Global Issues students may feel free to discuss with one another anything on their minds in this space. Please use appropriate language and be mindful and respectful of other students’ opinions.
Global Issues Dialogue
Pages
November 2009 S M T W T F S « Jan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Archives
Global Issues Links
-
coffinstats
- 11,245 thumps
Blog at WordPress.com. — Theme: Connections by www.vanillamist.com
December 4, 2008 at 12:58 pm
What is wrong with the Canadian election system. In America people vote for their leaders. In Canada we vote for the party. Although many may find the American election system confusing it is actually far superior.
December 4, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Neither election system is superior; they are both the same. In each the people are forced to choose between two identical candidates, which appear different due solely to the rhetoric used. There is no real difference.
(My post is now 36 words long, which apparently allows my claims to stand without evidence. Having to back up your statements is a pain anyway.)
December 7, 2008 at 3:37 pm
What I think needs to be noted is, neither one is actually all that great. If you put together a list of 10 things that are defined as the qualities you vote for, none of the candidates, or leaders will share all the same answer as you. We are voting for the lesser of the two evils, which is a terrible system.
December 7, 2008 at 8:55 pm
I think that Dylan is right in saying that we are now voting (if and when we do at all) for the lesser of two evils. This does not mean that ‘democracy’ has failed, but that, to put it plainly, it has been thoroughly messed up. We are no longer voting for who is best suited to lead our country; instead we have to base our votes on who ‘campaigns’ best (which in Canada means Conservative Party ’scratch ‘n lose’ commercials). Unfortunately, as we all know, the joys of campaigning are short lived as reality sets in and the responsibilities present themselves.
Voting is a great idea, but what I like to call ‘the great political restaurant’ is running out of menu options. (Harper Herrings or Deviled Dion’s anybody?)
December 10, 2008 at 12:31 pm
As much as I hate to agree with Nick I believe that the system of voting for a perticular candidate over a political party can have its benefits. However, I also believe that since Canada is not run by only one person, that most issues are put to a vote, we have to be able to decide what group (party) that we wish to represent us. It would be good though to see a “two-tiered” voting system where you vote for the PM as well as the governing party.
December 10, 2008 at 12:34 pm
To elaborate on the current discussion, I must comment to you Anna and say that your metaphor, is ’superb’. To add to that, how can a country have an ‘election’ that is supposed to be based on ‘democracy’, and ‘freedom’, when in fact we are electing the party with the highest advertising budget. Is that democracy?
December 10, 2008 at 12:36 pm
I also agree with what Dylan and Anna said about “voting for the lesser of two evils”. I think that at the present moment we are voting for the best liar. Which ever candidate can tell us what we want to hear, that’s who we end up voting for. Then after the election is over, they don’t follow through with all of the “promises” that they made to the people.
December 10, 2008 at 12:37 pm
– DISCUSSION TOPIC –
Knowing that most of you consider yourselves Christians, I will post a question which goes under the banner of ‘Christian ethics’. This question assumes the basic principles of Christianity to hold true.
We can agree that the commands of God are moral. But the question is: are they moral because God commands them, or does he command them because they are moral?
December 10, 2008 at 12:40 pm
My question is this, how do you feel about abortion? Does your opinion change if the woman was raped?
December 10, 2008 at 12:40 pm
I agree and disagree with Nick. Voting on parties is just plain stupid. Of course we’re not going to get the leader we want. We’re going to get the party we want (Occasionally) and hope for the best. The very fact that the party chooses their leader and not the public is flawed. Give us candidates, and let us vote.
Even to have a say on WHO each leader of the party is would be better. If we all got to choose the leaders, we could vote for the party we want, satisfied that the best of the worst will be chosen anyways. No matter who the leader was, we would have selected them.
I’m not saying vote in competition with the other parties. I’m saying vote WITHIN the parties. Not the other politicians. The people.
December 10, 2008 at 12:41 pm
I would have to agree with everyone especially Ethan and that neither are superior and that they are indeed the same, one is not better than the other. Fred also has a point that Canada is not just run by one person but that issues are put to a vote and decided by the whole party. I personally think we vote by whoever is the best liar the person who promise’s to do more for this country.
December 10, 2008 at 12:42 pm
I believe that both election processes has there strengths and weaknesses but I would much rather vote for the a system that promotes a group of people rather than one person. When voting for a group of people you are putting your faith into a number of people not placing all the blame or glory on one persons shoulders.
Do you think that one elected person holds too much control?
December 10, 2008 at 12:43 pm
I don’t think that either election system is better than the other. I believe that we may have a stronger one, because I don’t believe that we should or can trust one person to run our country, rather I believe that a group(party) of people should do so, making more people involved with happens in our country. Krista is right though, we only vote for the best liars rather than the ones who will actually help our country.
December 10, 2008 at 12:44 pm
I have to side with Nick on this one: our election system is flawed, more flawed in fact than the American one in fact. There are too many parties that have no use at all. As well too often, we vote for the party that our families have traditionally voted for. Instead we focus on making a change and voting for the person and not the party. However, if we all did that, the NDP I’m sure would be elected and if you ever heard of an NDP party taking control you would know that we would all be financially hard off and corrupted. Bob Rae, you may recall, the politician who recently bowed out of the Liberal Leadership race, ran the NDP party in Ontario in the early nineties , which resulted in the worst economic period for Ontario since the depression. Something has to give and change for the better.
December 10, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Personally I think Canadain’s election and Americans election are very similar, but in the Canadian election, sometimes one area votes for a person from the following party and don’t think of their leader. I defiantly agree with Dylan and Anna’s statement, we do vote for the one who tells us what we want to hear, not for what they do. I think Canada needs to read more into their head leader not their party because in the end who makes the final decisions, not your perticular candidate.
December 10, 2008 at 12:46 pm
In response to Krista Question~~
I know that abortion can be a touchy subject to some people but I think that whatever people choose to do whether they have been raped or not is up to them and no one has the right to judge them for it.
December 10, 2008 at 12:47 pm
I agree with Nick. When the election is called, and make no mistake, there is going to be an election, we have to pick the party even if we do not like the leader. Like Dylan said, we’re voting for the lesser of two evils. Our system is being toyed with. Harper knows that we don’t want an election and at the same time the opposition knows that if they disagree with his idea’s then we get caught up in another election. Who looks bad for this? Usually the opposition.
Harper is abusing our system to get a majority in the next election and for some odd reason, the system allows it? Every party has some good idea’s and some not so good idea’s. If we could vote for the party and the leader, which is basically what the USA does, we could have a good, STABLE, government and not have an election every year or two. We could have Jack Layton in charge of the Liberals or Conservatives. Personally, I think he would have the majority of the vote if he were in charge of either party.
December 10, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I think that the Canadian voting system is so much different than the United States but it will still get our country run in a half decent manner. It would be a lot better I think if we (well when we are old enough to vote) were able to pick the leader of our country based on the leadership skills. It should not be based on who the different parties think the best person will be, because who they thing is correct to dictate their party may not be the right person to dictate a whole country. That person they choose therefore is going to get publicly humiliated. I personally think the way our elections are run are fairly good but it would be better if we could choose the leader of a party before having to vote for that party. It can cause a lot of disarray throughout the country because they think the Conservative leader has better leadership skills but the Liberal leader has a better plan for Canada.
Do you think our election system would work better if you could choose the leader of a party, then vote for the actual party or the way it is now?
December 10, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I like the Canadian system better in some ways, for me it seems right to vote in a group that shares the same views as you yourself do. I don’t really understand how the American elections actually work but after I researched it a bit I found that it was much more complicated then ours, and I didn’t really like it too much. I don’t like the idea of having to vote in a single person and then voting in a party, it seems like your giving the one person too much power, but with one single group it would be more spread out. I think that voting in one person hasn’t really worked to well for the Americans in the past but as much as Canadians may complain about our leaders we are still given a bit more influence in the choices.
I don’t agree with the other Canadian parties getting together to through out the voted in party thought and for my question I would like to know how everybody else feels about this situation.
December 10, 2008 at 12:51 pm
The chief problem with the election system, in Canada and the United States is that the people who are best suited to lead the country are unable to do so. Even if a political leader is brilliant and wants to do what is best for a country they may be unable to because they may not be able to raise the funds necessary to do so. Our Democracy favors the wealthy because they can afford to publicize and run elaborate campaigns. They have the support of industry, and subsequently the power one has politically is in direct relation to their connections among the wealthy. As a result we are lead by the people with the best economic connections, not the people who would be best for the country. A solution would be to publicize debates more and outlaw mud slinging campaign advertisements. As an additional measure I would regulate the budget allowed for a party’s campaign to a fraction of its current size. This would give smaller parities’ a better chance to become elected and the process would be more democratic and less of an auction for the wealthy and powerful to become more so.
December 10, 2008 at 12:52 pm
In Canada, especially places as small as PEI, I think peoples minds are set on what party they vote for before they even know who the leader is. I think it boils down to what their parents voted for or pure stubbornness really. It’s interesting that in smaller communities people may know which way you vote based on your last name, or what family you’re from. I think if we were to vote based on candidates, and no biased opinions could possibly be formed about specific parties, I think most people would be shocked and perhaps ashamed to realize after the fact that “OMG! I voted for a liberal!” (for example).
December 10, 2008 at 12:52 pm
To quote Krista.. “My question is this, how do you feel about abortion? Does your opinion change if the woman was raped?”
I believe that abortion is wrong. It shouldn’t even be an option. To destroy a life when so many people are looking to have children who can’t, should be a crime. They say the baby isn’t alive yet, but the sperm was alive. The cells are alive. Because they’re attached to the mother, they’re not alive? The flaw is if someone asks you to cut off their arm, and you do it, that’s illegal. But giving an abortion isn’t illegal.
If the woman was raped, my opinion wouldn’t change. You may never want to see your baby, and that’s your choice. You don’t have to. It can be given up for adoption straight from birth, without them even showing you it. That baby could go on to make other people incredibly happy. How could anyone live with themselves robbing others of that happiness? Stealing a baby from the world is as bad as being a rapist, in my eyes.
December 10, 2008 at 12:53 pm
P.S.
It would also help to stop things like Harper cutting the funding to all other parties
December 10, 2008 at 12:53 pm
In response to Krista’s question about abortion, I think that abortion is simply murder. The fetus inside of the child will one day become a person and they will likely have children. I don’t buy the argument that it is the mother’s choice. To me, that’s the same as saying that it’s my rightful choice, or anyone’s rightful choice for that matter, to step outside and kill another person just because I, or anyone else, think that they are not wanted, or of no use.
December 10, 2008 at 12:55 pm
I would have to agree with Nick on this subject. In my mind, it seems that Americans have a much better system of voting than we do. I believe that it makes more sense to vote for a single leader and I really wish that was possible in Canada. Although, I do believe that my response is a bit biased because I really have so much more support for Obama then I do for Stephen Harper and the rest of his party. Basically, Canada’s system as a whole is some what of a joke and just doesn’t spark interest in me. If Canada eliminated the idea of “parties”, I believe that we would really see different results. As far as what is wrong with our system – I would have to agree with Dylan’s comment.
December 10, 2008 at 12:55 pm
In response to Ethan’s question~~
I think “God” commanded these things because they were moral they do not become moral just because he commanded them.
December 10, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Question?
Do you think that the population numbers today are too high or too low? and what it might mean in the future?
December 10, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Response: The American electoral system is most definitely not superior to Canada’s. The only reason this may even appear to seem true, is due to the extensive amount of pride Americans place in their country. In reality, everyone is discussing the exact same issues and, as Ethan mentioned, the only thing separating the candidates are the words in which they choose to convey these issues. As far as your question goes Nick, I think if anyone could provide a realistic answer to that then our problems would be solved; however, this is simply not the case. Look at the situation our government is in now. The only way we are ever going to accomplish anything in parliament is if we come up with a majority government. So in essence, it’s your fault Canada, you are what’s wrong with our electoral system!
Question: What are your thoughts on Michael Jean’s recent decision to reject the proposition of a coalition government and to “suspend” parliament until the budget is scheduled to be announced at the end of January?
December 10, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Could a world wide government work?
If there was an organization, Say the UN, which had the power to enforce its laws on the world, would it be a good thing? If they had the power to redistribute wealth without having to beg for funds, we could eliminate poverty, and spread first world medial care worldwide. Could this work? I say yes. Why/Why not?
December 10, 2008 at 12:58 pm
My opinion on Krista’s question, is that either way you are killing what will be a human one day. Even if the girl is raped, you are still ending a potential life. If you really don’t want the baby then you have other options such as adoption.
December 10, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Do you think that we should use what ever means necessary to stop terrorism? Even if it means torturing people until they confess?
Remember that if we’re tortured, the majority of people will confess just to make it stop.
December 10, 2008 at 12:59 pm
“Question”
Do you think its right that the government is shutting down the smaller churches in P.E.I? Think about the elder and local families that will have to drive out of there way to make it to a mass, is it fair just to keep the center churches across the Island?
December 10, 2008 at 12:59 pm
My answer to Krista’s question. I fell that abortion shouldn’t be allowed and in the case of Rape I think they should go through with it and give it up for adoption. I don’t think it is right to punish that child because of someone else’s mistakes.
December 10, 2008 at 1:01 pm
The Harlem Children’s Zone is a program to keep African American children in school. They get paid for their grades. 50 dollars for an A, and so on. Do you support this? Do you think bribing children to stay in school is a good thing? What if the kid uses part of the money to pay someone to do it for them?
December 10, 2008 at 1:02 pm
My response to Travis’ question is that some laws or rules may work, but the world isn’t ready for it. Things would start off really slow and some people may even end up forgetting about what plan really is.
December 10, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Question
Do you think that if an election were to be called January 26th, the day that Parliament is set to resume, who do you think would win, keeping in mind that Michael Ignatieff is now the new liberal leader and by how much?
December 10, 2008 at 1:06 pm
I don’t agree with Kelly’s answer to her own question. I believe that if someone is truly die-hard for their group that they will lie to protect them. Not only that but terrorists are not stupid. If one of their own is captured, they are going to hurry to get out of where ever they are. Torture is completely wrong, and should not be allowed to be used.
