April 23 2012: Alberta Provincial Election

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by kn

If this is any indication, Wildrose isn't getting elected.

Inshallah.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Makarov

That wasn't really the point though, was it? The WRP attacked the PCs on the basis that they would "impose their big government-knows-best, ivory tower views on all of us". No other parties have thrown around this "ivory tower" rhetoric, especially not against the WRP, despite the fact that many of its platform elements were forged in the same ivory towers.

Yes I find this very ironic given that Danielle Smith's teacher, mentor and campaign manager is the epitome of an ivory tower ideologue (UofC chapter).

[Senator Clay Davis]

The Wildrose is basically going to be holding on for dear life this last week. But I'd imagine the PCs have saved all their best shots at the Wildrose to leak to the press this week. I think its going to be difficult for the Wildrose to keep the moderate vote from fleeing the party.

Edit: Also, Hunsperger apparently stands behind his blog and comments so much, he's already taken the blog down. Not just a biggot, but a coward too!

Double edit: More Wildrose biggoted fun!

Abstract: To affirm homosexuality is to insult the nature and being of God, writes Calgary pastor Ron Leech. He points out that homosexuality is a sin that violates God's intention for human creation itself. Deliberately choosing to sin is an intentional rebellion, and homosexuality distorts the image of God, which comprises both male and female, a complementarity eternal and everlasting.

December 19, 2004

Let me say first that I believe all sin is equally reprehensible to God, and He does not identify "levels of sin."

Second, I do not hate homosexuals, lesbians, adulterers or, for that matter, rapists. What I do hate is sin and its devastating effects on people's lives.

Third, I do strive to love and support everyone, whether I agree with their lifestyle choices or not.

Now, in our great nation, we have many opinions about marriage. But my dictionary says opinions are "beliefs or judgments, based on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty." We all have different opinions, but our opinions can be wrong.

A fact of life, in contrast, is "any aspect of human existence that must be acknowledged or regarded as unalterable." And the fact is, marriage between one man and one woman is ordained and maintained in its integrity by God and His Word.

Marriage is not my idea or yours; it was God's design from the beginning.

Jesus said, "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning made them male and female? And said 'for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and he shall be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh'. So, they are no longer two, but one flesh; therefore what God has joined together, let no man separate." (Matthew 19:4-6)

Marriage is the foundational institution of all human society, always and everywhere. It is a promise reaching across all cultures, beyond all borders, over all creeds, standing all tests of time. No war can defeat it, no pestilence can destroy it, no invention can replace it.

Though the world changes, there are some things we can't afford to change. If we try, we will bury only ourselves as a country, and the family will live on elsewhere after we are gone.

Gays and lesbians have the right to live as they choose, but they don't have the right to redefine marriage. And it is outrageous that our prime minister, courts or Parliament might violate our political rights in this crucial matter. If anyone can change marriage, let it be the Canadian people. Then at least those who will suffer the results will have been responsible for them.

Marriage is God's own standard and it has been entrusted to all humanity. Marriage affirms God's ideal of a loving creation. When it comes to raising children, the Bible, science and common sense all agree that mothers and fathers together benefit them in every possible dimension.

Redefining marriage to allow the deliberate exclusion of either a father or mother sends a terrible message to the next generation. It says children don't deserve both parents, and it will further demoralize their own efforts to become parents themselves.

Teachers and parents will be gravely affected by this decision; they will be open to all sorts of social engineering.

And it will set a precedent for lawyers to bring litigation on polygamy and even worse distortions, undermining what is left of our social consensus.

It is biblically, morally and practically reprehensible for the government to pretend that two men or two women engaged in mutual stimulation are the same as a husband and wife, as potential parents. Marriage is not about equal rights; it isn't a special-interest group. It is a repository for the future of humanity.

All Canadians -- including childless homosexuals -- benefit from a healthy marriage culture. All Canadians pay the price in increased taxes, mental illness, crime and human suffering when mothers and fathers choose to divorce or not marry. Adding same-sex marriages to a hodgepodge of family groupings will only worsen the confusion.

So I am against same-sex marriage for four reasons:

First, were homosexuality at all legitimate, the Bible would include options other than natural heterosexuality; yet homosexuality is only ever condemned.

So, second, homosexuality, like every other sin, is a conscious rebellion against divinely created order. Scriptures (like Romans 1:26-32) clearly call homosexual behaviour sinful. To deliberately choose to practise a sin is intentional rebellion.

