Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

Ablonczy/Pride: Maybe Brad Trost wasn't so far off the mark.

by kadyomalley on Wednesday, July 8, 2009 8:36pm - 147 Comments

At least, as far his understanding of why Diane Ablonczy is no longer in charge of handing out money to festivals.

David Akin has a copy of the email that went out to Conservative MPs on June 26th – just two weeks after Ablonczy made what would turn out to be her final marquee funding announcement. Reading through, it’s suddenly not that difficult to imagine how a backbencher like Brad Trost might have thought that Ablonczy had been stripped of the file as a direct result of public reaction to her decision to fund the Pride parade — and that PMO, or at least whoever sent out this email on its behalf, felt the same way he did about it:

From: Alerte-Info-Alert <Alerte-Info-Alert@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>

To: Alerte-Info-Alert <Alerte-Info-Alert@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>

Sent: Fri Jun 26 15:18:41 2009

Subject: Marquee Tourism Events Program / Programme des manifestations touristiques de renom

Recently many MPs have received an increasing number of constituent communications related to the Marquee Tourism Events Program.

The program is now directly the responsibility of Industry Minister Tony Clement. He will be conducting a review of the entire program to ensure that the funding is providing genuine stimulus to the economy.

The Minister’s office and the PMO are working together to support Caucus members and help them respond to constituents.

For further information, please contact Regional Affairs in the Prime Minister’s Office:

Coincidentally, just a few days earlier, the Institute for Canadian Values — headed up, as it happens, by one Rev. Charles McVety — had issued an alert of its own, which called upon right-thinking Canadians to let the government know what they thought about giving taxpayer dollars to “sex parades” like Pride :

Funding sex parades is not just politically destructive- it is also spiritually devastating. Scripture records numerous admonitions to not promote immorality. The first chapter of Romans teaches us that God will turn one over to vile passions and a reprobate mind. He then gives a litany of inevitable consequences that will follow. Paul Martin is a clear example of this immutable spiritual law. Mr. Martin had a stellar career as the Finance Minister and most believed he would become a great Prime Minster. Once he achieved the office, Paul Martin spent all his political capital to redefine marriage. Everything fell apart and he ended his short term with newspapers reporting that he was the worst Prime Minister in the history of Canada. Paul Martin lost his life-long goal, his legacy and integrity. Stephen Harper has done quite well for families as Prime Minister for 3 years raising the age of sexual consent and attempting to protect children. However I am afraid that if he continues to move in this direction he will see his career could abruptly end in turmoil and disgrace.

The hope is that the course can be corrected. If you and I, plus our friends, families and colleagues voice our opposition to this program, hopefully the Prime Minster will listen and reverse the path he has chosen.

Call the Prime Minister’s office and express your views. 1-613-992-4211
Call your Member of Parliament and request that the government stop wasting our money on destructive sex parades.

Coincidence? Or cause and effect? Somehow, ITQ suspects that Charles McVety would claim the latter. She’s just surprised he hasn’t popped up in the news taking credit for the whole thing, like he did last year with C-10, and the government’s ill-fated attempt to prevent naughtily-titled movies like Young People Fucking from taking advantage of the film tax credit.

Of course, since that little bout of bombast ultimately led to the bill’s demise — although not before providing ITQ with ample fodder for liveblogging, including an memorable appearance by McVety himself — perhaps he has learned that, as with valour, discretion can be the better part of a effective grassroots lobby campaign.

Tags: charles mcvety, Diane Ablonczy, maybe brad trost was right, pride goeth ..., surely just a freakish coincidence of timing

More by kadyomalley

http://intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

Only in Canada eh?

I want Red Rose Tea Chimp parties.
[youtube -918OMwCx6w http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-918OMwCx6w youtube]

Darrell

Careful,

You're going to stir up the creationist crowd.