December 10, 2008 at 1:06 pm
As much as I dislike responding to questions about abortion because it such a thoroughly debated and researched subject that has two distinct sides which are unlikely to be swayed regardless of what anyone says. However, I will once and for all give my view. I think that I will start by saying that on a personal level I think that abortion is immoral and not something I, or my significant other would every consider. On the other hand, if in the following situation I would say that abortion is a ‘fine’ choice for those people and I am in no place to judge them, never mind publicly shun them. Picture for a moment you have two extremely irresponsible people (a male and a female of child bearing age) who due to their immature relationship, discuss nothing and take no precautions and thus result in a pregnancy. To further the situation, add the fact that since these two irresponsible, and immature disgusting animals called humans know that they are going to hate, and mistreat (the most politically correct way of saying abuse, physically, mentally, and maybe sexually) this child and treat it essentially, like garbage. They have an abortion to spare the child of a life of misery.
As I previously stated I still think it is morally wrong, I also feel that since it is not that strong of an emotion, it is a personal one and should hold no weight over anyone else, especially in that example.
I am obligated by Coffin to post a question. When I say obligated, I use that specific terminology solely because the last time, the remarks that I received were less than exquisite. The question I pose today is that of major philosophical and political importance; here it goes: Would the Venus Project not be the ultimate ‘Shangri-La’ that our world needs?
The only way to answer this would be to do the research yourself, as there is an imposed word count. Here is a link the various points of interest of the Venus Project:
1) Home Page: http://thevenusproject.com/
2) Brief Synopsis: http://thevenusproject.com/intro_main/whatis_tvp.htm
3) Primary Essay: http://www.thevenusproject.com/intro_main/essay.htm
4) Definitive Basis: http://www.thevenusproject.com/resource_eco.htm
Hopefully someone will research this and see my true political beliefs. Despite the fact that I agree that this will never be implemented in our lifetime, our children’s lifetimes, or maybe even further, I still believe it is the ultimate ‘utopia’ that our world needs.
After this post I will be writing a short synopsis of the Venus Project just to give a quick glance as to its intensions. After having read the various questions I will respond to all of them individually.
December 10, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Answering to Jessica’s question I believe that in the last five or six years life is to expensive to raise a family. Parents can hardly afford their own bills and payments without having to pay for their children. However, within the last two years I think the birth rates have been increasing. As of right now the populations numbers are to low because people are fleeing from one place to another for jobs. If the numbers continue to rise then churches, schools and stores will continue to maintain business, but if they drop that could make great difficulty for our life travels. Prices will rise higher and higher, stores will go out of business and many people will flee the country for jobs elsewhere which will leave no population at all.
December 10, 2008 at 1:10 pm
In response to Kelly’s Question, I say no. If we torture and rape and kill to find terrorists, we create a larger problem than the origional terrorism. Worse yet is we create sympathy for radicals and compound the original probelem. If we sink to torture ans worse, than we are no more right than the people we torture. We become as bad as they are, the difference is that we have the power. Does Might make Right? I say no.
December 10, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I don’t agree with abortion no matter what the situation. I my opinion taking any life is murder no matter what the situation and therefore unforgivable. I think that to take the life of an innocent child is by far the worst thing a person can do. If a girl is raped, I know it will make things harder for her but she should consider adoption. I think that if the man who raped her gets caught he should have to pay all of the expenses needed to go through the pregnant, birthing, and adoption (if used). Then he should be tried in court and the rest is up to the judge.
December 10, 2008 at 1:10 pm
In response to Travis’ question~~
I think that one major benefit of having a world wide government is that fact that fugitives could not escape that law by fleeing the country but this is a hypothetical situation and we are years even decades from having countries that are capable of cooperating on this kind of level.
December 10, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I am going to respond Krista’s question about the abortion and if your opinion changes when the women is raped. In my opinion I don’t think abortion is the right thing to do. Everyone should be granted the right to live there is always another option such as adoption or actually raising the child as your own. Even if you are a teenager or you are a grown woman but not able to raise a child there is always another hope.In the case if a woman was raped and became pregnant I think if by the chose the woman she wanted to get an abortion that would be acceptable in my mind. If a child is going to be looked at every day and a bad memory is going to be brought up in the woman’s mind, it may cause harm to the child intentionally or unintentionally, and it could also make the child think there was something wrong with him/her because their mommy was unable to look them in the eye. So in my opinion it could be better for the woman and the child if she underwent an abortion. Yes there is an adoption process but it is possible that the child could find his/her parent and it would bring up all those memories all over again. Those are just my opinions on the matter.
December 10, 2008 at 1:12 pm
To answer Ian’s question, I think the last thing that any Canadian wants, and for that matter any party wants, to do is to yet again march back to the polls for another election. My optimistic prediction would be that the conservatives will craft the budget, just enough, to satisfy the opposition and government will continue as if this whole issue never happened. On the flip side, we could see another vote of non confidence and be sent into another election.
December 10, 2008 at 1:15 pm
In answer to Kelly’s question I greatly disagree with any form of torture to any living thing; I think that everybody can agree that there are too many unnecessary deaths in the world already. So why would we provoke more? If you where to torture a terrorist then his group would most defiantly retaliate and kill/torture some innocent people. The only thing you can achieve from violence is more violence. Plus I don’t think it would be an effective method to collect information, seeing how a person in pain may lie to you just to make to stop.
December 10, 2008 at 1:16 pm
In response to the question Travis posted about a world government, I don’t think it would work. It may sound like a noble and stable idea, but it wouldn’t work. Firstly, countries are very different and countries would be very angry if this government took well earned money from, lets say, Canada and the US, and gave it to Africa. However, there should be a policy in every government to help rid the world of poverty. Secondly, every government has corruption. To have one government govern the world there would be way to much of this. Whoever was in charge would always fear that someone in the government was planning an uprising. Thirdly, how much say would the people have in the government? An all world election would cost too much money and how would you be sure that everyone voted. Plus, in different cultures women can not vote; how are we going to get an entire culture to change it’s view? While it is a noble idea, there are just to many differences between world cultures and political views. There would be too much fighting and nothing would get done.
December 10, 2008 at 1:16 pm
I’m going to respond to Jessica’s question about the population issue. I believe that if the population is to keep growing there will be major issues in the world, mixed with the threat of Global Warming taking away many of Earth’s food sources the wars of the future will not be fought over oil but over fresh water and food.
December 10, 2008 at 1:17 pm
The Canadian election system in my opinion is a lot more laid back. A lot of people do care about it but for some people it seems they already know what is going to happen so they don’t vote, or if they do vote they follow the family trend. In Canada it seems the people in the United States are always being talked about because the U.S government always has great ideas and they are a lot more efficient when it comes to voting. The United States is a larger nation but we are just as important as them. In terms of voting, I do not agree with Canada’s voting system. Personally I feel that if we were aloud to vote for a single person it would work a lot more efficiently.
My Question:
Do you think it’s right that animals are being harvested for science purposes?
Response:
In response to Katharena’s question I actually do agree to the Government closing the smaller churches. Sadly to say but the populations of the churches on PEI are slowly declining and with this, it is hard for the church parishioners to pay for electricity, oil, etc. If we closed the smaller churches it would give the larger ones a bigger chance to stay open. As for commuting to church it is not really that bad because the Catholic churches for instance in this area are maximum 10-15 minutes apart.
December 10, 2008 at 1:18 pm
The way in which Canadians were raised has a strong influence on how they vote in elections. If you were brought up in a Conservative home or liberal home it will have an affect whose name you check off on the ballet, even if their plans and goals for Canada were worse than the other parties. Canadians should consider all the parties plans for the future of Canada and who ever seems to have a well planned agenda for our country, then that is who we should vote for. Choosing the leaders for each party would increase the chance of Canada having a stronger government and the citizens agreeing with the leader’s daily decisions he or she makes for our country.
December 10, 2008 at 1:18 pm
I feel as though I must argue for abortion against some of the people (specifically Ian) who has related abortion directly to “stepping outside and killing another person just because I, or anyone else, think that they are not wanted, or of no use”. However I can easily see how abortion would be considered immoral, or should be illegal, or a numerous amount of other derogatory phrases, but abortion is not the same as the quote I took from Ian’s post. At the time of a legal abortion, the fetus is just that, a fetus, not a developed human yet. Another point is that the abortion is not simply because you feel you have a right to kill someone because they aren’t wanted, or of no use. In the situation that I posted above it would be for the safety of the child, and in the rape situation also posted by someone else (Krista, the original poster of this question) the child would be aborted for the sake of the mother as it can be an extremely traumatic experience, both mentally and physically to have a child come out of you, your body, with your mind present, that was the result of a man who forcibly conceived said child. You know have a conflict of rights. You have the mothers constitutional right of feelings safe, and the fetus’ rights (which under the law are currently nonexistent therefore a mute point). Which trumps?
December 10, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Question: Do you think that a Coalition government could work for Canada?
December 10, 2008 at 1:19 pm
In answer to Kelly’s question I do not think it is right to form a torture on someone for an answer it isn’t really nessesary and considering there are many deaths and violence in the world why would you just want to cause more to get a confession?
December 10, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Question :
After watching the movie in class, how would your opinion sit on Human Trafficking? Has your opinion changed in any way? Do you believe that governments do enough to prevent this crime?
December 10, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Question!
As for my comment/question, I want to say that I use to believe that the news was the guaranteed 100% truth. I mean, the mere thought that it could be wrong or that people had even (dare I say) lied, just seemed out of the question. But when you know both sides of a story, blatant lies and contradicting articles are quite apparent. Which leads me to my question if you believe what you read in the newspaper or watch in the news is true. Do you ask questions about the facts presented or “fact check” with previous articles or comments?
December 10, 2008 at 1:21 pm
I too think that the American system is better than the Canadian system. I also agree it is true that you are just voting for the biggest liar, but I think that if a person ran for president and said his/her actual opinion on everything that was thrown at him then they would never be elected. Also I think that we vote for the lesser of two evils because there will never be the prefect leader, somebody well always disagree with them. The American system is better in my opinion to vote for one person then a whole party.
Question:
Do you think that it is a good idea to use computers to vote, like they do in American elections or is it better to use a pencil and paper.
December 10, 2008 at 1:22 pm
To respond to Allison’s post of ‘harvesting’ animals for science, I must say yes, despite my love for animals, and feelings towards animal rights, I must say we need to. As it was explained in Biology, the only reason we have insulin right now was because of the extraction of dogs pancreases. An example as simple as this must be pointed out because given a world such as the one presented by Allison, our diabetics would have no medicinal option, just for the sake of dogs lives. Is that fair for the human race?
December 10, 2008 at 1:23 pm
In response to Kat’s question, the government has no say in the Church situation. The government and the Church are separate and the PEI government has no say in what Churches close and which one’s stay open. The Churches are closing because either there is not enough people to sustain the Church, or the actual Church is in bad shape.
December 10, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Another comment to Kelly’s question, if someone was being tortured and they told the truth, they would probably end up being killed (but perhaps in a more humane way), if they keep lying then they will probably end up being killed from all the torture they are receiving. But then if the person is totally innocent and has no idea as to what the torturers are talking about, then they will probably end up being killed because the torturers believe that they are lying. No matter what it is a lose-lose situation. Nothing comes from it anyways.
December 10, 2008 at 1:24 pm
To answer Alison’s question No, moraly, I do not think it is right to use animals for sceince purposes, I mean you wouldn’t use a human so I don’t see how using an animal is any different? But if your not using animals or humans what are you supposed to use?
December 10, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Response – First of all I must say that Anna’s response was right on. I believe that it’s not so much the election system that is disarrayed, rather our perception of the system and the ways we use it or as you may believe misuse it. On the surface the American Election system may look very different from the Canadian election system. However, if you look a little deeper you’ll find that they really are not that different and the fundamentals are very much the same. I believe that the root of the problem is that we have forgotten what a true leader is and we have fallen so far from our original foundations of morals, justice, pride, etc. Basically, leaders seem to be more focused on parties than they are on the country and as voters we have got too caught up in ‘their’ scheme. If we could focus on who will do the best for our country and not on whose party looks the best and who make the best false promises than some problems may be resolved. The American system is not superior to the Canadian system necessarily, but I believe they do a better job voting for leaders and not parties.
Question – In Canada alone thousands of innocent people are trafficked here to ‘work’ and trafficked through our country to ‘work’ elsewhere. After watching the movie “Human Trafficking” do you believe that Canada is doing enough to prevent and overcome this serious issue?
December 10, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Nick’s Question: Well to be honest I don’t really know much about the Canadian Election system, but I do know a lot more about the American one. It’s much easier to follow the American election because it is always plastered over the television. I think the Americans have a better voting system because you are voting for the person and not the party. I think that is the way it should be in Canada, because some people may like the person represented in their community for the Conservative Party, but may not like the leader running for Prime Minister. It’s not a fair way at all to do things, and it really makes no sense. If everyone had their own individual vote for the Prime Minister then maybe we wouldn’t be having as many problems as we are now.
My Question: There is a lot of talk now about small school closures, do you believe it will benefit children to move into a bigger school with more learning opportunities, or do you think it will take away from the one-on-one time given to children with small classes?
Krista’s Question: I believe that under no circumstances is adoption acceptable. Either way weather you were raped or not, it is still killing what would be a future child. Some people could decide to keep the child, or if they don’t want to keep it then they could give it up for adoption. It would be tough to go through getting pregnant and raped but there are just some decisions that should be made the right way, like going for adoption instead of abortion.
December 10, 2008 at 1:28 pm
In response to Alisons Question~~
It sounds horrible but in my opinion it’s alright with me as long as they are using the rodent animals or pests like rats because in the end they do have to use something.
December 10, 2008 at 1:30 pm
We are all aware of the poverty of the world and of the organizations that try and help raise money for the poor. Our global issues class also started a Humanitarian Project to raise money to send children to school. The question is, are there people out there who do not put enough thought into the issue and spend their money for their own pleasures? Are rich, famous people being greedy and selfish with their money when they could take the money they earned and help the people living in poverty?
