quote:the way my post is set up implies that i do not like harper particularly, and thought it would be comical to compare his villification to Ender's, seeing as how this is an OSC forum, woman
Okay . I'm just trying to keep things pleasant between the "for" and "against" groups. I wasn't trying to be snippy.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Let's not forget sociopaths, however, who are perfectly convinced of their values and experience no discomfort while engaging in seriously warped acts.
Sociopaths seem to have less of a problem with being themselves and more of a problem with fitting into society as a whole. That doesn't contradict Mr. Squicky's defintion of psychological health.
I think I'm going too far in defending my position. Clearly sociopaths have problems. However, I contend that when it comes to sexual behavior, living in accordance with your beliefs is necessary to psychological health. Which pretty much means I disagree with Squicky's opinion that Canada's views of sexuality are empirically better than America's, in case that wasn't already clear. Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
But again, we can measure psychopathology to a certain extent. It can be demonstrated with a certain degree of confidence that viewing and reacting to sexual stimuli/threats in certain ways (in accordance with tthe whole big field of studying the healthiness/unhealthiness of responses to stresses and threats) leads to more unhealthy and even psychopathological effects.
The human being, like other aspects of reality, is not infinitely malleable. There are rules that govern what is going to occur when we do things. Just like it's not going to be healthy for you to gorge yourself on fast food on a regular basis, taking certain attiudes and actions in psychological areas, such as sex, is not going to be healthy. We've got a whole section of the DSM devoted to sexual disorders, specifically because these things can be shown to be bad for people.
We are not there yet in terms of a huge deal of specificity, even on the personal level let alone the wider social one that we're talking about here, but science is not, as some people seem to be suggesting, a binary phenomenom. Freud was right in many ways and this has been borne out by the last hundred of so years of research. Extreme anixiety and repression to sexual stimuli is not a heathy way to be. It leads to and springs from an unhealthy, warped psyche. I can't definitively prove that going nuts over seeing a brief flash of the human body is necessarily, in all cases, a less healthy response than not going nuts, but I can suggest it with a reasonably high degree of confidence.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Bob, given our judicial history of interpreting the Charter extremely loosely, do you really think it that inconceivable, even improbable, that some judge not too far down the road will find that "equality" rights trump freedom of religion, or at least of open expression of that religion?
Of course it's not inconceivable. It's just highly improbably. There are a lot of special protections within the charter you’d have to change in order to legislating religion, not to mention the *complete* about face that the public would have to go through. Look, I know religious people feel like they're under attack and are being persecuted, but let's not forget that they are still the vast and undisputed majority in this country. And beyond that, I'm pretty sure that the majority of people who don't identify with a religion are still pretty big on religious freedoms. Heck, we even have religious courts that people are free to use.
quote:In fact, there already are. The bishop of Calgary is currently being investigated by the Alberta Human Rights Commission for distributing litterature that was exactly in line with the teachings of his church, namely that homosexuality is a sin and encourageing people to oppose the bill.
The oft maligned and misunderstood laws in Canada on hate crime and hate literature do not even begin to apply here. Is he inciting genocide? No? Carry on. This is simply a situation where someone he doesn't understand the laws is making a stink for media attention (both the man making the charge and his supporters, and the religious people who feel persecuted by it).
quote:The Knights of Columbus (a catholic's men group, it's important to note) in B.C. are presently being sued for refusing to let a lesbian couple marry in their building.
This would probably have to be on the grounds that the Knights of Columbus are offering or providing public services within the protection of section 8a of the Human Rights Act. Of course, it isn't. It doesn't have a chance to win. It's not just religious organisations that are attacked under pretext of section 8a, look up Gould v. The Yukon Order of Pioneers (which also charged them of sexism under the Act). Tossed out. You can deny someone entry based on sexual orientation, gender, race, ethnicity, height, weight, eye colour, accent, whatever the hell you want.
Look, I know you already knew that these cases would be tossed out, but you have to understand that their primary function is to bring media attention to the situation in the hopes that the public will back them and pressure the government and courts into making sweeping changes to the constitution in order to legislate religion. I'm saying that I both doubt the Canadian public could be made to do this and that I doubt there could be enough pressure placed on the courts to decide "Religious freedom? Yeah, what *were* we thinking?"
quote:You can take that to the bank.
If it happens I'll owe you one grovel subject to 0.3% interest/year.
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Oh, but it will be fun to watch Spain and Canada burn in hell. I mean, we're right next door to Canada. We have the best possible view. It will be fun to watch their societies crumble, their moral fiber rend and shred, their sense of justice and humanity wither and die in the white-hot sun of sin and impudence and blasphemy, Canada's no-longer-manly hockey teams spontaneously combust into a billion meaty bloody God-splattered bits, Spanish children drop their jamón sandwiches in terror and scream and shriek and turn into instant puddles of fiery confused goo.
Why all the vicious carnage? Why the reign of terror? Simple, silly: Canada and Spain have done the unthinkable, the unconscionable. They have legalized gay marriage, everywhere, in their respective countries. Oh my God, they are so going to burn.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
. I'm just trying to keep things pleasant between the "for" and "against" groups. I wasn't trying to be snippy.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
