
> >
> > God love 'em!
>
> I'm curious. What do you think about the concept of "decency"?
Well, before we get into what I personally consider decent, the Ontario courts
ruled a while back that the exposure of breasts in certain public areas
(basically any public area where, say, a man can legally go topless) is decent,
and is now protected by law (if that's what you were referring to by
'decent'--of you were referring to somethign else, then clarify).
I have never, nor will I ever, smoke dope or use any currently illegal substance
for whatever reason. It's not based on the idea that my body is a 'temple of
the Lord' (though it is, and I believe that), it's just that the product of
using said substances does not supercede the costs incurred in acquiring said
materials, and the proven detriment to the body via needles for some illicit
substances... needles--ugh! Even if everything were to be made legal, I
wouldn't go about using the stuff, either. I don't drink alcohol, I don't
smoke, though both of these options are perfectly to a 30+ year old in Canada.
I'm not interested.
But why would I personally deny someone else from doing what they think makes
them happy? For 30+ years of my life I have been acquiring certain
multi-coloured bricks for purposes that I would consider related to a hobby.
Others, such as parental units, have stated forthright and adamantly that my
spending money on these pieces of ABS has caused them great consternation. If
my parents made the laws, no one over the age of 15 would *legally* be able to
play with these bricks (probably not taken to that excess, but the point is
made).
There are laws of the land. Those laws shold be there to protect one
individiual from the actions (or inactions, whatever the case may be) of another
individual. If Joe Blow is smoking weed in his thatched cottage in the
Muskokas, how does that impact me on any level at all. Now if he gets high and
hops in a car and kills or injures me, that's a completely differnet story. But
we have substances that are of legal use today which impairs the ability of
individuals, and individuals, whilst impaired, do get behind the wheel of a car,
and yet no laws are passed outlawing the useage of these intoxifying substances.
So why come down hard on joints? Medical reasons? That's no reason at all.
Outlaw video games, then--the obesity of todays young generation will impact the
health care system by a far greater amount than those people who want to smoke
up. Stop wasting my tax dollars busting, conviction and detaining Joe Pothead
when he's causing no one any harm at all when he gets high in his abode.
THe next little issue I referred to is the same-sex marriages. Is trhis where
you were questioning my decency? In the laws of Canada--right there in the
books--there are marriage laws. This is a legal issue, not a moral one. If a
church feels like abstaining from marrying same sex couples, that's entirely up
to the church. That should not, however, infringe the same sex couple from
walking down to city hall to get hitched. To infringe that union is completely
discriminatory and goes against the charter of rights and feedoms.
Does me supporting same sex marriages make me any way less a man? I don't think
that being gay makes a person less--I think the minute you say to another
person, "you can't do that because I will think less of you, and I don'tl ike
what it is you want to do" is inherent discrimination. I cannot think that a
gay person doesn't have the same rights and freedoms that I have, under the law
of the land. That goes against the very nature of the law. Allowing gay people
to marry will npot make more people gay, nor will it lead to some slippery slope
where all of a sudden people will legally be able to marry their dog, or a
teenage kid. Consenting adults, see. Consenting, rational, law abiding adults,
who also work within the same legal structure that I do--why should they be in a
more disadvantageous position according to the law than me?
>
> Freedom without respect and responsibility is meaningless.
Nowhere in any of my posts did I even remotely infer this. Clarify please. I
have a wit that may not come across sometimes in posting, but I would never
think this.
> > As an aside, in Europe you probably couldn't go a block without seeing some
> > marquee or billboard without seeing an advert with a topless model selling
> > something... what is it about North America? It was a breast! And it, so I'm
> > told, for I didn't TiVo it and do a frame by frame peek-see, had a 'pastie' over
> > the nipple!!
>
> You obviously don't have kids and are trying to raise them to become decent
> people.
And you obviously didn't turn off the half time show for the first 20 minutes
when the 'artists' were grinding against one another and grabbing their crotches
repeatedly, so when the coverend nipple sprung out, that was the bad thing?
It was quite well advertised that MTV was going to run the show. The viewers
were forewarned just by that. From many other newsgroups I've read that people
knew beforehand that it was going to be a waste of time and watched somethign
else during the 1/2 time break.
"I don't like Donny Denton either.. you know what I do? I turn [the radio]
off."
Don't go looking to MTV to instill morals and decency into your kids. DOnt'
look to the NFL to do so, either. There are sports heros like Wayne Gretzky and
the like who any child can look up to, but for every Wayne there is a (whatever,
insert bad-boy sports figure here 'cause I dont' follow too many sports that
closely)
It comes down to you, the parent, to instill what you consider decent values,
and morals, into your children. I think my parents did a pretty good job with
me. They also gave me the freedom to learn things on my own, and to make my own
mistakes. My folks showed me that no matter how bad somehting is, there is a
redeeming value somewhere, and that people should be treated with the respect
and consideration that one would expect for oneself. (they taught me many other
things but that'll fill a server of, like hundreds of gigabytes...)
> > Holy great mother of Teetsville!!! The uproar! The furor!!
> >
> > Eh, whatever...
>
> Of course you are an adult and can handle such inanities-- try to think beyond
> your self for answers.
It was inane. There was *no nipple!!!!!* For the quick flash of skin, you get
more watching an 'oil of olay' commercial! They have Seinfeld episodes on at 5
p.m. when Georges mom's in the hospital and the nurses are giving that sponge
bath behind the curtain... Oh My Goodness!! Yes Janet Jackson's flashing of her
breast was inane. The entire half time show was inane (whatever happened to
marching bands and the like?) But the cheerleaders during the game were more
sexually provocative than Justin and Janet. Yet nothing on that.
If that show happened in *any* other country, this wouldn't even have been a
blip.
My decision not to have kids is mine alone. I may face my maker someday to
justify that but actions have consequenses and I've accepted that. That by no
way diminishes my responsibilities to my friends and family, who just happen to
have many 'little ones' scampering around, and who often drop 'em off at my
house 'cause 'Uncle Dave' happens to have a basement full of LEGO bricks. So
don't lecture me about "you don't understand responsiblity until you have kids"
Where's Richard when you need 'im! Try to think beyond myself for answers? I
am really not trying to say this (struggle).... but the sheer arrogance and
hypocricy of that line...
Dave K
>
> [JOHN]
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