December 10, 2008 at 1:31 pm
To answer Bailey’s question, when I read any news article I will compare it to at least ten different articles just to make complete certain that what I am reading. I will then read at least a few of the argumentative articles (sometimes referred to as ‘conspiracy theories’) just to see all the sides to a story.
December 10, 2008 at 1:35 pm
RESPONSE (Krista’s Question)
I definitely disagree with abortion. In my mind it is purely murder and there is no way around that. When you start trying to make it okay for certain circumstances, it just leads to the assumption that it is okay. Dealing with the idea of rape, abortion is an extremely controversial subject. In my opinion, it is impossible to decide what you would do because it is dealing with a traumatic experience that you can’t just put yourself in. I believe that only someone who is put through this can make the decision.
December 10, 2008 at 1:36 pm
To Shauna-Lee’s question I think that yes, people who do not put enough money into this issue do spend alot of it on themselves. There are very wealthy people who probably havn’t even considered that there are people in the world that don’t have anything at all, barley even a place to live or food to eat. Some rich people do give money away but I think the majority keep it for themselves. I know if I had more money than I needed I would help out those who need it as much as I could.
December 10, 2008 at 1:38 pm
I’m going to answer my own question. I also think the abortion is wrong in all circumstances. I think that adoption is a great solution to an unwanted pregnancy. There are so many couples in Canada that can’t get pregnant, and would be so greatful for a child. According to some websites you can have an adoption up until the 6th month of the pregnancy. Eighteen days after conception a baby’s heart begins to beat. By the end of the sixth week the baby can hiccup and has a sleeping pattern. How can anyone justify killing an innocent child? With some types of abortion, the child may come out of the womb still alive, how is this right?
December 10, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Answer! (to Krista’s question)
My thoughts on abortion are that it should only be considered in circumstances where it could be harmful to the mother. But with todays medical knowledge I’m sure there’s a way around most problems. I believe rape isn’t an excuse for an abortion. A child doesn’t choose how it was concieved. Also, the mental side effects of carrying a child from a rape could also be considered just as detrimental as physical complications.
December 10, 2008 at 7:45 pm
There are several problems with the Canadian election system. The first problem is that in Canada, we vote for a party. In the United States on their election card you can vote for two leaders, not five parties. In Canada after the election a specific party is in power, not a specific leader. In some cases when Canadians vote they do not even know who the leader of that party is. The next problem with the election system is that in Canada there are five political parties. In the United States there are two parties. Another thing is that the Bloc Quebecois are one of those five political parties. How come every time there is an election only people who reside in Quebec can vote for the Bloc. Maybe other people in Canada want to vote for the Bloc. In my opinion, if all residents of a country cannot vote for a party then said party should be discontinued. Everyone can vote for the Liberals, NDP, Conservatives, etc, so why can you only vote for the Bloc in Quebec? In every election the Bloc win all of the seats in Quebec and therefore takes seats away from other parties. Another thing that is wrong with the Canadian election system is that it allows minority governments. This should be changed so that the party in power can do as it feels. Eliminating minority governments would create more political stability. A suggestion is that if the party with the most seats is still a minority then they should be given enough seats from other parties to become a majority. Another election would also work. The Canadian government also has too much power. In the US, the individual states have more power than the federal government which allows things to be dealt with on a more local level. On political debates in Canada, even if they were more publicized, no one would watch them. Who wants to watch a bunch of uncharismatic leaders debate when they all have the same ideas? Why can’t any of the leaders come out with an interesting idea? In the United States almost 80 million people watched the Obama/McCain debate. This is close to the number of people who watch the Superbowl each year. Their political leaders are actually interesting. They had the possible first black president, the possible first woman vice president and another version of George Bush to vote for. Although there are many problems in the Canadian government we should be thankful that we have an actual functioning government that provides a high quality of living for Canadian Citizens, unlike many governments that are ruled by dictators or are incredibly unstable.
As for responding to another persons comment, I will respond to the comment that Lucas made. I think that is was a reasonable decision to suspend parliament. Why I think this, is because it helps to keep the government stable. The coalition would never work because the other parties would never get along. I also think it is the right decision because it is keeping the leader who was voted in democratically in power. The majority of Canadians voted for Harper and therefore it is his government to run (even if he isn’t doing that well). I think that when Harper presents his budget he will include enough “economic stimulus” to satisfy the other members of parliament, thus avoiding a coalition government.
December 10, 2008 at 8:16 pm
To answer Brittany Power’s question I think it will benefit children to move into a bigger school because you learn more. I’m not positive but I think in one of the elementry schools this past year there was one child registered into grade one. I think that a child needs to have peers in order to develop socially. It isn’t healthy to not be able to hang out with kids your own age.
December 11, 2008 at 6:51 pm
First of all, I agree completely with Logan, way back when he commented on Krista’s question. Abortion shouldn’t even be an option. As Dr. Zeus (yes Dr. Zeus) so nicely put it: “A person’s a person, no matter how small.” (see ‘Horton Hears a Who’)
In response to Krista: Abortion is murder. I know that I can never fully understand the emotional and psychological damage done to a woman who has been raped and finds herself pregnant. However, two wrongs never make a right, and there is no way that murdering her own child will make the mother ‘feel better’. No one has the right to decide who should live and who should die. The baby has the same right to life as she does. It is not a matter of the woman’s ‘choice’, it is a matter of another person’s life.
Also, I have to say I disagree with Dylan’s statement (see comment # 50) that an abortion of a fetus is not the murder of person, because a fetus ‘isn’t a person’. Even many of the pro-choice organizations admit now that a fetus is indeed a human being. Instead of trying to prove otherwise, they just ignore the fact. Besides, why is that fetus not human? Because it can’t smell? See? Hear? Because it has no arms or legs? Because it’s organs aren’t all formed? Because it can’t ‘think’ as we can? Because it has no memory? In that case, what about adults who are deaf? Blind? Mute? What about amputees, without legs or arms? What about those with mental illnesses who cannot ‘think’ the way most of us do? What about those with severe memory loss? Are they not ‘persons’? Are they inhuman?Can we murder them because they are a ‘burden’ on their families? Of course not. Murder is murder, and age doesn’t change anything, whether the person is fifty years old or five months old in the womb.
In regard to Dylan’s comment about the mother’s right to ‘feel safe’ versus the baby’s right to live, life wins out. I can’t kill an innocent child standing beside me because he/she reminds me of something terrible that’s happened to me. It’s not the child’s fault and he/she doesn’t deserve to die.
As Logan said, adoption is an option and there are many pregnancy help-centers to assist women in these circumstances.
December 13, 2008 at 9:36 pm
We are all aware of the poverty of the world and of the organizations that try and help raise money for the poor. Our global issues class also started a Humanitarian Project to raise money to send children to school. The question is, are there people out there who do not put enough thought into the issue and spend their money for their own pleasures? Are rich, famous people being greedy and selfish with their money when they could take the money they earned and help the people living in poverty?
In response to Shauna-Lee’s question I must agree that there are people in this world who spend too much money on their own pleasure and the truth be told I am one of them. It is easy to ponder off the reasonability of poverty’s increasing numbers to the rich and famous of our world, but it is humanity’s issue. I truly believe that as a young person living in the western world, with an education that I am responsible for the well being of others in need, whether here or around the world. Poverty cannot be fought and overcome by one social class, but by all groupings of humanity banding together. There are MANY wealthy individuals in our world and they have a responsibility to help sustain those living in poverty. However, I have the same responsibility. To sum up my answer, yes, there are many people who have the means to put a huge dent in the poverty’s devastating outcomes. However, there are also people such as you and me who have many resources and need to do our part in overcoming poverty’s sting.
December 13, 2008 at 9:37 pm
oops. . .I didn’t mean to re-post SL’s question!
December 14, 2008 at 10:20 am
My response to Nick’s question:
Well, Nick just said it right there. In Canada we vote for the party, that’s what’s wrong with our election system. Too many people in Canada base the election on the best party or the party that they grew up to believe was the right one. Personally, I would probably stick with the conservative party because all of my life, that’s the party I was told is going to make a difference for our country. However, this year approached me differently than others, I was more tuned in to the election. Therefore, I seen how each political leader acted towards our country and to be honest, Jack Layton was beginning to convert me to his side because I felt that he was most devoted to Canada. If only I could have voted this year. Really I think it’s mostly a matter of where you live. Take P.E.I for example, we live on this little isolated island where we generally vote for the parties in our district because the leader’s usually change up every year anyways and sad to say, Canada’s leader doesn’t have an overally huge effect on us anyways. In America, I would say it’s different though, where their country’s leader would have a major impact on each state.
December 14, 2008 at 11:56 am
My question is about freedom. Does it mean doing whatever one wants too? If so, does that mean I can steal from you? What about YOUR freedom in that case? If this is not what freedom is, what is it?
December 14, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Recently, there has been a major outraging discussion whether P3 should replace our manors on P.E.I. First of all, for those who don’t know what P3 is – it stands for Public private partnership, which means it allows for the government to erase the cost of replacing manors off the books and makes them look respsonsible. The concern is that the costs are still there and taxpayers still pay no matter what the financial outcome be. so my question is: are you in favor of P3 or not?
In response to Ethan’s question: God’s commands are moral because he commands them, just like the world exists because he created it!
December 14, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Firstly I would like to respond on the topic of animal harvested for science. I would honestly have to say as long as a single person eats meat in our entire country that animal testing will continue. To cite the classic example I would rather not have someone perform open heart surgery on me that has never operated on a living specimin before. If all that the student knows is what a text tells him about surgury and has never held a scalple before, I don’t want him poking around in my chest! Even if they operate on donated cadavers, it teachs them nothing about controling bleeding, or responding to changes in the situation. What many radical animal rights actvists forget is that if we stopped animal testing today, and made it illegal, over 90% of all test animals would be killed within the week. There is a center in Toronto that breeds rodents for testing, they are treated humanely and live in clean enviroments. If we stopped testing those 40,000 animals would be killed, fruitlessly. We save millions of lives a year by using animals in experiments. As Dylan cited in the discovery of insulin, animal testing was used. 600 dogs were experimented on and most of them would have died. A high price to pay? Maybe, but Diabetes killed tens of thousands of humans and animals each year anyway, so really those deaths were displaced. I know it sounds heartless, but they died so that many more could live, your friends and families amoung them.
December 14, 2008 at 1:04 pm
In response to Anna’s question about freedom, It does mean that you may do whatever you please. Complete and unrestricted freedom means just that, I could take what I want and do as I please in so far as others would allow me to. I would be free to steal from you, but it would also mean that you would be free to drop me off a bridge. It is my opinion that our society isn’t built on basic freedoms, but rather it is constructed around enroaching on certain freedoms to better benefit society. For example the right to personal well being enroaches on my freedom to club whatever I choose. The only real issue is how the balance between control and freedom should stand.
P.S. The author Anna quoted is Dr. Suess, not Zeus
December 14, 2008 at 4:50 pm
It seems that some people think it would be a good idea to vote for the prime minister and then vote for the party they want. I couldn’t disagree more with this. I think that the different parties really do have perspectives and plans for the country, and so you can personally decide which party favours your interest. So I would for sure want the Prime Minister of our country to be confident in his or her party, and the beliefs of that party to run the country. I kind of like the system we have now, but I can imagine that it could be improved by having more than one candidate from each party so that Canada could have a real vote and have the best person run our country. I actually don’t think that our elections are worse than the American elections, I find them pretty much equal. Sure the American elections are much more interesting, but really in the end we’re probably getting the same kind of general leadership.
December 14, 2008 at 6:00 pm
In response to Nick’s question, I tend to think that we too vote for the leader like the Americans. This was quite evident in the November election with Stephen Harper being pitted against Stephane Dion. Harper appeared to be the better of the two, especially in verbal communication.
December 14, 2008 at 6:16 pm
I’d like to respond to Brittany’s question regarding small school closure. While it may be hard for a community to see a school close and have children bussed a greater distance to get an education, it just isn’t financially possible. The government allows a certain amount of money to education. Is it not better to put that money in places where it’s going to make a difference, like programs and better equipment within schools. City schools have so much more opportunity that rural schools and this way more money being put into fewer schools would be put into improving existing programs.
December 14, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Question: I realize the world is in crisis right now and poverty is at an all time high. We spend so much time and effort (and not that I think that it is wrong)into improving poverty in third world countries, when our own community, island , and country has massive poverty. Should we look at helping our own first?
December 14, 2008 at 6:42 pm
In response to Kelly’s Question:
This question was an easy one for me. I really don’t see that any means will stop terrorism, so toturing is out of the question because it will not stop anything. And since we can only speculate about terrorists we can’t target potential terrorists and toture them for information. But I have a suspicion that toture is probably going on, but it honestly would not stop anything. And like others said something like toture will only anger the group, if the individual is part of a group.
December 14, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Do you see our generation as a consumerism generation? And how do you think this benefits/harms our generation? Do you think consumerism blinds us from the important things in life?
December 14, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Alex Myers
In response to Brittany Power’s question, I think that it would not be good for small schools to have to close down, and make the children go to a bigger school. I think that the one-on-one time is very important when teaching. With bigger schools, you don’t get that because the teacher doesn’t have as much time.Everybody in a large class can’t have one-on-one time or they would be there for ever. Some people may disagree but this is my opinion.
December 14, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Krista’s Question is a well debated topic and a hard one to discuss. In my opinion, I am against abortion, because I believe every one should have the chance to live their life. Even if a woman concieved due to rape, a child’s life should not be taken away. Who am I to say, she should or should not abort the child, I was never in the situation to make that decision. In my eyes, abortion is ending a life who never had the chance to defend themselves or live the life they deserve. In the toughest of times people have to think twice and remember they can get through anything if they have the love of their family and friends.
December 14, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Now that my question has received a couple of responses, and opposing ones at that, I will elaborate on the issue by asking you each another question.
Devan: If God commands these things because they are moral, who makes them so? If God is the ultimate authority and creator of all laws, how can any higher moral authority exist?