Ceeger

I'm a Creationist, but I admit that I struggle with it sometimes. Because I just can't understand why God would create an idiot like you.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

That's not creationism, unless God created Darrell in 4004 BC.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

If anybody doubted that the CPC is beholden to frighteningly fundamentalist special interests, look no further.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Meanwhile, the whole friggin' country actually ends up beholden to every single interest group out there instead. Guess that counts for diversity, in some sort of polluted, twisted way. This is the kind of inevitable nonsense you get when you surrender so much power and decision-making to a central planner. The pigs line up and jostle at the trough.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Quite right, it's very disturbing, in fact it's ruining politics (especially in a minority situation). Still, homophobes are rather worse than the dairy sector.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Worse in what way?

If the government wasn't poking its nose everywhere, those homophobes would be blissfully irrelevant. Whereas the coddled dairy farmers (Coddled? You call getting up at 4:30AM every g-d-mned day coddled? You stay in that business willingly, don't you?) have exacted untold damage to the economy and especially to low-income families. Over decades.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

As a low-income milk-drinker, I sympathise somewhat, though I can see there are benefits too ("For a bold peasantry, their country’s pride, / When once destroy’d, can never be supply’d," etc.). The benefits of insulting gay people, helping teenaged girls get pregnant, associating sensuality with guilt, etc. etc., i.e. the Christianist agenda, escape me.
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Please outline those benefits you see to society of supporting an incredibly inefficient government-enforced cartel industry whose revenue has a government-enforced floor. Furthermore, please do not abandon basic economics (scarce resources, supply and demand) in your reply.

As to the benefits that escape you: here's the thing: Make government less than all-bloody-powerful and watch the influence of these toxic loudmouths shrivel away…
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

The benefits were already outlined in my Goldsmith quotation, but here is the full passage from The Deserted Village:

Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates, and men decay;
Princes and lords may flourish, or may fade;
A breath can make them, as a breath has made:
But a bold peasantry, their country’s pride,
When once destroy’d, can never be supply’d.

In other words, to give supply & demand free rein might lower the cost of milk, but it would deprive the country of yeomen. What price yeomen? A dollar extra on a 2L carton doesn't seem too expensive to me.

As to making government less powerful so as to forestall Christianism, I don't quite get you. Wouldn't the Christianists, if they ever took power, just vamp government interference back up? I doubt that, if government influence were curtailed in the dairy industry among others, Christianists would wake up and say, "Oh, what's the use, we're living in a libertarian paradise anyway. Might as well restrict our zealotry to our own lives." That is apparently not God's will.
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Wow, Jack, that Dairy Farmers of Canada cheese-shaped fridge magnet has you brainwashed, dead to rights!

As to your interpretation of the alleged will of some mythical creature: It's not the government interference in agriculture, Jack. It's the interference in everything, including a friggin' festival & parade in a single city (and every other friggin' single city…). These homophobic twerps have a podium because there can be bitchin' and whinin' about public money going towards something of which they disapprove. Take away the government subsidy of so much of our society and we can all go back to ignoring them.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

I don't disagree with you, MYL, at least when it comes to the government handing out grants, though I think we have different reasons. E.g. for both the Pride parade and festival, whatever happened to spontaneity? If more money extracted from more serfs would enhance their moral and aesthetic effect, I would be all for it; but I tend to think raw entrepreneurship in the arts (including the art of parading) makes for much better art. Random example to follow by request only.
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

… by request only…

(it's been an enjoyable conversation, but he wants to go even further??!? Aieee, don't encourage him, but do your best to be polite about it)

Wow, Jack, look at the time! Why don't I take a rain cheque…
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Sounds good. My rage against this particular example has a long half-life.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Wascally_Wabbit Wascally_Wabbit

MYL is out to lunch at a milk bar as usual.__Funny he should base his economic arguments on an industry that has been regulated by quotas for generations.__Milk quotas DO have a market value though – I'm surprised they aren't listed prominently in the Commodities Markets
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Same Q to WW, then, whose gratuitous insult is unaccompanied by any actual argument, except to highlight a concept (quotas) that possesses a "market value" only because the market itself is so incredibly distorted:

Please outline those benefits you see to society of supporting an incredibly inefficient government-enforced cartel industry whose revenue has a government-enforced floor.
http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

I fail to understand why you don't view the government-has-its-hands-in-everything as an investment on the part of the government. It generates revenue, does it not? Or do you believe that fundamentally, governments should not be trying to gain more for its tax dollars because it doesn't fall within your ideological suasion…?
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

I fail to understand why you MYL don't view the government-has-its-hands-in-everything as an investment on the part of the government. It generates revenue, does it not? Or do you believe that fundamentally, governments should not be trying to gain more for its tax dollars because it doesn't fall within your ideological suasion…?
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Austin, please define the revenue-generating "it," so I may offer a reply. I will check back for a response tomorrow, as I am unplugging from the web for about 24h.

http://intensedebate.com/people/JustinWordswrth JustinWordswrth

Are the lactose-intolerant complaining about the Dairy Processors Association?

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

While Kady, no doubt exudes a professional commitment to objective – and incredibly entertaining and informative – practice of the craft, did anyone else really doubt it?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

I keep hoping that their time in office, surrounded by Public Service grown-ups, will civilise them — and I think it has in some cases (Kenney and Harper himself, I'd say, are far more adult than they were before). But the rank and file is still hairy and uncouth; what's disturbing about this story is that Harper apparently feels the need to appease their barbarity.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

doesn't that detract from the notion that he has grown up?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

I don't think he's ceased to be malevolent — cf. the FUFU — but that he's gradually realising he's already PM and shouldn't waste his time on this Nixonian stuff. Been a long time coming, though, and people don't really change. Still, I doubt he has it in for Toronto Pride; this weird Ablonczy-Trost thing strikes me more as a necessity for keeping his base happy. Which means they are powerful indeed, since he's just lost all chance of winning any downtown Toronto ridings (which should, IMHO, be his goal — with Quebec gone, he has nowhere to expand except Toronto and, I guess, Northern Ontario). I'm thinking that a lot of that fabulous war chest of theirs comes from middle-class religious zealots (from all across the country). If you've got 100 evangelical churches out there, with 20% of each large congregation maxing out on political donations, that buys a lot of puffins.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

It does. And, I certainly agree with you on 1) the power of the fundamentalists to influence the CPC and, as a sad result, this country; 2) his dismally short-sighted 'growth-strategy' (Has he never asked himself "Where the hell would my base possibly go to?"?); 3) that he is malevolent.
CAPS

His base would go to the brand new Reform Party that would eventually arise.

CAPS

Jack, If you truly think Kenney and Harper are more adult now then you must have had a really low opinion of them before.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Yup.
http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

Still higher than mine methinks…

http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

MY EYES!
Ya, Right

Well the best part of this story is that nobody has accused Trost of being intelligent, phew that was a close one!

http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

It is kind of interesting though how this has immediately turned into a larger question about Ablonczy and the PMO while the one who got the ball rolling has been an afterthought in this entire affair.

Murray Anderson

do you enjoy destroying peoples lives Kady? I imagine that you must because, after all, you have to make a living somehow. Why not concentrate on what is important at this time instead of just drumming up things that might make some money for Maclean's, or just move over to the Star.

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

I'm probably going to regret asking this, but how exactly does this post "destroy peoples lives"?

Ceeger

Well, I am not Murray, and I hesitate to speak for him, but I would guess he's generally wondering why you choose to denigrate things you do not understand (religious convictions based in Scripture, morals, etc.) and why you have the breathtaking hypocrisy to enjoy the privileges, rights and freedoms that a society based on Judeo-Christian values has granted you, yet spend your time ridiculing Christianity. (I base this not just on this post, but on your record).
Unlike Murray, who can perhaps be accused of hyperbole in his opening question, I do understand the reason why: You're a screaming lefty and that's just what screaming lefties do.
And that's OK. We'll just turn the other cheek … again, and unlike some other religions I could name.
But in your case, I reserve the right to decide which cheeks I turn for you.

http://intensedebate.com/people/DZulu Dave Z.