Third, deliberately sterile homosexuality violates God's intention for human creation itself. The Bible says, "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. So God blessed them and God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.' " (Genesis 1:27-28)

Fourth, homosexuality distorts the image of God. The image of God comprises both male and female, a complementarity eternal and everlasting.

To affirm homosexuality is to distort the image of God, to insult the nature and being of God.

I urge all citizens of Canada to pray and do all they can to contact their Member of Parliament and uphold the sanctity of marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

http://www.faithandmedia.org/articles/show/233

Ron Leech is running in Calgary/Greenway

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

The Wildrose is basically going to be holding on for dear life this last week. But I'd imagine the PCs have saved all their best shots at the Wildrose to leak to the press this week. I think its going to be difficult for the Wildrose to keep the moderate vote from fleeing the party.

All the fear mongering by Redford is really going to gain them votes? I wish both sides would stop this nonsense and stick to telling voters what they are going to do for us. I dispise the mudslinging and half truths that get reported. Voters aren't as stupid as politicians think we are

[Dion]

What was the breathless fuss about? Redford wanted to point out that Lyle Oberg (a former Tory Health minister and now a Wildrose adviser) was involved with a private hospital that might be built in B.C.

Was she merely seeking to inform reporters of an intriguing coincidence? Of course not. Redford was hoping to raise public fears about Wildrose’s commitment to public health care.

It was “hidden agenda” stuff worthy of federal Liberal attacks on Stephen Harper and the federal Conservatives in the 2004 and 2006 national elections.

Remember the Liberals’ ominous 2006 drumbeat ads in which they charged that if the Harper Conservatives were elected there would be “Soldiers with guns. In our cities. In Canada." Expect similar baseless threats from the Tories against Wildrose in the coming week.

There will be allegations galore that if Wildrose is elected your community will not get the school it needs or the hospital it requires. Seniors will not get the aid they deserve and public services will suffer.

Nowhere will there be any recognition that Alberta already spends the most per capita of any government in the country on health, education and other public services or that the province pays the highest public-sector wages.

Those who love big government are never satisfied no matter how many tax dollars are spent.

The Tories might even try putting the fear in voters of cuts to rival those under Ralph Klein in 1993. Never mind that those cuts were made by their party. The Tories, of course, are “not your father’s PC Party” any longer.

The Tories will do everything they can to pull together those who, like themselves, benefit from big government and ever-expanding budgets.

It wouldn’t be pretty, but with any luck it will all be over in a week.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2012/04/1...-without-fight

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Dion

All the fear mongering by Redford is really going to gain them votes? I wish both sides would stop this nonsense and stick to telling voters what they are going to do for us. I dispise the mudslinging and half truths that get reported. Voters aren't as stupid as politicians think we are

If fear mongering is telling us that biggots are going to come to office, than yeah I kinda am afraid. I don't want religious zealouts telling me how to live my life thanks.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

If fear mongering is telling us that biggots are going to come to office, than yeah I kinda am afraid. I don't want religious zealouts telling me how to live my life thanks.

Fear mongering is telling voters what he might do. Personaly I think the guy is a biggot and I highly doubt he'd be able to legislate anything - if that's what he chooses to do in the future. He made a personal opinion on a blog and I would think voters are smart enough to read that and not vote the guy in without some leader telling them so..

[Senator Clay Davis]

But the blog getting out here has to come from somewhere, and people instantly label it as fear mongering. I don't think showing the electorate what certain candidates personal philosophies are is fear mongering. Its simply saying "Here's a couple of guys who clearly think gay people aren't really human. Do you want someone who holds intolerant views making decisions that affect everyone?"

Of course we shouldn't even be having this discussion anymore in the 21st century (equal rights for all), but obviously some members of the Wildrose party would very much like to have this discussion again.

[Senator Clay Davis]

[Resolute 14]

Conservative "hidden agenda" attack ads all over tonight's episode of Canada's Got Talent. Redford's definitely running scared.

[kn]

I missed the memo where it was cool to beat up on conservative Christians. Some people on the twitter feed who purport to be tolerant of all faiths seem to get genuine glee out of doing so. I highly doubt any Muslim and Jewish candidates will garner a similar level of scrutiny. It seems we are to be tolerant except when we encounter religious views we vehemently dislike.

Perhaps one of the lawyers on the board can answer this question but does a religious view of "homosexuality as a sin" constitute "hate speech"? I think that's an important question and seems to be the implication in the reaction I'm reading.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by SebC

So... does this guy lose his bozo deposit, or is there a statute of limitations on it?