Alicia: If God’s commands are moral because God commands them, does that mean that if God commanded the opposite (play along, for the sake of argument), it would still be moral? If God commanded us to kill, steal, etc., would that these acts than be moral?
December 14, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Shauna-Lee: Thanks for that response the abortion question. It’s nice to hear someone who states their opinion on this issue without making it out to be a universal truth. I myself also tend to be against abortion. However, I do not pretend that I have all the answers, nor do I think that this is a black and white issue. While I personally disagree with abortion in most cases, I have no wish to make my opinion law. I still believe it is up to the individual parents to make the decision.
December 15, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Directed to Ethan’s response to Alicia’s answer:
Despite that fact that I would classify myself as an Agnostic Taoist meaning that I believe in Taoism and on the existence of God, I have decided that I will know when I die. I will speak as if I was a christian for this comment.
Assuming that the Christian belief of a God is true, then yes. If God commanded that murder was morally right it would be. Since God is all-powerful and all-knowing (granted, that point was well refuted in your essay) if he/she states something then it is true. The fact that it goes against what is seen to be a culturally accepted moral is a mute point seeing as God created that moral as well. He can change it.
December 15, 2008 at 5:28 pm
In regard to ‘if God states something then it is true’, could God ever lie? Even if we accept that he is perfectly good, most would still say that it is not always wrong to lie. So could God tell a lie? By this I mean, is he capable of doing so, and would he?
December 17, 2008 at 2:02 pm
In response to Brittany Powers question: I think that the smaller schools should close, I don’t think there is much a point having schools with 50 kids in it espeically when some schools are made to have more children like Mount Stewart for example, was a school built to fit quite a bit of people and has almost none so it’s almost a waste. Also I think it’s a better learing experince, I moved from a small school to a bigger one and I liked it, there are more people to choose from to be friends with and you didn’t have one teacher for two grades.
December 17, 2008 at 2:06 pm
In response to Emily’s question, I believe that we should take care of our own citizens first. It seems that everyone wants to buy local products to help our farmers but why doesn’t everyone want to support those in our communities that are not as well of as others? There is an arguement that can be made against this because we as Canadians are known for helping others around the world, if we were to stop this we would not be looked upon very nicely by the rest of the world.
December 17, 2008 at 2:06 pm
In response to Jessica’s question, I think that the population is fine. There is only a problem with the population because we are abusing natural resources and some places are overcrowded. In Canada, we could probably accommodate a few million more people and still have land to spare. The problem is that places like India and China are having too many children, and sometimes abandoning these children if they don’t like the gender, and because these people can’t get a good education so other countries do not want them. In a few years there might be a population problem, but if we could convince people that natural resources are coming to an end and get governments to reduce their pay checks and use that money on pollution and education issues than it would not be that big of a problem for many years.
December 17, 2008 at 2:06 pm
In response to Emilys Question: I think we should look into helping our own first. Yes, the poverty rates and such are bigger in third world countries but there are a lot of people and organizations out there rasing lots of money for them. Whereas here there are not people from every where in the world helping out for this Island. I think before we go and give our money to kids in Africa, for example, we should give it to people from here first, we do have a few organizations helping out which is a good thing but we could probably have more.
December 17, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Michelle: My opinion on human trafficking after watching the movie, is gross, horable and in fact a major crime. I never really new exactly what human trafficking was until watching that movie. I can’t understand why a person or group of people could do that to a human. It is not right, fair or leggal! I do not beleive goverments do enough about this crime. Also, when they are caught there is not enough punishment. It is indeed hard to say but when a person is caught trafficking a human they should be executed. I think police have to take charge and started watching ship yards and other available places for this to happen.When women and men are getting bought into something they need to look further into what they are getting asked to do. They need to find out who has done this in the past and if its successful, and if they can relie on the situation before they get into trouble.
December 17, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Ellen: in response to your question, I believe that our society has become far too much of a consumerism generation. So much so that Christmas has become a holiday that is slowly losing its meaning. Using Christmas as an example, people are stressed, rushed and worried because of trying to find the perfect gift for the person you are shopping for. These are not the feelings that should describe Christmas. It should be one of peace, tranquility, and happiness. We, as a society have too much of a reliance on material goods, which is too bad. With our society, it seems as though the more we get, the more we want, which leaves the majority of those who possess a lot to be sad. Consumerism definitely blinds us, and we should learn to cool it, especially on Sunday shopping. Ellen, this is an excellent question!!!
December 17, 2008 at 2:09 pm
In response to Emily’s question, I completely agree in helping our own first. I think that if we can’t support our own people enough then how are we to help support a whole country. It takes a lot of work to help a whole country and we can barely help our own people. I think that as a country we should start off with helping our own people. If we are so concerned about helping people, then perhaps we should help people who are closer to us. For some reason people are happier to help people that they have never met or seen, which I do most of the time, but they are hesitant when it comes to helping poor people in their community. I believe that there is something strangely wrong with that.
December 17, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Logans Question: I would have to say that the issue is based on the context. In a poor place like Kenya many students couldn’t afford to go to school, they have to sork at a young age just to keep eating. In this case the money just makes it possible for the kids to go to school and not have to scavenge all say. In other systems there is other incentives for people. In Canada there is no need to pay anyone to go to school. The welfare system should support the needy durign their learning years. We are rewarded for our high grades with more choices and scholarships, no other incentive is needed. Basically there is no need and it would only create resentment and segregation between the classes. For example a child who breaks their leg halfway through a semester, isn’t going to be able to play dodge ball. Also some children have learning disablities which would exclude them simply because they may not be capable in certain tasks. Funding grades in a place like this would cause more harm than good.
December 17, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Do you think that we’ll have a white Christmas (White Holiday Season, for those of you who aren’t Christian.) given the rate that snow has been melting? What factors do you think contributed to this melting in December, compared to other years? Just less snow? Global Warming?
P.S. – Please be aware that, while I posed this Christmas-related question to you all, I still am quite the scrooge when it comes to anything related to Christmas other than to [b]food[/b], or presents.
December 17, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Emily: I think your question is great. It’s definatly a hard question to ask and answer. You seem mean if you say we need to look into helping out our own province, but when you sit back and look there is so many things that could be done to improve our own home. Not so much major poverty in P.E.I, but there is homeless,sick and in general people in need. We seen on the news last night that clothes are great for the salvation army, but what about cash too. We raise so much money going door to door for other countries, what about here too? Those people in need would like to by a few things they do not have. Even though it is not that noticeable there are many of people here in P.E.I to help.
December 17, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Emily: In response to your question (#82)
The topic/issue of poverty is so diverse and it effects so many people in different ways that it can be difficult to focus on an area (place/problem) in which change can be enacted. Emily, you posed the question of should we be focusing on improving poverty in our local vicinities before reaching out to help the developing countries. I believe that this is an answer that should be different for everyone. To say that there is no poverty in PEI is completely ignorant, because there is! Personally, I believe that a person is a person, black, white, red or yellow. We re humans and we all deserve to be treated as such. We need to really be focusing eliminating poverty locally. I mean we are a developed world and we have the resources to do so. Here’s my only issue. Personally, I have a passion for the undeveloped world and I am trying to do a small part of creating change and sustainability. There are also those individuals who are committed to helping solve these issues a little closer to home. What we need is a balance. We need to think Global and act local and vice versa. Poverty also takes on different faces in different locations. On PEI may mean we cannot pay bills at times, can’t own a home, can’t afford groceries, etc. In the undeveloped world, this generally means sickness, no education, malnutrition, living on less than one dollar a day, etc. So we need to find a tangible way to act locally and globally and just do it.
December 17, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Question: Do you think that Christmas is just a way to market “Green Products” What is your opinion on the new style of a “Plastic Christmas” with artificial trees and snow?
December 17, 2008 at 2:20 pm
To Answer #102..
Christmas as it stands is a marketing scam. Buy presents to celebrate this event, but never think of the event while doing it and care more about the presents!
Plastic trees should be recycled into shopping bags or something else. Natural trees are way better.
Artificial snow? You sure you’re thinking right? Plenty of snow outside. Want it in your house too? You’re damn crazy, sir or madam.
December 17, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Question: Do you think that it is right that restaurants charge so much for food that could easily be made by an ordinary person?
I understand that there a chefs that prepare the food, but honestly, does it really cost $100 to fry a fish that tastes like a fish stick? A third of the time the food that is made at a restaurant is prepared and froze in a factory, the chef/cooks only have to put it in the fryer or the oven.
December 17, 2008 at 2:24 pm
A question to tinker with.
Should Sunday shopping, year round be banned? Or should it be open just for the holidays? Any opinions on Sunday shopping in general?
December 17, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Anna: In response to your question, freedom does have its limits. There are certain things, such as taking one’s life, that are considered immoral, ever since the dawn of time. However, certain countries have their ideas about freedom and this excludes things such as speech. That’s what makes Canada so great: our freedom.
December 17, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Shauna-Lee: In response to your question I would have to absolutely say that there are alot of people who don’t put enough thought into poverty and spend their money for their own pleasures. I don’t agree with, however, that you pinpointed the ‘rich and famous’. I think alot of celebrities (or just wealthy people) do alot of charity work away from the public eye. I don’t think it’s fair that they live in mansions and wear $1000 pants, but there just as many, or probably more, middleclass families that could afford to help but don’t. As for being greedy and selfish, it doesn’t matter how much money you make because in the end if you have any money at all, you have more than alot of people. Whether a ‘rich and famous’ person is buying a diamond collar for their dog or someone is buying an Ipod, they are both unnecessary items where money could have been better well spent and therefore are both greedy, selfish acts.
December 17, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Brittany Power : In responce to your question, I believe that uniting schools is a good idea. There’s always the circumstances when some kids grow accustomed to their school and then completely hate the idea of changing this, however, this seems like a change that would end well. Also, it only makes sense that more students means less one on one time. My opinion here is that the ability for students to have more opportunities while learning the same material and being properly prepared to move on, justifies it.
Jessica : In responce to your question, it appears that population in some places has become a huge burden, while in others not so much. Of course, we all know that the population in places like India and China is a constant worry to the point that controversial measures have been taken. However, it is in the US and Canada that we do not have this problem and still we are draining our land of everything. For the future, this definitely means loss of resources and a lot of climate change because our generation is greedy. Basically what I believe is that population does not have as much to do with our problems than our ridiculous consumption does.
My Question :
Do you really believe everything you hear about climate change? If so, do you think we will ever come out of this hole we dug or is it just an inevitable end for us as we know it?
December 17, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Ellen’s Question: I would have to say that our generation is definitely one of consumerism. I believe that is a bad thing. I think that it promotes the idea that everything is disposable and can be replaced. This isn’t true. Many things are one shot deals. If we wreck the oceans we can’t get that at Walmart. We buy disposable items, we throw them away and buy more, we use and use and use and sooner rather than later we won’t have anything left to use any more.
As I commented on my test Consumerism has become the God of modern times. We used to pray to gods so we could eat tomorrow, we used to believe that happiness was achievable only through a set of rules and morals. Now our joy comes from the purchase, the new phones, belonging to that select few that were the first to own a new gadget. The clerks have become our priests; the stores are now our temples. We have created the largest polytheistic religion in the history of mankind. Whether you pay your respects at the steps of mall or show your devotion in the halls of Canadian Tire we show our faith. We return again and again, and we are devout. The old gods drift from the minds of many, displaced by new ideals and the values placed on tags. It is not all consuming, there are many who remain outside its grasp. It’s the one religion that you never knew you belonged to.
December 17, 2008 at 2:27 pm
As you all know on Sunday there were three more soldiers from Canada, killed looking for a road side bomb. They were all from atlantic Canada,pretty close to our home. The numbers of deaths continue to grow from soldiers from Canada. All three soldiers were dedicated and willing to be there, doing there job, however, do you think its right that these soldiers died? Do you think the Government are going to step up to the plate before 3 more or 6 more continue to keep getting killed? Do you think that the army needs to get better equipment to lower the death rates?
December 17, 2008 at 2:27 pm
It does seem that Christmas has lost its true meaning, but I don’t think anyone can say they don’t like getting presents. As for the fake tree’s; I will NEVER have one. To me, a real tree completes Christmas, and they smell real good. Fake tree’s are a waste of money and resources, so is the slow. I would rather have a green Christmas that a fake white one.
December 17, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Response to #104..
Like eating out? Yes? Good. Stop complaining about the prices. That food pays a lot of peoples livelyhoods. The people who raise/catch the animals, people who process it, people who package it, people who cook it, and people who serve it. That’s why it’s expensive. Each stage of that chain has markup. They charge more than what they paid for it, and more than what it cost them to make it. Which is called profit. Don’t want to pay 100 dollars for fish? Eat mor chickn.
P.S. – If you didn’t get that reference, watch more commercials. Which also raise the cost of food, as they have to get you to buy it.
P.P.S. – Reading over it sounds kind of mean. But it wasn’t intended in that way. Okay. Not 100% in that way. I’m mean-spirited as it is, so. Yeah. Anyways. Merry Christmas, and all that other crap for other religions. (What do Agnostic Tao’s say at Christmas time? Anything?)
December 17, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Bailey: in response to you question (#54)
Media lies all of the time or at least doesn’t tell the whole truth. Honestly, if the subject which is being discussed, written about, etc. doesn’t interest me than chances are I won’t spend much or any time checking facts, which is exactly what the media wants us to do. However, I do some ‘fact checking’ when the issue is relevant or of interest to me. I firmly believe that people need to be questioning what they are assuming to be fact. We need to be careful to not just eat up and digest every bit of information thrown at us. That is what keeps the media going. If we really started checking facts, questioning what we see, hear and read the media may start doing a better job presenting stories to us.
December 17, 2008 at 2:31 pm
P.P.P.S. – #112 I didn’t really mean complaining. I don’t know why I wrote complaining. I more or less meant.. Okay. I don’t know what I meant. But I didn’t mean complaining. Or not specifically to her.
December 17, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Michelle’s Question: I believe that global warming will reverse, it will be fixed by one means or another in the future. It is important to note though, if we do not do something soon mankind will look very differnt. For example there will be about 1,000,000 of us left and many parts of the world will look like a bad rerun of “Mad Max” If we let nature take its course humanity will probably collapse. I doubt that we will all die off though, 60-70% is my prediction. If we want to aviod this we should make changes now. It’s not all that difficult and could be cheaper than fixing the problem later.