Morality is not the exclusive province of religion. Moreover, last time I checked, our government is founded on largely secular principles, among them the separation of church and state. Please understand that I don't think religion is worthless. It can enrich peoples' lives, and help us all live more peacefully together. However, to imply that the only reason why there is order in Canada can be found in the Bible is just wrong. I can think of plenty of passages from that book that are unacceptable in our society, and not even half of them are in the Pentateuch.

Ceeger

I disagree. Our government is founded on largely Christian principles. Those still resonate in our laws and underpin our institutions. It is only in this new era of secularism that we have abandoned those and begun to chip away at the very foundation that is holding up the house.
Martin Levenson

What rot! Surely you can comprehend that the values inherent in Christianity are NOT exlusive to Christianity? Most religious teachings, of any religion, include some variant of the Ten Commandments, because it's functional to the society that people not kill each other, not covet each others' wives (although I should note that this particular one is probably least observed), not create images of other gods, etcetera.

It's just an accident that our laws are "based" on Christian values, because that's what the people who set up our system of government were aware of. I'm pretty sure if Eric the Red had stuck around, our laws would be based on "Norse" principles…and wouldn't be all that different, because laws must be functional to the society.
http://runesmith.blogspot.com runesmith

Actually, our Parliament is based on the Norse 'Althing', and much of the structure of our government is derived from the Greek and Roman, so… yeah.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

That's cool, I didn't know that. Come to think of it, if we just cut the mead ration, QP might be more peaceful.
baldygirl

Finally, someone talking sense!
http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Here here Martin. Well said.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Habitant Habitant

Ceeger, seriously… You gotta slack off on the righteousness pal,! If anything, your coming off as a detriment to your faith (and highly presumptuous in regards to what Kady may or may not understand/appreciate about scriptures, morals, convictions, etc…).
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Habitant Habitant

Ceeger, seriously… You gotta slack off on the righteousness pal,! If anything, your coming off as a detriment to your faith (and highly presumptuous in regards to what Kady may or may not understand/appreciate about scriptures, morals, convictions, etc…).

As for juxtaposing (some of) the morals and principles that can be found in Christianity on to those that might exist in Canada and then finding them to be one and the same… Fascism to Canada (or better yet, fascism to Christianity) could be applied to the same exercise with a similar outcome. In a nutshell, your logic is flawed.
Ceeger

My self-righteousness is just a different brand than your's, Habitant. Your's is based in elitist arrogance as a Liberal; mine is based in religion. At least one ends in heaven. The other, apparently, ends in the opposition benches of Parliament.

Anon

Man, such bile.

You're possessed. See a priest.

Ceeger

Yes, I know Anon … when the secularists make a harsh observation it is clever and mainstream. When a Christian does so, it is 'bile' and we need an exorcism because something must obviously be wrong with us.
We're to be seen and not heard, right?
Well, some of us are getting tired of that. Even Christ overturned the moneychangers table in the Temple courtyard, when their hypocrisy become too much for Him to bear.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Clever? Where?
Anon

I'm a Christian. Pretty devout, too. But you're just nasty. Go and repent.
Ceeger

Ah, judge not Anon. Lots of nasty people in the Bible were saved. I do need to repent for many things, but not of anything I've written here tonight.
Jenn

Hey, how come you can judge, but Anon can't?
http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

Cuz' Ceeger likes to pretend to be in the position of God, rather than let God decide…
http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

I'm always curious about this…do you have so little confidence in your own religious faith that you fear that it is unable to withstand this "onslaught of secularlism"?
Ceeger

