Tuesday, April 06, 2004
Hey everyone, hope your Tuesday is going well.
My post is pretty late today as I had the unfortunate pleasure of breaking my nose at hockey last night. The Tylenol 3's have kept me pretty woozy for most of the day so I really havent paid much attention to any news outlets or even any blogs. I heard about Ted Kennedy weighing in (pun intended) on George W. Bush and calling Iraq Vietnam. Why doesnt someone put a muzzle on this old windbag? Keep in mind who his Senate colleague is when its time to go to the polls in November.
Another interesting tidbit is the discovery of the Clinton administration's massive document on its anti-terror activities. You know the one that doesnt mention al-Quida and only brings up Bin Laden a grand total of four times. I have said recently that blaming each other for 9/11 is ridiculous, and I stick by that, however I hope that this revelation will pour water on this stupid 9/11 commission and make Richard Clarke an un-pleasant memory and perhaps a trivia question in the footnotes of history.
I also saw a very interesting article on the WSJ's Best of the Web column. It seems that Ontario has allowed Muslims the option of trying some matters (family law etc) before the sharia courts. I understand that Canada is very liberal as a whole and tries ever so desperately to be open minded and accepting of diversity in order that we might seem "cool" like those Europeans, but this is nothing short of outrageous. It sets a very dangerous precedent that in my mind will only hasten the demise of Canada. If every small interest group gets its own way and its own courts, then what is the point of having a country? Canada is already far too lenient with any minority that raises its voice above a whisper.
If, hypothetically, this idea catches on and other minorities are allowed to have their own courts, then how does one decide which court one is to be tried in? Do you shop around for the best deal and then convert to the appropriate religion or belief system as needed? I think this will create a sort of legal apartheid and lead to chaos. Since Canada tends to pride itself on being open and "progressive", what would happen if a Muslim homosexual was tried under sharia law for some minor offense? I am not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I think that if it came out during trial that this man or woman was gay, they would have the displeasure of being showered with rocks or some other barbarous sentence.
One country should have one set of laws (I'm looking at you Quebec) and thats that. People should be free to come to Canada and not be persecuted for their beliefs or cultures, but the price of that freedom is adhering to and embracing the laws and customs of your adopted homeland.
I hope everyone saw those pictures of John Kerry playing football!! What a nerd, must have had a Frenchie teach him to catch!!
Joke O' The Day:
Why do the Winnipeg Blue Bombers (insert team name here) play on artifical turf??
To keep the cheerleaders from grazing!!
I'm out
StatcounterMy post is pretty late today as I had the unfortunate pleasure of breaking my nose at hockey last night. The Tylenol 3's have kept me pretty woozy for most of the day so I really havent paid much attention to any news outlets or even any blogs. I heard about Ted Kennedy weighing in (pun intended) on George W. Bush and calling Iraq Vietnam. Why doesnt someone put a muzzle on this old windbag? Keep in mind who his Senate colleague is when its time to go to the polls in November.
Another interesting tidbit is the discovery of the Clinton administration's massive document on its anti-terror activities. You know the one that doesnt mention al-Quida and only brings up Bin Laden a grand total of four times. I have said recently that blaming each other for 9/11 is ridiculous, and I stick by that, however I hope that this revelation will pour water on this stupid 9/11 commission and make Richard Clarke an un-pleasant memory and perhaps a trivia question in the footnotes of history.
I also saw a very interesting article on the WSJ's Best of the Web column. It seems that Ontario has allowed Muslims the option of trying some matters (family law etc) before the sharia courts. I understand that Canada is very liberal as a whole and tries ever so desperately to be open minded and accepting of diversity in order that we might seem "cool" like those Europeans, but this is nothing short of outrageous. It sets a very dangerous precedent that in my mind will only hasten the demise of Canada. If every small interest group gets its own way and its own courts, then what is the point of having a country? Canada is already far too lenient with any minority that raises its voice above a whisper.
If, hypothetically, this idea catches on and other minorities are allowed to have their own courts, then how does one decide which court one is to be tried in? Do you shop around for the best deal and then convert to the appropriate religion or belief system as needed? I think this will create a sort of legal apartheid and lead to chaos. Since Canada tends to pride itself on being open and "progressive", what would happen if a Muslim homosexual was tried under sharia law for some minor offense? I am not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I think that if it came out during trial that this man or woman was gay, they would have the displeasure of being showered with rocks or some other barbarous sentence.
One country should have one set of laws (I'm looking at you Quebec) and thats that. People should be free to come to Canada and not be persecuted for their beliefs or cultures, but the price of that freedom is adhering to and embracing the laws and customs of your adopted homeland.
I hope everyone saw those pictures of John Kerry playing football!! What a nerd, must have had a Frenchie teach him to catch!!
Joke O' The Day:
Why do the Winnipeg Blue Bombers (insert team name here) play on artifical turf??
To keep the cheerleaders from grazing!!
I'm out
Shoes