December 17, 2008 at 2:34 pm
When discussing religion, many people in our area proclaim to be Christian. There are many opinions of what a Christian is and how they should/shouldn’t live. Is Christianity simply a religion that you are born into with its traditions and rules or is it a commitment and a lifestyle to a higher God? The term is used so loosely so I just wanted to hear some thoughts.
December 17, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Question: Do you believe that a major collapse in the human population will happen in our lifetime? If so explain what factors would be the main causes. If not, explain how we will stave off collapse
December 17, 2008 at 2:36 pm
In response to Kat’s question, I think that if the soldiers in Afghanistan had better equipment than not nearly as many would be killed. It is a war and with war there is always going to be casualties. That being said I believe that the equipment being used could be updated. Many soldiers die due to road side bombs, how come their vehicles didn’t have a system that could detect these bombs? There is no way that Governments can claim that in this day and age there is no radar system that can detect bombs. People claim that we shouldn’t be in Afghanistan, we are there because of 9/11 and many people lost their lives that day. I believe that if our soldiers had better equipment than this war could be over, either that or more half of the great Canadians killed over there would still be alive.
December 17, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Emily: In response to your question I agree that our country, island, and even community has massive poverty. But what alot of people don’t know, and this might be kind of controversial, but in Canada to be homeless is a choice. We have social programs that ensure the street is not your only option. If you have less than a certain amount of money in your bank account (I think it’s $500 or something) and find an empty apartment, you can get social assistance. Of course you’re not going to get money to support your pets or eat at a restaurant everynight of the week but you can be sure you’ll have a roof over your head and something to eat which is more than alot of people outside of Canada can say. So to answer your question I’d think I’d sooner help those who can’t help themselves.
December 17, 2008 at 2:39 pm
My question is;
Gas is at it’s lowest price in years, this can be good and bad. We can afford fill up our cars/trucks, but it also means the economy is not producing as many goods as it used to. Some say if the people would spend more money then the problem with the economy would be fixed. Do you believe this?
December 17, 2008 at 2:43 pm
In response to Logan’s question dealing with African American Children being paid to stay in school, I would have to say that I completely disagree with it. First of all, if any student, regardless of their race, is serious about receiving an education they are fortunate enough to obtain free schooling, let alone getting paid to go. Even in our own school, some students receive these types of benefits, and most of them simply take advantage of this luxury. On the contrary, there is the rare occasion that some students will actually put the money to good use. However, my overall concern in this whole situation is where this money is coming from. My best guess would have to be taxes, and it is quite well know that minorities are not the only group of people taxed. Therefore, one could conclude that, a significant amount of tax dollars are being used on only a single group of people and to me that is completely unfair. To sum up, If you are going to reward students for obtaining good grades at all, there should be no discrimination whatsoever towards who receives them.
Shauna Lee posted a question a while back in regard to celebrities being selfish with their money and not donating it toward charities to help aid poverty. In my opinion, the reason that many celebrities choose not to do this is in a lot of cases because they don’t now exactly where their money is going. For all they know it could be, yet another, “get rich quick” scam. However, I would have to say that the majority of celebrities who do nothing for those in poverty either simply don’t care, don’t know or are too important to do anything about it. This may sound horrible, but that’s reality and it happens everyday. I also read Bailey’s response to this question and I think she hit the nail on the head. Celebrities are not the only ones to blame here. There are plenty of middle class citizens who could most definitely afford to donate a small portion of their income to these impoverished nations.
December 17, 2008 at 2:44 pm
In response to Kara’s question, I believe that it all depends. Religion is a very touchy subject. I believe that many people are born into Christianity. I think what makes you a true Christian is if you actually believe what you are taught. I also believe that it is important to have knowledge of other religions before you can claim what you are. As you said many of the people living in this area claim to be Christians; however, have they ever experienced anything besides what they have been born in to? Many people between the age of new-born to whatever age a person moves out, is the religion that their parents are, however until they experience living on their own and making their own decisions, do they really choose what religion they are. I’m not sure if this really answers the question, but it is my thoughts on some of the things that you had said.
December 17, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Kara: The definition of being a Christian is worshipping The Christ. Thats the definition. many have different ideas about what that means but thats what it is. There are christian like lifestyles and there are many ideas of how to do that. In my opinion alot becomes debate after taht point
December 17, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Ian: I think that Sunday shopping should be banned year round except for late November/December. It has been something that Islanders have been unique for and shold have stayed the way it was.
Since I’m on the topic of tradition, what are your thoughts on the lifting of the “Can Ban” was this the right move for PEI?
December 17, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Question: Do you think it’s hypocritical, contradictory, and ironic (assuming I used those words correctly) for NON-VEGETARIANS to fight for “free range” animals. Assuming that all non-free range farms are humane and meet all codes and standards.
December 17, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Question:
As we have witnessed in the media there are places in our world where corruption is uprooting and essentially running peoples lives. Put yourself in the shoes of a citizen living in one of these nations and imagine what it must be like to go through everyday knowing that the people in control of your well being have money and power in their best interest. As Canadians, what are some ways in which we can help battle this growing epidemic and help put an end to corruption.
December 17, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Question:
This is not so much the case in Morell, however in many larger schools the Christmas season is not allowed to be celebrated openly. For example, instead of having a “Christmas tree” it much be considered a “Holiday tree”. What is your take on this, and keep in mind that we were supposed to have out annual “Christmas Concert” tonight.
December 17, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Responding to Bailey: No I don’t find it hypocritical, Free range products are usually of much better quality, and taste much better. While a factory farm meets code, many prefer to support smaller “free range” farmers which tend to be small family businesses. The dual benefits of supporting a local economy and getting a fresher better quality products are enough to motivate many to support these programs. Many also believe that these products are healthier because they lead more natural lives and are less apt to be shot up with drugs and GH. The logic is a chicken in fresh air is healthier to eat than one that has never seen the sun.
December 17, 2008 at 9:00 pm
In response to Lucas’s Question:Let people celebrate their holiday the way they are meant to. A Christmas tree is a Christian symbol, it has meaning to Christians. Hanukkah is a Jewish holiday and the Menorah is a symbol of that holiday much as the tree is the symbol of Christmas. If we started to call the Menorah a “holiday” candle holder, we would be dishonoring their traditions. Everyone has a right to practice their religion in the manner that they believe, which is a constitutional right. This means that we shouldn’t have to change what we call our symbols just because we live in the same area as people who practice other things. I would welcome a Menorah in our school is we had a Jewish population, but I would refuse to call it a holiday candle holder because some people think that distinct cultures are going to cause a problem. Names have meaning and they don’t need to be changed.
December 17, 2008 at 9:09 pm
In response to Kara’s question: I believe that there are two classes of Christians. The first is the garden variety they were born into the society, and typically have moderate to weak faith in the beliefs, laws ect. They claim the faith through no real adherence but rather because it is the norm in their society.
The second variety is what I refer to as true believers. These are the people who let the doctrines of Christianity guide their lives, they don’t get loaded drunk, they go to church regularly and they believe in their hearts that what they practice will lead them to heaven or Paradise, according to your beliefs. They believe in the deepest morals, adhere to the laws and study their literature in an attempt to better understand their God.
Of course there are miles of middle ground, but these are the two main groups.
December 20, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Kara: You are right that ‘Christian’ is a very ambiguous term. In general, it obviously refers to anyone claiming to believe in the Christ. Strictly, however, I believe it should refer only to those who understand and truly believe in the Christ’s teachings. I feel that the concept of Christianity needs to be reevaluated, and that it should perhaps be a belief held by learned and knowledgeable people, not one held by the masses simply because of their upbringing. If one is to believe in any holy book, one must familiarize themselves with its teachings, and very few Christians do so. The vast majority have never made any serious attempt to read or understand the book in which they claim to believe. This is a very simple-minded path to take.
Bailey: I see no contradiction in a non-vegetarian wishing to eat free-range meat. Many people object not to the eating of meat, but simply to the cruelty to which the animals are subjected: such farming practices help to eliminate this cruelty. As well, these practices also generally lead to a healthier product. Either of these reasons could cause a non-vegetarian to want free-range meat.
December 20, 2008 at 4:32 pm
QUESTION:
Is there such a thing as an objective value, or are all values subjective? Before responding, please attempt to rebut your own argument (as if you disagreed with yourself) in the interest of providing a well thought-out final product.
(‘Objective’ means something that can be known for certain. ‘Subjective’ means something that can be different for different people. The former is the realm of facts, the latter is the realm of opinion. Essentially: are values opinions or facts?)
December 21, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Travis: In response to you question wondering if their will be a major collapse in the human population in our life time. I believe that their will not be a huge collapse but rather a gradual decline. I believe every day there are new inventions and advancements that are being developed that are continuously making our world a better place. This goes with resources as well. Right now gas and oil are gradually declining but while this is happening new types of transportation are being developed. In closing I certainly believe that in our lifetime we will live very fulfilling lives with the time that we are going to have on earth but it is truly the lives of the generations after us we have to think about.
Kara: In response to your question about Christianity, I have two different opinions. Many children today are born into Christianity but it is not under personal choice. It may be a family trend that they have to follow. However, I believe that Christianity if you choose to believe it, should be a lifelong commitment. In countries that do not have the Christian faith for a base to live by often suffer from not having human rights and are often subject to unreasonable control/violence. I feel that in faiths that branch off Christianity there are a lot of similarities in the way we treat others, that we do not have in common with non Christians.
Question: Do you feel that the Christian celebration of Christ’s birth, Christmas, is slowly being eroded and now becoming some sort of winter celebration with the main focus being a general celebration with no real focus on the historical celebration of Christ’s birth. In a lot of public schools they are not permitted to sing Christmas Carols, with any connection to Jesus as they feel that this will offend those families that are not Christian.
December 21, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Response #1:
In response to Logan’s question about African American children being paid according to grades is ridiculous. Getting an education should be considered a privilege and children should not be rewarded financially for it. Like Lucas said, there are students within our own school being rewarded for attending school, let alone the grade. I see this as completely unfair. In addition, it is discrimination. As well, could this money being given to students not be put to better use for all students? It seems that so much money is being used to repay past governmental errors. My wish is that we could look to the future and not dwell so much in the past. The past has passed!
Response #2:
I would also like to respond to Katharena’s about soldiers in Afghanistan. My view is that all Canadian soldiers should be withdrawn from this war that George Bush felt the need to initiate. Canadian soldiers were always considered as Peacekeepers and were highly respected for it. I’m not saying that Canadian soldiers aren’t respected because I am truly in awe of someone who can give so selflessly; however, we are seen as George Bush’s sidekicks right now, and, in turn, have made our country vulnerable to attack. Stephen Harper does need to step up and do the right thing. Let these soldiers come home to their families or return to our peacekeeping role. I’m not sure that putting more money into technology to make us better prepared to fight is an issue I’m prepared to discuss. Here’s a solution… send George Bush to Iraq and let him fight the fight. If he needs backup, I’m sure Stephen Harper could support him as he always has.
Question:
An article in The Guardian on Saturday had a headline that read, “Harper describes $30 billion deficit as ‘bitter pill’ needed for economy”. Do you think Harper should put the country in this much of a deficit to stimulate the economy after 12 years of surplus budgets?
December 24, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Travis: In response to your question (#29), I think that a world wide government could never work. Many countries governments already have difficulty dealing with their own citizens. Imagine if the government had to deal with 6.8 billion people. This would make all the current issues worse and many things would get “lost in translation”. This would also never work because there are too many differences in countries around the world, in areas such as: culture, economy, resources and population. It would be good if there was a system that could enforce certain major laws around the world, so that situations involving the law were all evaluated the same. It would be a terrible idea if a government could just redistribute money around the world, taking from those who have fairly earned it. Even with a supreme governing body, poverty would still exist, and universal health care wouldn’t happen either. No offense to anybody but a universal government is a very questionable idea. Countries could never cooperate with one another.
Brittany: In response to your question (#61), I think that it will benefit children to move to a larger school for a few reasons. The first reason is that children at larger schools have more opportunities and better access to extra curricular programs. Plus it doesn’t make very much sense to keep schools open that are built for 200+ but only have 50 students. It would also help to make sure that all the students are learning the same thing. All schools and teachers have different ideas on how to teach and because of this, some students are better prepared. If all the students were together, then the teachers would be able to teach the same way. Even though students may get less “one on one” time, there are still lots of opportunities to get assistance
My Question: How did the economic crisis that we are currently dealing with happen?
January 2, 2009 at 3:04 pm
In respsonse to Ian’s question:
I guess you can really look at this scenario in two different perspectives. But in my oppinion, I stick with the commandment – that the Sabbath day should remain Holy; this day is meant for relaxation and rest. I imagine people can take one day out of the week and respect and honour the Holy word. I think that such businesses that are madatory to stay opened on Sunday should be allowed; ex. Hospitals, gas stations, police stations, pharmacies. However, shopping is not necessary, and leads to many people working that shouldn’t have to be. I know Christmas is most busiest and rushed time of the year and that one extra day means a lot to some shoppers but I don’t think this should be an exception.
Ethan’s question #90:
Yes, God is really capable of doing anything, however, I don’t believe God could ever deceive us. He claims to love us all, why would he do such a thing as to lie to us? Maybe I am not think open mindedly enough but if you’re talking about the same God I believe in, he perfectly could but would not decieve us like that.
Alright, for argument sake for # 87: I remain true to my word; restating that God’s commands are moral because he commands them. Therefore, if God commanded us to steal, kill, etc.; they would still be moral because God had commanded them.
January 3, 2009 at 10:38 am
Alison: I certainly believe that that is what has happened to the Christmas most of us celebrate. The message is foggy to most people and it has more so become a season of giving. But this is a reaction to all the dviersity Canada, and PEI, is experiencing. We don’t have to be selfish and completely exclude any other faiths from the massive celebration that we nationally celebrate. And we can be inclusive, allowing others to enjoy some of the festivities by making it easier for them to partake by not pressing that it is only a Christian Holiday. Nationally there are millions of people on a Christmas break. So would you prefer to not have any break in light of protecting the Christmas message? It seems a selfish thing to add but everyone needs a break sometime and when is a better time to have a break, then around the holidays to spend time with family and friends.