You confuse exasperation with fear. Of course we are exasperated at the continued secularist attacks on our Christian faith, especially in light of the fact that it is that very same faith that has made Canada a place where secularists have the freedoms to spout their religion-hating agendas as publically and as frequently as they choose.
If you doubt me, go live in a country where the Christian faith is not welcome and see how you fare once you start dissing the big guy. A little exasperation among the faithful at the secularists' antics here sure beats bloody street riots and beheadings over there, wouldn't you agree?
The exasperation arises from the fact that you are able to indulge in your cowardice. The same darts that you fling at Christians – whom you know must forgive and turn the other cheek – you would not dare fling at other faiths that are taught to respond forcefully to insults against their deity.
I'd respect you more if you were an equal-opportunity offender of all religions. But that line of work is too dangerous for the high-foreheads that haunt this place.
http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

I think you are simply confused…but that is okay. God accepts all, even the lowest among us.
Canuckistanian

well, kumbaya ma lord to you too ;-)
baldygirl

You SERIOUSLY think that Christians are seen and not heard? Christian ideals of 'morality' are what have been robbing people of rights and continue to rob people of rights. You're heard. You're seen. This is kind of sounding like you're crying 'reverse discrimination.'

Gays, women, youth, people of different colour and faith (including atheists)—they're increasingly NOT seen.

TheWest

Hey Ceeger, great post, do me a favour, email me at: thewest@bigfoot.com. I've got a question for you. Thanks!
http://intensedebate.com/people/Be_rad Be_rad

I have read Kady for a long time and she has never, in my experience, ridiculed religion. Its practitioners – in particular the ones who feel they are in a position to dictate pubic life – may have been somewhat targeted, but not disproportionately.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

Well, Kady. I don't know if you regret it yet, but I certainly do.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Please expand: whose life is Kady destroying here? I see no corpses on this page.

http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

Maybe the children. They seem to be destroyed quite a bit, what with people not thinking of them and all. Or the oceans, they're getting destroyed a lot too apparently.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

The oceans! Won't somebody think of the oceans?

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

The Court of Public Opinion is getting mighty ticked and impatient… Crown Prosecutor Anderson, do you have any EVIDENCE of destroyed lives, or is this case dismissed before opening statements?

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

Well, other than the corpse of C-10, but really, it just laid down and died — no murder involved.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

And, last I checked. C-10 is not "peoples." So I guess we must wait for Murray's word-for-word indictment before your high-priced lawyers mount a defence.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

to the degree that the zealots prefer a literal interpretation I am sure Murray will be more than willing to provide the goods.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Alas, not as of yet…

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

sorry MYL, i guess my sarcasm was not clear.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

did you not also get a great autographed-wonkeriffic-parliamentary-based-piece-of-memorabilia Kady?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

You would not believe how much money Maclean's makes when Kady writes posts like this. Filthy lucre doesn't begin to describe it. Hey, everyone! Kady's writing about theology and public policy again! We're all gonna be rich!

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Why — is there a special government grant for that, too?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

There should be. There is nowhere to discuss theology nowadays.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

I hear there's plenty of room in most houses of worship across the country. Nowhere, shmowhere…

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

I must confess I wouldn't know, but in my experience it's a bit hard to get a word in edgewise.

http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

Does Maclean's accept traveler's cheques?

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

no but i heard it takes CTC money.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

Everybody's pushing that darn book.
http://intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

I get the part where Maclean's gets rich when Kady writes these posts.

But do all the contributors/writers (what is the proper term) share in the profits? Pro-rated with number of words typed? Pro-rated with number of comments?
Canuckistanian

SATANISM! trying to undo our godly judeo-christian values upon whose foundation this house of sin is built; the power of christ compels you…to never criticize the faithful servants of the lord that is this CPC gov't. skibblyddibblydooodadazizizi zappaitybipitiboowackashackalacka timinyliminykadyomalley…sorry, speaking in tongues is more effective in spoken form ;-)

http://intensedebate.com/people/DerekPearce DerekPearce

LMAO!

Seriously though, this whole little episode reminds a vast swath of the electorate why the Conservatives give us the heebie-jeebies.