Edit: link broke, here's a screenshot.

Spoiler!

Updated post with a screenshot.

If the Wildrose party wins the election, Danielle Smith should return $1000 of my dollars for letting this guy run.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by kn

I missed the memo where it was cool to beat up on conservative Christians. Some people on the twitter feed who purport to be tolerant of all faiths seem to get genuine glee out of doing so. I highly doubt any Muslim and Jewish candidates will garner a similar level of scrutiny. It seems we are to be tolerant except when we encounter religious views we vehemently dislike.

Perhaps one of the lawyers on the board can answer this question but does a religious view of "homosexuality as a sin" constitute "hate speech"? I think that's an important question and seems to be the implication in the reaction I'm reading.

You don't need a lawyer for that one. It does. Just under the guise of a western religion that seems to justify it for some.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Conservative "hidden agenda" attack ads all over tonight's episode of Canada's Got Talent. Redford's definitely running scared.

Maybe she is, I don't know, but if I were running the Wildrose campaign I would be going full throttle this week. I attended a forum in my riding today which I would describe as a run of the mill Calgary riding. The forum was actually for two neighboring ridings and I would guess neither is a slam dunk for anyone. Granted, forums aren't full of undecided voters, nonetheless it was far from a Wildrose room as far as I could tell. While there is dissatisfaction with the PCs there were also way more cheers for them than for the other candidates.

Truthfully, that proves nothing and its purely anecdotal. As issues like the candidates personal views are brought into question (whether they are relevant or not) it is bad in terms of wooing the undecided voter. Even in one of the ridings here where the PC was terrible today, I drove through his riding this evening and he has a lot of signs on private property. He was in a close race to be the worst candidate on stage today actually and had a lot of pathetic and weird answers, but sadly it might be enough.

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by kn

I missed the memo where it was cool to beat up on conservative Christians. Some people on the twitter feed who purport to be tolerant of all faiths seem to get genuine glee out of doing so. I highly doubt any Muslim and Jewish candidates will garner a similar level of scrutiny. It seems we are to be tolerant except when we encounter religious views we vehemently dislike.

The #abvote hashtag and conversation has been a bit of a gong show for a while. Trust me, I've spent far too much time over the past month looking at it. That being said, it doesn't shock me that it's that heated at the moment, the whole thing has been boiling over for weeks. When you have an unfiltered and unmoderated avenue to express opinions with a bit of anonymity, it can turn bad really quick.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by kn

I highly doubt any Muslim and Jewish candidates will garner a similar level of scrutiny.

Yep, typical Alberta -- rake the Christians over the coals while everyone else gets a free ride.

God willing, one day in this province we'll have an election between Christian conservatives and conservatives who are Christians, and our long provincial nightmare at the hands of the multi-culti pinkos will be over.

[Slava]

Well I used that hashtag a lot today, partly because it seemed appropriate and partly because I might make the top tweets for @albertatweets !

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by kn

I missed the memo where it was cool to beat up on conservative Christians. Some people on the twitter feed who purport to be tolerant of all faiths seem to get genuine glee out of doing so. I highly doubt any Muslim and Jewish candidates will garner a similar level of scrutiny. It seems we are to be tolerant except when we encounter religious views we vehemently dislike.

If only the WRP had a candidate of Muslim or Jewish faith, then we could find out.

Originally Posted by kn

Perhaps one of the lawyers on the board can answer this question but does a religious view of "homosexuality as a sin" constitute "hate speech"? I think that's an important question and seems to be the implication in the reaction I'm reading.

Can't answer that question until we get a decision from the Supreme Court in Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission v. William Whatcott, et al. (some time this year hopefully.)

In any event, in my view, its irrelevant. Statements don't have to constitute "hate speech" before the electorate can legitimately say "I don't want people who hold these views to be in charge of important decisions that affect my province." For example, I think that if a candidate openly believed in a flat earth or a 10,000 year old earth, those are also legitimate things to discuss in the context of an election campaign.

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well I used that hashtag a lot today, partly because it seemed appropriate and partly because I might make the top tweets for @albertatweets !

LOL. You never know. You never know.

But to be honest that's one of those instances where #abvote is really useful. (There are other uses for it, but that's probably one of the easiest to understand) I'm always curious as to what's being said in these forums and seeing the reaction is very fascinating. So thanks for tweeting the conversation today.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I think I know who RougeUnderoos isn't voting for...