January 3, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Alicia: Indeed, that’s the only way to answer the question. One must either be capable of accepting that a world could exist in which things we feel are very immoral were moral, or one must accept that there is no answer. God cannot be all-powerful and answer to any higher moral authority. This is only a paradox to those who feel that murder and the like could never possibly be moral. And of course, those who do not believe in the Christian God are not bound by it either.
January 4, 2009 at 9:26 am
Bailey: I do not find this a contradiction at all. I am not a vegetarian but I still care for animals quite a bit. I am frequently disgusted by the supposed treatment of the animals which are bred for meat, so of course I would opt for a “more-humane”, if that’s acceptable, way of treating the animals. I feel that to have a balanced diet you need to incorporate all of the food groups, so why not have meat of an animal who was treated well. Going along the lines that you don’t think non-vegetarians are wrong for their choices or a monster for eating meat, I really don’t see the contradiction anywhere in this statement. Because if the non-vegetarians aren’t fighting for free-range animals then who would.
January 4, 2009 at 1:43 pm
In regard to Ethan’s question about whether God is capable of lying.
First of all, if God is all-good, all-powerful, all-knowing etc., why would he ever have to lie? He has no one ‘higher up’ to cover things up from, and no motive to lie to human beings.
So, would he lie? I highly doubt it. Could he lie? Well, could you chop off your own arm or leg? Technically, yes. But that would defeat at least part of the purpose of being human, like a tree cutting off its own branches. So to God, being all-powerful, could, technically, lie. But since he is also all-good, that would be self-defeating, and nothing can defeat God. To lie would defeat part of what God is and therefore render him no longer all-powerful. In other words it is by his very quality of being all-powerful that he cannot lie.
In response to Alison’s post about animal testing.
I love animals, and I do not think that animal testing is wrong as long as it is done humanely. I don’t agree with using animals to test things like cosmetics, but for medical purposes I believe it is a different issue.
My question for all of you:
With the economical problems occurring all over the world today, especially in North America, do you think we are in fact heading for what some call ‘The Greater Depression’? What (besides another World War) might prevent this from happening?
January 4, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Nick: In response to your response to my question of world government, There have been governments that operated in the manner which you described as impossible. The Roman and other empires occupied what they knew as the entire world. They imposed universal laws and did redistribute wealth. Every citizen had the same basic rights to food and water. The system broke down simply because someone forced a system of government into power that wasn’t sustainable. As for lost in translation, there are people in every country in this world that speak English, Spanish or Chinese, so I believe that the language barrier could be overcome. As for giving taking money from those who “fairly” earned it and giving it to those who haven’t, it’s really a question of who actually did the work that made the money. If you looked close, most of the money we have hear was created be someone working somewhere else and being underpaid. If we achieved global government, I believe that universal health care would be mandatory or the government would tear itself apart. I do agree that we would be unable to eliminate 100% of poverty but we could drastically lessen its affect on world population.
January 4, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Michelle’s Question:
After watching the film about human trafficking, my opinions mostly widened. I always knew that the trafficking of humans was a large and dangerous business but I never knew how scary it could be for the victims. I believe that there is not enough of a government focus on stopping this problem. Many people get injured and killed each year by being trafficked, and I believe that they should work harder to stop it.
Alex’s Question:
I believe that when voting in elections we should be using the old way with pencil’s and paper because if we used computers to vote there is always a chance that a ‘hacker’ could change the results. I just think that it would be safer just to stick with pencil and paper.
My Question:
We talked about this a bit in global issues, but not many people came out and said how they feel. Do you believe that we take advantage of our resources? If so, do you think if we keep abusing the use of them then what are future generations going to be left with?
January 4, 2009 at 8:25 pm
In response to Lucas’s question #127
I can see how people who don’t celebrated Christmas might be offended by people celebrating it, but I think that it shouldn’t offend them to the point where they want people to change the name of things like Christmas trees to Holiday trees. People who work in stores are also not aloud to say “Merry Christmas” they have to say “Happy Holidays”. I personally wouldn’t be offended if there were Menorahs all over my school or workplace. I also wouldn’t care if a clerk told me to have a happy Kwanza as I was leaving the store where I was buying my Christmas gifts. You never know maybe deep down inside people who don’t celebrate Christmas are just jealous, it’s a long shot but you never know.
In response to Tomi-Lee’s question #104
I don’t think that restaurants charge too much for food. They charge more because they are making it for you so you don’t have to. It’s almost like a labour charge. I can see how in fancy restaurants they might charge a lot for food, but they are serving you quality stuff. If you are getting your meal made by somebody who went to school just so he/she could learn the best way to make your food, you should expect to pay a bit more money. I will admit though that restaurants take advantage of the fact that most people are too lazy to make their own food.
Question
It is now 2009 and there are only three more years to go. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, there is a theory that the world is going to end in 2012. Since we have already lived through Y2K and 6/6/06, do you think this is also just a bunch of nonsense? Do you think people will continue to try and predict the end of the world?
January 4, 2009 at 8:49 pm
->In response to Michelles question after watching the movie about human trafficking, I was very shocked to know that this was going on. I knew it happened but it just wasn’t real until we watched that movie. It must be so hard for the victims, I can’t even imagine that happening to myself. I think that the government should do more to prevent this from happening because obviously it is a big issue going on it the world.
-> In response to Alex’s question I don’t think that the world will end in 2012. I think after getting through millenium we’re safe. Although after watching the different predictions Nostradamus made it makes you wonder whether he’s going to be right about the world ending in 2012. I do believe that people will continue to try to predict the end of the world.
My question is what are everyones opinions about Israel invading the Gaza?
January 4, 2009 at 8:51 pm
***invading Gaza?
January 5, 2009 at 4:10 pm
In response to Alex’s question,
I do think the whole “the world is going to end in 2012″ is a bunch of nonsense, though i have heard that someone predicted things such as 911 that it isn’t acutally going to happen, because of things that we’ve overcome already that we’re going to be ok for an other 1000 years or so.
In response to Brittany’s question, I do believe that some people take advantage of our natural resources, but others on the other hand try to value what we have and savor the things we need most.
My Question: Do you think that Bin Laden will ever be found? (only thing I can think of haha)
January 5, 2009 at 7:14 pm
In response to Kelly’s question on stopping terrorism, I strongly believe it needs to be stopped but we as Canadians can only do so much. We have been in Afghanistan for many years now and we have lost our own so we need to ask ourselves is it really worth it? I understand that we are helping many natives of Afghanistan that are dealing with the issues of the terrorists but when it comes down to it we need to think are we actually making a big difference in the way Afghanistan people live their lives. In general, terrorism is present around the world today and maybe someday we will see the end of it. Who knows, we may be the generation to put an end to it.
In response to Katharena’s question on closing old churches, I think maybe it’s a good idea just for fact of the money it takes to keep the churches in working order. There are many churches that have an extensive history and it is a shame to close them. On the flip side, how many of these churches only have a few people in each pew on Sunday morning? By closing a few churches the other churches can gain more members and with a larger congregation it won’t cost as much to keep it running. It is a sin to be closing these churches but let’s face it there is not enough people to fill them.
Question: The total count of Canadian soldiers who were killed in Afghanistan is over one hundred. I want to know if you think staying there is worth losing our own people? I understand, that we are helping many families, but after being there for the past few years and seeing no huge change should they pull the armed forced out of Afghanistan as soon as possible or should we stay there and try to bring peace to their country? What are your thoughts on war? Is there any other ways to resolve a conflict, other than engaging in a war?
January 5, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Jillian, in response to your question of will we ever find Osama Bin Laden, I will pose a question of my own. Does this person actually exist? Despite the fact that the United States of America has charged Bin Laden with multiple counts of terrorism, and he is blamed for the September 11th attacks, there is no categorical proof that in a court of law he could be proven guilty (seeing as it needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt). Seeing as the actual events of September 11th are questionable, is Osama’s existence and guilt not questionable as well?
Brittany, in response to your question about what people will do after we run out of resources I will say that I feel it is a mute point. Granted, at some point soon, maybe even in this generation we will run out of non-renewable resources; that is not a problem seeing as how we have a countless number of ways to generate renewable energy (geothermal, tidal, solar, wind, etc.). It is a problem because human nature will cause us to fight for those resources, deaths will occur but assuming we survive, the human race will be fine due to other resources.
My question to pose for anyone would be that of whether or not the human race is capable of a major change in its actions without a disastrous catalyst. We have seen so far in history that nothing has changed without either a war, or an assassination or some other deadly event. Has this changed? The example I will use is something that I have gone on about enough: The Venus Project. Some could say that assuming this was the ultimate political doctrine (I am not arguing that right now) it could not be implemented in this lifetime, or ever without something major such as another World War. Is this the truth?
January 7, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Response to 148 Dylan: In response to your question of whether or not the human race can change without a catastrophic event is, quite simply, yes. The human race is capable of changing and of making massive changes in our behavior in order to survive and to prosper. The main issue with this is that it proceeds extraordinarily slowly unless it is catalyzed by some dramatic event. Some examples of this are the way we treat our sick. As we learned more about how humans worked we changed how we treated diseases and how our medical professionals went about their business. Another dramatic change is the elimination of both DDT and CFC’s in many countries. Both chemicals had major effects on the environment and over 190 countries have agreed to eliminate CFC use. The human race can and most likely will change its current path, the question is whether or not it will be before or after some catastrophe. We are capable of change but the question is are we willing? Will we believe the stove is hot and not touch it? Or will we be burned?
January 7, 2009 at 1:03 pm
I believe that the things we hear about regarding climate change can be exaggerated a little bit in order to inspire us to change. In some instances we need to use common sense and judgment when faced with a statement that we believe to be true, untrue, or slightly exaggerated about climate change. Like the old saying states, “If it’s too good to be true, then it probably is”.
January 7, 2009 at 1:10 pm
My previous response was to question 108
140-I think that the answer to whether or not “The Greater Depression” will become a reality hinges on if and when the President-elect Barack Obama will make an impact on the U.S. and more specifically, the global economy. The U.S. got us into this money-mess and they’re the only ones who can get us out of it, IF it isn’t bad enough already.
January 7, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Answering to Shauna-lee’s question, I completely agree with taking our soldiers out of Afganistan. I do not beleive it is worth the pain to people back home to keep them there. Young Canadians going down there thinking they will come back with a job well done, but they never get to see what they wish they could have accomplished. Canadains jobs are to find road side bombs to save the other soldiers, but they are the ones dieing first. Personnally with no change in the issues they are trying to solve, why shouldn’t they come home. Shouldn’t our governments do something about it? War doesn’t describe any part of peace, solution or happieness so why not take our soldiers back home!
Commenting on Anna’s question I beleive our world is becoming another “Great Depression.” The government do not use our money wisely enough, each family is struggling. Even the ones that have more money then the rest of us, are struggling from what they used to have. To many situations are turning upside down in North America. If this continues to happen I would hope that war would not be our solution. I think we may have to look back to when North America was high and mighty and take a look at what the new governments are doing different, what people are doing different, and what else is effecting our society, and turn back to what helped us back then!
Michelle’s question is a hard one. With all the tests, stories, surveys and workers telling us each day that or climate change is affecting our earth more and more each day enough to take it down, what side can you beleive? However, I do not beleive that polution and other side effects can kill our planet. I do beleive it will harm us very bad but we can come out of it. If we continue to help out by recycling, using CFL lights and other things we will save our earth.
January 7, 2009 at 1:17 pm
147-I believe that with our mission in Afghanistan, if cooler heads prevailed and if they chose to talk about their problems rationally and discuss a solution, war wouldn’t have entered the equation. However some world leaders don’t believe in rational and insightful discussion on answers to problems that affect us globally. As well I believe that we aren’t doing much to help matters by being overseas and that we should leave Afghanistan. That’s just my opinion, though.
January 7, 2009 at 1:27 pm
144 In response to Krista’s inquiry I believe that one has to consider the history of the entire region to even have a chance of understanding the situation. Israel was carved out of the Middle east in the years following WWII after the Jewish people battled for years to become a nation in the face of Anti-Semitism elsewhere. The nation has been embattled almost constantly since its creation. There are two groups fighting in that region. It boils down to the fact that both groups have a claim to the land, both groups have persecuted each other and this has went on since the Old Testament was still being written. In recent years there has been strides made to promote peace. This is simply a relapse into an old conflict.
January 7, 2009 at 1:29 pm
147 response — We have been in Afghanistan for almost six years, maybe more. We count the number of Canadian soldiers killed but do we count the number of terrorists killed? No, we do not. Recently, the US killed eleven members of the Taliban in one day. If this happened to Canadian soldiers there would be march’s in Ottawa. We went into Afghanistan because of 9/11 and sometimes I think people are forgetting that. We are not just over there to kill the Taliban and Al-qaeda. We are there to try to improve these people’s lives. We are giving women rights, letting girls go to school, and so much more. If we just leave then we could find ourselves in even more trouble or the people of Afghanistan will all rise up and get rid of Al-qaeda. However, we don’t know which would happen. This is why I don’t think we should just leave, if we do leave Afghanistan I think the conflict should be over, or the Afghan people have the tools needed to solve the problem of Al-qaeda. I also think that other countries should step up and help us out in this war because terrorism affects them too.
It would be wonderful if this conflict could be resolved without this war. Personally, I think that after 9/11, instead of rushing into war we should have told the Afghan government that we wanted the people responsible and give them a certain amount of time to deliver them instead of rushing into war, and if they weren’t delivered by a certain date, then we invade. I don’t think that there is any reasoning with Al-qaeda, if they wanted to talk to resolve the problems that they had with America then they should have talked instead of doing what they did. I don’t think war is right, I think we should have spoken with the Afghan government instead of doing what we did, but we didn’t.