Ceeger

And yet a 36% margin of support for the Conservatives in today's poll. And, right behind him at 30%, a Liberal leader whom the Republican party in the U.S. endorses (http://www.republicansforignatieff.com/).
It sounds to me like 66 per cent of the Canadian populace is not sharing your spine-wracking chills and is pretty comfortable with right of centre politicians.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Hmm Ceeger. I see it as 64% of the Canadian populace does not share the spine-wracking chills of the CPC.

Cam

hmmm I wonder how many of those making accusations of denigrating religous beliefs were yposting elsewhere saying Catholics were over-reacting when critical of Harper going up for Communion and then doing whatever he did with it (at best he "saved it for later" ?).

Kady, when not destroying lives, do you enjoy making fudge? Long walks by the Rideau Canal?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

For every life that ITQ destroys, she resurrects ten corpses. Metaphorically of course.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Oh great. People snuffed out way too soon, AND a bunch of zombies all over the place. Gee thanks, Kady…

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

As Nixon would say, I mean "she resurrects corpses" in the best sense of those words.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

As Nixon would say, I meant "she resurrects corpses" in the best sense of those words.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

It would take a linguist to eke out "the best sense" of those words, I suppose. And I don't mean that in a bad way, unless you say I did…
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Poor MYL, I have bewitched you with my pedantry. The actual Nixon quote is far better, of course: he said that Eisenhower "was a far more complex and devious man than most people realized, and in the best sense of those words."

Ceeger

Why do you wonder, Cam? Just ask us, we'll tell you. I wasn't critical of Harper at all for pocketing the host. Transubstantiation is a Catholic dogma that has no Scriptural basis and that was devised by Popes centuries after Christ, along with the sale of indulgences and the Inquisition. So Harper can do what he wants with the wafer. It is just a wafer.

Cam

thanks for making my point so clear Ceeger. It's okay to insult Roman Catholic beliefs when they might make Harper look bad. One set of rules for Conservatives, and one for everyone else.

Tell me, is it painful to speak out of both sides of your mouth like that?

Ceeger

I always find it amusing when people have to point out that their point was so clear, rather than simply letting it stand on its own merits. But I know you were just trying to clarify.
And how exactly did I insult Catholics? I merely stated some historical facts. If they are insulted by their own history, then that's their problem. I know historical revisionism in the name of 'tolerance' is all the rage amongst you lefties, but I prefer my history books unadulterated.

http://intensedebate.com/people/austinso austinso

I prefer my history books unadulterated

Hmmm…I think there is a Barney joke in there somewhere…

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

That is not very openminded, Ceeger. As I'm sure you know, the Catholics base their view of transubstantiation on Matthew 26:26-29. One may well disagree the belief but it is certainly grounded on that passage. Also, the early Christians absolutely believed in transubstantiation: one of the pagan libels against them was the charge of cannibalism.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

Thanks for that. Like most people who endured the tender mercies of catholic schools,
I just assumed it was because it said so in grade 3 catechism.
Otherwise, why was Sister Sadie cuffing my ear?

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Otherwise, why was Sister Sadie cuffing my ear?

Because she loves(ed) all God's children, and your soul deserved to be saved. Back then, anyways. She should probably leave your ear alone today.

Scott M.

Kady, when not destroying lives, do you enjoy making fudge? Long walks by the Rideau Canal?

She enjoys stalking John Baird as he bikes along the Canal Pathways. That's how I got into this gig – it all comes round.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Douglass Douglass

Thanks for writing this Kady. Regardless of what a few think, I think its important for us to have reporters such as yourself there to keep our parliamentarians on their toes. They are after all supposed to represent all of us, not just their religious base.

Ceeger

She's not a reporter. She's a blogger. There's a HUGE difference. Like standards of ethics, accuracy, etc.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

you're an ass.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

ITQ reports on stories, very often before anybody else is on them, and she is one of the most deeply ethical and scrupulously accurate members of the Canadian media.