January 7, 2009 at 1:36 pm
In response to Shauna-Lee’s Question about the Canadian soldiers and whether or not we should pull them out of Afghanistan I sincerely think we should. I agree with Shauna-Lee when she is saying that we are helping lots of families but how many families are left her in Canada left without a son, daughter, mother, father, or someone close to you? One of my good friends is going to Afghanistan next month so I am hoping it is done by then you need to have some wishful thinking. It does not seem as though Canada is making much of an impact on keeping the peace throughout this war despite their effort. I don’t like war and don’t agree with it. You end up killing thousands of people for a reason that ends up forgotten and it turns into just fighting. There are many ways to resolve conflicts they could have conferences or anything that would resolve their issues without killing hundreds of thousands of people.
In response to Anna’s question I think it is scary to think about a Depression hitting the world again. I think if the economy keeps going down and there is no way to bring it back up we will be in a depression which to tell the truth I don’t think anyone wants to admit that in the end this is what this economical crisis may end up in. I think if the United States gets some help from some other countries it will end up working out. If they are able to get loans from different countries and other countries want their products that they are producing the United States will come out of this recession. It’s scary to think though, my uncle drives a truck for a steel company that is based from the United States and he used to work everyday long hours now he is lucky to get 60 hours a week and he has the second highest seniority in the building. That shows how this is really effecting Canada, it also shows in the down fall of Linens and Things. It was doing great in Canada but it’s parent stores in the United States was going under. It’s a scary thought.
In response to Michelle’s question I believe some of the facts that I hear about climate change, but most of it I think they are exaggerating a little bit with how extensive it is getting and how it will be. We will never be able to tell here in PEI I don’t think because our weather is so varied already. I think if we put our minds to it we would be able to figure out a way to stop the little effects that people are able to notice but it will be hard and it will take a lot of work. Hopefully someone will think of something soon.
January 7, 2009 at 7:05 pm
147: As far as the war in Afghanistan goes, I disagree with it because I respect the sovereignty of nations. However we may disagree with the policies of a nation state, it is not for us to attempt to change them. That responsibility must ultimately fall to the people of the state in question — if they are as displeased with their government as they are supposed to be, they will do something about it. However their living conditions may seem to us, if they are satisfied with them then it is not up to us to change them. Ensuring good policy is the responsibility of the nation’s citizens, not of foreign governments using their own policies as the ideal against which others are judged.
148: The only means of implementing such widespread change is through subversive and coercive methods. This is how we have reached our present arrangement, and the only way to reach any different future arrangement. It is the nature of man that he should be an individual, and as such, that he should always disagree with a significant number of his fellows. This being the case, it is impossible for Man to choose his future, to make himself as he wishes, for different men wish different things, and they cannot be reconciled. The only solution to this problem is and has been manipulation of the masses by a small group of powerful men. While free-thinking individuals disagree, proper technique can make the vast majority of the population choose what is ‘right’ — which is whatever their conditioners desire. Man cannot change himself or make himself better or worse — only men can do that: a small group of men can alter the entire face of Man.
108: I personally believe very little of what I hear about climate change. This is mostly due to the lack of credible science in favour of it. While much that is not credible is made to appear so by propagandists, the truth is that there is no scientific consensus on the issue. It is easy to fool the public by presenting them with information which they are not equipped to interpret, and telling them what it means. Those who do understand it, however, are not nearly so certain as all the non-scientists as to what it means.
I contributed greatly to the writing of this essay, which provides a good argument against manmade global warming:
http://ethanmeanor.com/misc/responsepaper.docx
January 9, 2009 at 9:31 am
In response to Shauna-Lee’s question regarding Canadian Forces in Afghanistan, I have always felt that Canada’s Armed Forces could be better utilized in areas where the need for peacekeeping and protection is greater. Having said that though, I fully support our troops and the countless sacrifices they are making. I just don’t agree with/support their current mission in Afghanistan. In the beginning when the army was first deployed to Afghanistan the mission seemed appropriate and worthwhile. However, as time has passed and truths have been revealed my opinion and support for the army’s mission in Afghanistan has changes (as I already stated). War has pretty much been around since the beginning of time. It seems to be man’s way of solving issues in most situations and if war is ‘successful’ then peace is achieved. I tend to be an optimist and would love to see a world free of war and full of peace, but this is not a reasonable expectation. So if we are going to put literally billions of dollars into missions, men’s and women’s lives on the line, etc. we better have a darn good reason for it. As I said, war in some cases is inevitable, but it can also be avoidable. Communication, compromise and balance between people, leaders, countries, ect. are essential to avoid war. If these ’steps’ are used more often, I truly believe many conflicts that result in war could be solved peacefully.
In response to Michelle’s question on climate change, I do not believe everything that I hear about climate change and how it is affecting the human population and our world. Don’t get me wrong though, I do realize that our climate is changing quite drastically in response to our energy consumption. Many people have been referring to climate change as the new trend (money maker) and I tend to agree with this statement. The effects of our climate changing are becoming more and more obvious each day. Although there has been a lot of damage done it can be repaired (in part) slowly, over time. In recent years, there has been a lot of TALK about climate change and I think it’s time to start actually making noticeable changes in our lives and as a country/world if we want to turn the tides of global warming.
In response to Lucas’ question on corruption, it would be a very difficult task for Canadians to battle the major corruption that is in our world (especially when our government is corrupt to an extent). However, difficult or not, we Canadians have the freedom and the resources to fight the battle on corruption so we must. There are so many countries in the world which operate under very corrupt governments and civilians of these counties are living lives of suffering. I am not just responding to this question and writing what I have because it sounds good or because it is easy to answer, but because I have seen first hand the realities of living under corruption and I feel very passionately about calling governments and leaders to places of true integrity. Just as an example, look at the DRC, Laurent Kabila and his sons have run a military based government for decades and have caused the country to undergo war, created increasing poverty, sickness, death, the government has murdered thousands of innocent people to cover up wrongs committed by the government, and the list goes on. This is just one example of an extreme case of corrupt governments, there are MANY. In response to all of this dishonest ruling, it can be next to impossible for individuals and properly functioning countries to see where and how they can help. I believe baby steps need to be taken in order to build relations and trust between leaders and countries. Many of these leaders are criminals and have murdered or ordered the assignations of countless people. There are tribunals and international justice systems set up and enforced to deal with these people. Many qualified people within these countries have the ability and education to govern their country, but because voting is rigged their chances are impossible. Finally, there are peacekeeping units, armies, etc that are set up to work and give aid within such countries (this can get messy and unclear though). It seems impossible, but we have to start somewhere.
January 10, 2009 at 2:16 pm
108- No I don’t believe everything I hear about climate change, because there are two sides to every argument. Personally I think that most of what Al Gore had to say, was fabricated, and not based on any real scientific data. Sure some of the statistics may be accurate, which means that we definitely need to do something to reduce the amount of damage being done to the earth. One statistic that you cannot argue it the fact that the earth is getting warmer, but there is an explanation for this. I read that in New York City over the last 100 years the temperature has increased by 4.1 degrees, but the population has also increased exponentially. In Albany, New York the population has remained steady and so has the temperature. This is evidence that the temperature increase is following the population increase. As of right now I believe the hole is getting deeper, but we can still get out of it by reducing the strain that we put on the environment. No, climate change won’t be the end of human life, because I will stick with my cornucopian view, which is, that technology will save us. Many advances have been made which greatly reduces the amount of harmful emissions into the environment and many countries are trying, although not hard enough, to make a difference.
126- It is an unfortunate fact that many of the countries in the world have problems with political corruption. The government has no right to make decisions for people, however in many countries they get away with it, simply because of the vast amount of power and resources they have at their disposal. Corruption is difficult to overcome because the leaders often silence any of their adversaries and ensure they stay in power by any mean possible. As Canadian citizens, I don’t believe that we can do a lot about this. Many of these countries are unstable, and interference from other countries often has poor results. Eliminating corruption should be a focal point of the established world, because eliminating corruption would improve the standard of living in these countries greatly. However, most of these countries have sovereignty, which makes other countries reluctant to interfere.
147- In my opinion there is no way to justify Canadian soldiers serving in Afghanistan. Although I understand that we are helping the citizens of Afghanistan, it is not worth the death toll that comes along with it. The troops currently situated in Afghanistan should be removed as soon as possible, because there have been no major improvements in several years. I think that bringing peace to Afghanistan is a losing battle, and we should realize this before the death toll gets higher. Invading Afghanistan was a decision the Americans made. Afghanistan is their war, not ours, and our current situation should reflect this. My thought on war is that in no way is it necessary, until all the other options have been exhausted first. There are many other ways to resolve a conflict, other than war, such as: discussing the conflict with the other party or just ignoring it.
January 10, 2009 at 2:55 pm
108: I certainly find it extremely difficult to believe everything I hear about climate change. I don’t entirely believe that man is the one and only cause for all the problems the Earth is experiencing right now. I personally believe that some of the changes are just the Earth’s natural cycle. There are all kinds of accounts for the Earth going in cycles. How did the Earth ever come out of Ice Ages if it didn’t have a natural warming/cooling cycle? But on the other hand I think today’s society lives completely unhealthy according to how we should be living. And there should be a rush to change our ways before things happen, things worse than the Earth’s warming cycle speeding up. I am skeptical that all the things are true, and things are going as fast as scientists say. But really we don’t have any other choice but to believe them because if these things are having the dramatic effects that they say then we won’t really have the means of going back in time and reversing our ways. So we don’t really need to say we believe or not but just act drastically to try to improve our situation. And maybe the media and scientist exaggerate the information to reach the people who honestly didn’t care so they could get everyone to work together. It seems that caring for the environment is an “in” and trendy thing, but maybe that’s the only way to reach people. I really don’t think it’s an inevitable end at this point but if it’s left neglected for much longer I do think it can cause majors problems for our society, and we’ll wonder why we bothered doing things against the environment, instead of trying to help out as much as we could.
147: I never really agree with war in the first place but it is hard as a Canadian to sit back and not avoid the threats of terrorism our people might have to face. I think in most cases war is avoidable, but people’s power doesn’t necessarily leave them with an open mind to discuss alternatives, but in this case I can only think of one very small possible alternative. If the Afghanistan government were ever able to negotiate with the Taliban to give them territorial rights, in the name of peace for the country, then it might subside the Taliban’s want for control over the entire country. But there are so many flaws with this alternative that it doesn’t seem that there could possibly be any way of ending the fighting. I honestly don’t know an exceptional amount about the war in Afghanistan, and I know the Canadian troops death toll is constantly rising, but wouldn’t the loose of lives sky-rocket at the bombing, of terrorists, around the world. It’s doesn’t seem like a hard decision to make; that we will sacrifice our people to save the many lives of many other countries. Isn’t helping in our nature, isn’t that the way Canada is always trying to be. We always help someone in need and I think the people of the world can be protected by Canada’s presence in Afghanistan. And though it doesn’t seem progress is being made when we look at the number of deaths of Canadian soldiers, but I really want to believe that the troops are helping that many people at least every hour our troops are there. So to sum everything up I think the troops should stay in Afghanistan.
148: First of all I want to thank Dylan for this question, I think it brings up some really sparking discussion. And my answer would have to revolve around no because, as you pointed out, in the past there hasn’t been much other motivation to change the way things were, so why now would we change our ways of changing our ways?? Without the pressure to change, people don’t feel the need to change. There are some changes that we have made that were not sprung by disaster but more so influenced by more information; technological advances in medicine, electronics, and a few other things we seem to need every day. The use of cell phones is a good example of a way we have changed for the better without being forced to, because of a catastrophic event, just new technology.
January 10, 2009 at 9:16 pm
#148- I don’t believe that the human race is able to change it’s views without a major catalyst. It is almost like tradition is part of our DNA, we do not like change. It doesn’t matter what we have to change, be it our consumption habits or just getting rid of an old pair of shoes, many humans are hesitant to do something different. I personally go with the motto “I’ll try anything once, twice if it tastes good.” This simple phrase could change many people. If they try something new and they like it, they will continue to do it. Now if we could only get them to try it once we could change the world’s thoughts on change.
#144- Personally I think that this is a very “Iffy” subject. It is hard to chose a side on this one. If anyone tried to take my homeland I would put up a hell of a fight trying to keep it. However, you can look at it as taking back something that was already yours to begin with. If I had to chose a side I don’t think I would be able to. Both sides give many pros and cons for their beliefs so the only way it will end is if one side gives into the other.
#108- Climate change has gotten a bad rap lately. It’s a lot like Communism, either you believe it or you think it’s a conspiracy. There have been many studies that show that climate change is an issue but there also have been an equal amount opposing it. If you believe it or not is your own choice but the progress we have made in the past 20 years has made a difference. If you look on the other hand however, we have also done much to our environment in the past 20 years that LED Christmas lights won’t make up for. There is still much that we have to do to overcome this proposed crisis, and everyone should be able to help out in some way.
January 10, 2009 at 9:28 pm
147- I believe Canadian troops should stay in Afghanistan. The Canadian troops have helped the citizens of Afghanistan make changes for the better. Canadian police officers are presently training Afghan officers under the U.N. Canadian military members are training Afghan military so they will be better prepared to protect their country and its citizens. War in general to me is the last option that should occur to bring peace to a nation but sometimes must be taken. Problems that come about and decisions that must be made should be made by the country. There are other options that should be tried first. Why risk the lives of others around you, when there are other possibilities.
140- From what my maternal grandmother (1921-) has said recently, contributes to my belief that we are indeed heading toward what could be a situation similar to what was experienced in 1929-1939. The stock market crash of 1929 resulted in a decline in spending which lead to a decrease in goods and services required, exports to other countries were slowed (similar to what is happening now in the auto industry in Canada) and the forces of nature caused large crop losses in Western Canada (which PEI has experienced last summer with rain). A noticeable difference is the level of government help that was available – before 1930 the government didn’t get involved very much and felt that the market would take care of the economy and churches and charities would take care of society. Now, the government steps in with payments to farmers as well as assistance to families in need. The areas hardest hit were those dependant on farming, mining and logging as prices dropped around the world. I feel a situation similar to the Great Depression is possible but I don’t feel it would be as significant as the Great Depression.