Ceeger

I wonder how you'd feel about her reporting if she happened to lean right? Would she be deeply scrupulous and ethical then?
And if you want to date her, just ask her out — no need to flex your muscles for her from afar.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Of course she would still be deeply scrupulous and ethical. She is very non-partisan. The Tories happen to be in government right now so there is a brighter spotlight on them — that is the price of responsibility, and if one doesn't like it one shouldn't seek to govern. ITQ has several times focused on Liberal brouhahas too. If you haven't noticed, you either haven't been paying attention or you have some heavy axe to grind. Also, it's sexist to say that one can't admire the work of a female journalist without having an ulterior motive.
Ceeger

Funny how she says in another post that she squealed in anguish when she saw the Tories were leading at 36% in the latest poll. I guess that qualifies as non-partisanship in your book?
And as for what you qualify as sexism – who cares? Who are you, anyway, Ms. Lynch? Trolling the Internet under a pseudonym from CHRC HQ again, are we? Just spending a night sifting through my expressions of free-speech and trying to sniff out some intolerance?
Or could it just be I thought your hasty leap to her defence made you sound like a 40-year-old virgin hopelessly in love, and I called you on it?
http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

pls clarify by providing at least one explicit example of something that Kady wrote that is unethical and or inaccurate (that was not clarified with an update).

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

you're an ass, frankly.

Ceeger

Finally, someone with an honest opinion. I disagree with it, but at least he/she (both? undecided?) delivers it in a forthright manner, with no lengthy preamble.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

i don't know whether to thumbs up or thumbs down this comment. I enjoy the compliment paid, but…see comment above.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

well this has sent me into a cyber-meta-physical spin. i don't know whether to thumbs up or thumbs down this comment. I enjoy the compliment paid; but…see comment above.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

well this has sent me into a cyber-meta-physical spin. i don't know whether to thumbs up or thumbs down this comment. I enjoy the compliment paid; but there is the small matter of the source who is, well….see comment above.
Ceeger

Hey, you're succinct and to the point, and I can respect that. Debate is about disagreement and having your ideas and arguments tried. Some can take it; some can't. I can. On the odd occasion I even learn something I didn't know.
And besides, you're right, I absolutely can be an ass at times. Liberals' sneering arrogance bringing out the fire and brimstone in me.
Well, that a Dominos extra-large with jalapenos.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Right. And a name, and a reputation as a columnist, and an employer who would be just as equally subject to the laws of defamation, libel, …

It is easy to have an honest and respectful debate with someone who holds opposing views. Forcefully, even. You should try it sometime. These unsubstantiated cheap shots are beneath this forum.

You want to come out and accuse with any actual specifics regarding lapsed ethics, inaccuracy, or any other failure of responsible commentary, fine. Otherwise, kindly refrain from soiling the carpet here. The facilities are just down the hall on the right. Would you at least please scoop what you left here?

http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

Easier than trying to resurrect Senate Private Members Bills at this point.
Northern PoV

Nasty Katy
how dare you report the shenanigans of our beloved ruling party in a frivolous light.
Northern PoV

sorry – KaDy

my bad
http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

sure but not before his tenure was done.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

sure but not before his tenure was up. it would take at least a yr to fragment in a srs way.
http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

I used to have to go to church when I was living at home. Sometimes I'd go on Saturday at 6pm to avoid waking up the next day. A few times I told my parents I went and instead went to a local eatery. I felt I had to admit that for here for some reason.

André

Isn't having a choice a pip!

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

You must confess? Apparently, there are places for that, too…

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Finally my own starring role.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Wascally_Wabbit Wascally_Wabbit

I wonder if all of MYL's comments are created out of his own head – or insinuated into it by the Rev. Charles McVety?

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Having a bad day, WW, or have you decided to become a meaningless insulter from now on?

scf

meaningless insulter = leftist

So no, it's more than just a bad day.

Catherine

You're doing a fine job Kady.

Folks take their politics too seriously.

Diane Ablonczy would be exhibit C. After, Belinda and Ruby, from recent memory.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Torybaiter Torybaiter

McVety sounds as if he'd make a fine tory MP. He just percolates intolerance.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Wascally_Wabbit Wascally_Wabbit

Actually – there is quite possibly very serious political thought going into this by Harper strategists.
There are ridings in rural Ontario for example – where CHP always runs candidates – and they take votes (in Helena Guergis' riding I think a high point of 4,000+ votes). If they can be persuaded not to run – they would effectively consolidate votes behind the CPC candidate!
Canuckistanian

that was for ceegs
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/sharing sharing

Since religious organisations are not shy about advocating political positions they should be treated as any other political lobyists and subjected to the law which governs that profession. Any and all preferential tax treatment religious organisations receive should be immediately revoked. This should have been done a long time ago but McVety and his ilk only serve to point out the urgency stopping all state subsidies (in the form of tax exemptions) religious organisations receive. By its very nature religion is a force for intolerance, exclusion and ignorance. The government should not support it even indirectly through tax breaks.

Canuckistanian

"By its very nature religion is a force for intolerance, exclusion and ignorance."

my uncle is a minister in the United Church. the people at his church are some of the most tolerant and inclusive people i have met. the above quote ain't much better than ceeger.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sharing sharing

Unfortunately the United Church in its inclusivety and tolerance (though i am an agnostic I would agree with you on this) is a historical and actual exception as religious organisations go. Organised religion is by definition exclusive and intolerant. If you are not a member of the club the general rule is that you are damned, an apostate, a heretic, an infidel etc etc. You dont need to know a lot of history to find past and current examples of what these types of attitudes can and all to frequently do lead to. A curious survival of religious intolerance is the fact that catholics are legally prevented from being Canada's head of state.

Canuckistanian

but what about the unitarians…won't someone think of the unitarians ;-)

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Unitarian Universalists, actually, but close enough…
http://intensedebate.com/people/sharing sharing

Or the Bahai. There are other such exceptions. As a rule however enlightened tolerance is not a general characteristic of organized religions.

Martin Levenson

How can that be right? Romeo LeBlanc was a Catholic, and GG, which is the head of state in Canada. Maybe your're thinking of Great Britain? I don't think they've had a Catholic King or Queen since Henry VIII.

pubic mullet

Hey Martin, you misspeld your last name
http://intensedebate.com/people/sharing sharing

The GG is not the head of state. Elizabeth II is. The GG is her representative as are the Lieutenant governors in the provinces.

pubic mullet

hey hypocrite, i bet you don't support harper's cutting of taxpayer funding for political parties.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

What, the 75% tax credit is gone? That's great news.

karol

I still do not understand what this tempest in a teacup was all about??

Mr. Michael Ignatieff, the new leader of Liberal Party of Canada, wanted to re-cast himself in the eyes Canadian public as a populist and in order to accomplish this task he wanted to march in Gay Pride Parade in downtown Toronto. Ms. Ablonczy decided to accommodate his wish and she made sure that Toronto Gay Pride Parade event went as planned. (BTW this is not news, this is old style politics; I scratch your back when you need it and you scratch my back when I need it.)

Leader of Her Majety’s Loyal Oposition, Mr. Michael Ignatieff is a grown up man, who has ambitions to become next Prime Minister of Canada and therefore Canadian government of the day, regardless of it’s political stripes, has an obligation to nurture and prepare him for that very important job.

If Mr. Michael Ignatieff decides to hang himself publicly while he is waiting to become next Prime Minister of Canada, Canadian government of the day is dully obliged to supply Mr. Ignatieff with as much rope as it takes so Mr. Ignatieff gets his wish accomplished properly.
pubic mullet

huh? dude, no one outstide of ottawa and t-dot and inside baseball crowd care about this $$ for sex parade stuff. and what is wrong with a political party appealing to its base from time to time. based on the reaction to this funding, it sure looks like a pro-gay vs. non-pro-gay thing to me in media instead of a simple disagreement of opinions and values. looks like the media have already picked sides on this issue. and the media wonders why they are ignored by the general populace. show us a new viewpoint. show us a new insight. moral relativism makes for a bland read.
Canada Loather

What a small, ugly country Canada has become.