108- I sometimes question things I hear about climate change but most of what I do hear sounds very believable. The world right now has polluted the atmosphere, rivers contain unimaginable amounts of chemicals due to the run off from agricultural land and industrial chemicals from industries have polluted the air we breathe. The rate at which this is happening is very fast. The ice in the arctic is already melting due to climate change with polar bears actually drowning as the ice floes are breaking apart with the increase in the temperature of the water. Certain areas of the world will soon flood due to rising sea levels.
I feel the world population, as a whole, is slowly beginning to see the effects of the misuse of farming and industry practices and some countries are making changes for the betterment of their country and its citizens. With world leaders meeting to discuss these issues we can only hope that changes will be implemented to slow the rate of climate change.
January 11, 2009 at 12:55 pm
148 – Personally, to say that the human race is capable of a major change, would be a long shot. Although I know that a negative attitude such as this, may be part of the force stopping us from this change, it is also extremely hard to imagine such a turn around of events with the constant need for power, force, and wealth. Obviously, we are familiar with the ongoing wars around us, but there have also been accomplishments by introducing democracy. With time (although we are running low), and the continued action of groups devoted to ending poverty and saving resources, new potential conflicts can be avoided. For now, the human race will continue to struggle.
147 – It is my opinion that our troops should be taken out of Afghanistan. This peacekeeping mission is one that has so far brought much pain upon us. I actually had a lot of trouble answering this question. The moral that tells me we should be helping these families that are helpless, is also telling me that we should be helping our Canadians who are losing their lives. Afghanistan has been a very unstable place now for years, and peace, right now, seems unattainable.
140 – We are definitely struggling with the economy at this time, but I don’t believe that this will lead to “The Greater Depression”. However, it is the government’s responsibility to assist and distribute money with the best intentions in mind. After doing some reading, it was clear that in 1935, the government took initiative to introduce relief programs for those who were affected by The Great Depression. Also, the Canadian and US governments had to work together to make agreements which is the best alternative.
January 11, 2009 at 2:31 pm
In answer to #148:
Of course human beings are capable of change. The question is, do we want it badly enough? It is true that many ‘great changes’ have had violent beginnings, but it is not so much the act of violence in itself that causes change, but rather people’s reaction to it. That reaction is to something that affects them emotionally, either by instilling fear (ie. the bombs dropped on Hiroshima/ Nagasaki caused people to change their methods based on fear and realization of great danger) or through appealing to people’s sense of justice, human rights, compassion, and other such feelings (ie. revolutions tend to bring out a sense of justice for the cause).
But is violence the only way to spark these reactions? No. Is violence an easier way to do so? Yes, but only because violence is a forceful catalyst that evokes strong emotions almost right away. Many things can spark similar, if more peaceful, reactions, but they definitely take more work. It is easier to threaten a country with bombs to get important scientific/political/etc information, but it is also possible to slowly and surely build up trust between nations. So too, when it comes to changing things like world poverty, wouldn’t evoking emotions like compassion and generosity be more efficient in the long run than using violence? And it is possible, the point is that it takes a certain amount of-heaven forbid-patience. If humans can use guns to change the world, they can certainly use the minds that created those guns to find another method of provoking change.
January 11, 2009 at 3:23 pm
140: The economy of North America usually sees higher improvements with every fiscal period, but lately it seems we are in recession. I do not see this has a major issue as of right now, due to the fact that every economy is going to have its’ low points. This may be the worse state the economy has been in since the Depression but I think eventually it will rise again. Unfortunately, there is the risk we might enter the ‘Greater Depression’, and that is when we have to come up with solutions to prevent it from happening, other than another world war. We are going to have to work together has a nation with our neighbors, the US, to bring our economy back up to where it was before. The new governments are going to have to pull up their socks and come up with reasons why we are in a recession and how we came out of the last depression, without entering another world war. We live in a modern, technological advanced society so there is no excuse for not coming up with positive solutions, excluding the awful thought of war.
144: For decades, Israelites and the Palestinians were in a war of property ownership rights. One would say Israel and the other would say Palestine. Their only solution was to start an attack on each other in hope one would leave. Israelites finally made the decision to invade Gaza Strip and now they are in the middle of a serious invasion where they stop for a period of time in the day long enough for the UN to bring in food supplies to the Palestinians and remove the casualties, and then they start bombing them again. The devastating thing is that many innocent children and people are getting killed over something as simple as ownership of Israel. Why can not the two groups of people come to a compromise instead of engaging in a war? It frustrates me when they can not come up with a better solution other than a pointless war.
148: We see violence on the news, in school, and in our own lives every day, whether it be a fist fight or another Canadian soldier sent home to be put to rest. Is violence really the only answer, the only solution? The truth is the human race is capable of a major change in its actions but the real question is are we willing to make that change? The world has witnessed two world wars, civil wars, and murders. For what? What did we actually accomplish in these deadly acts. I can see Canadians won our freedom from the world wars, but was there no other way to gain our freedom, other than killing many people to get it? It seems ridiculous to me for us to have to turn to violence when we can communicate with the whole world and sort our problems out differently.
January 11, 2009 at 3:38 pm
147- I believe the troops should be taken out of Afghanistan, as it is clear from the number of deaths, that this country is not ready for peace. Realistically, who wants another group of countries coming into their country trying to tell them how to run the government? While the United States and Canada are considered civilized nations, look at the state of our economies and the mess these governments have made in our part of the world. While the decision to invade Iraq was a George W. Bush decision, Stephen Harper did not have to join this fight by sending our soldiers into a war zone. Canadian soldiers were always held in high regard as peacekeepers and it seemed that more was accomplished when that was the case. While I support our troops and value the fact that they are committed to the job at hand, we cannot afford to lose any more soldiers and they could be helping people who need and want the help.
108 – I believe that we can make changes to our world that will indeed make a difference to our environment. The mess our climate is in did not happen overnight and it will not be fixed overnight. This is very much like going to the doctor and finding out that you have high cholesterol. The doctor prescribes a medicine and makes suggestions with diet and exercise that will lower your cholesterol level. The decision when you walk out that door is now in your hands. This is the way we have to look at it. If we all do our part, then change will occur. I do not believe it is too late. I don’t need Al Gore scaring everyone to the point where people will say, “What’s the use? The damage is done.” The difference is we can certainly the slow the effects of it. A line in one Nickelback song says, “What is worth the prize is worth the fight.” This is certainly worth the fight. While it may take others a bit longer to get on board and do what they have to to help, if I do my part then I know I’ve made a difference today!
144 – The Gaza Strip is a piece of land that is bordered by Israel to the North and East, the Mediterranean Sea to the West, and Egypt on the South. There are approximately 1.4 million people living there, of which 75 % of them are considered refugees by the United Nations. In addition, this piece of land is 25 miles long and about 7 miles wide. Now, that should put things in perspective. The people living in the Gaza Strip are helpless and in desperate need. The invasion of the Gaza Strip by Israel is wrong. It is based solely on their own need for control. What country in its right state would fire missiles into an area occupied by refugees? Israel started this “war” because Hamas (a Palestinian group) took control of an area in the Gaza Strip and was apparently smuggling weapons from Egypt into the Gaza Strip and firing them into Israel. To date, over 800 people have been killed of which 235 are children. Israel needs to get a grip and withdraw their forces from the Strip and relax the blockade they have set up there. These people simply want to live in peace. While Israel may have taken control of this area in 1967, they need to loosen the hold and stop controlling every aspect of these people’s lives. This is one person’s ( the government leader) need for control and a sense of power and not an issue of people in desperate need for help. These people are living in fear and Israel is making it worse every day they attack. Is power being used for good there?
January 11, 2009 at 5:35 pm
148- I don’t think the human race is capable of a huge change, as we have shown over the time of our existence; it is in our nature to just do as we please. Even now with so much tragedies going on around us, nobody will really step up we are more content to ignore the problems that don’t affect us directly. It is a shame that no one will change, or rather only a small percentage will, but I think that if something really huge happened then we might change. It takes a great disaster to make people realize how everyone is equal, and then everyone helps each other like during a huge war.
108- I think that climate change is a result of a number of things, those things being both natural and manmade. I think that the earth goes through cycles in which the climate temporally changes (ex. The ice age) but that the amount of pollution done by human kind may just speed up the cycles, but is not the main factor. I also don’t think that there is a way to stop climate change but that recycling and those types of things should still be encouraged.
147- I think that Canadian troops should be proud that they are trying to make a change in the daily lives of all the people in Afghanistan but I don’t like the war have of it, I wish there was a more peaceful solution. If it wasn’t for all the unnecessary deaths then I would be all for Canadian troops helping out, but their presence causes problems which put the innocent in danger.
January 11, 2009 at 5:56 pm
147. I think Canadian solders should be pulled out of Afghanistan. I don’t think its worth while having hundreds or even thousands of soldiers being killed over something that could be resolved in a room or some other kind of deal. For me, I think war is pointless, I know we’ve dealt with war for hundreds of years because that’s what happened if people didn’t pay up to things they owed something. Personally, I think the presidents/prime ministers of each country should just sit down together and try to resolve the issues without having to kill innocent people.
148. I think Osama might be a real person, or that’s what I thought until I thought about it. If he has stayed hidden all these years, he could’ve gotten surgery to reconstruct his face, so why not have done that before the attacks. I don’t know if he was responsible for the September 11th attacks, but I just hope they find out whoever actually did it.
140. I think that even if the world is going through a lot of things right now, I don’t think we’ll hit another great depression. Due to the fact that governments are trying their hardest to make that not happen. The world isn’t as bad as it was back then, as it is now.
January 11, 2009 at 6:05 pm
147- I feel as if the Canadian soldiers should not be in Afghanistan although I do respect every single one of those soldiers for making such a commitment to our country. I know that by being in Afghanistan our troops are making a difference but I feel as if it isn’t our war to fight. There has been no huge change in the past few years so I think that Canada should pull the troops from Afghanistan. I feel that there are probably better ways to resolve a conflict then engaging in war we just have to find out what those ways are.
108- I don’t believe everything I hear about climate change. I am very sceptical about whether or not the information we are given about climate change is true. I think that we will eventually not be faced with the problem.
140- I don’t think that we’re heading into a “Greater Depression”. I think evidence to prove this is the gas price has increased in the past few days and is said to increase even more. I think the only way to prevent the Greater Depression is to just spend money so that the economy is good again.
January 11, 2009 at 6:33 pm
147. I think the Canadian troops should be pulled out of Afghanistan. I understand why they are there but I personally do not think it is making any difference. In the past few years there has not been a dramatic change and it is not like we absolutly need to be there.
108. I am not completly sure if i believe everything I hear about climate change but I do think that it is something that is just bound to happen. I think that even with everyone doing what they can to change it, it still isn’t going to do to much.
140. Although right now is a bad time for economy I do not think we will have another depression. The government will find a way for it no to happen. However, I think if nothing happens for a couple years it could happen.
January 11, 2009 at 6:40 pm
147- I do agree that people here in Canada do not see any major changes that have occurred in Afghanistan, but we don’t see the whole thing. There is probably many minor differences that they are having in their everyday lives, that wouldn’t have been there otherwise. I think that the troops should be taken out of Afghanistan as soon as possible, but I also believe that what they are doing is great. They are all risking their lives to help out others, and I am proud to live in a place where people will actually do that. The men and woman that go to Afghanistan obviously feel strongly about it, so I don’t think we should stop people from doing something they want to do.
108- When it comes to climate change I do not believe everything I hear, but there are some things I believe. There is no possible way that it is all made up because we can see some actual evidence of it occurring, like rising sea levels for example. It would be very hard for people to just change their ways, but it clearly needs to be done. I think before people start to acknowledge the problem of climate change, something has to happen to ‘open our eyes’.
140- I do not think that our economy is heading towards a “Great Depression”. Our economy is in a terrible state right now, but I believe that things will change. The way the governments spend money has got to change. I think we need to work with other countries to think of ways to help the economies become more stable because like Canada, there are many other countries in our economical position. Like the saying goes, ‘Two heads are better then one.’
January 11, 2009 at 6:59 pm
In response to question 108, I don’t think that we should believe everything that we hear about climate change. I certainly don’t believe it all. I honestly believe that more or less the things we hear about climate change are precautions to what may happen. Our world is fragile and what not, but I don’t believe that we are at a point where we can not turn this all around.
In response to 147, I think that many people sometimes forget as to why we are fighting in Afghanistan, which is a shame. As of now, I believe that we are fighting a war in-which neither side is going to win. My opinion will certainly change if there comes a time when civil people from both sides can come to an agreement in-which both sides are satisfied, but I think it will be a long time before that happens. As to whether we should stay or leave, I believe that we should leave. Which sounds somewhat selfish, however if the people living in Afghanistan truely wanted to have peace, you would think that they would try to make it as easy on us as possible to help find a solution to their problem. That does not go to say that I don’t support everything that our troops are doing, because I certainly do, I just think that there is other issues in which we would be more helpful.
In response to 148, the situation that the world is in right now is certianly not a good one. With the rumor of gas prices going up again, I don’t believe that we are going to put ourselves in the hole anymore than we are now. I think that we are at the lowest point the economy can get as of now. I usually go by the phrase that things could always be worse when it comes to the economy.
January 11, 2009 at 7:34 pm
108: I don’t believe everything I hear about global warming because sometimes they stretch the truth. But I do believe that the Earth is going through a major climate change. Most of the stuff you hear about global warming is said to scare you into doing something to help the environment. Whether it be buying an electric car, to turning off your lights when you leave the room. I think the Earth is so big and there isn’t enough people being environmentally friendly to do anything to help stop climate change. Maybe if all six billion of us did our share of being environmentally friendly, then global warming would stop, but until then we will have better luck starting over on Mars.
144: I think the conflict between these two groups is way too complicated. It has been going on for way too long, and I would not be surprised if some people over there aren’t even sure what they were originally fighting about. You can’t really pick sides with either group because they both seem to be attacking each other an equal amount. I think it is terrible that innocent citizens get stuck in the cross fire of the two groups. This battle has gone on for a long time and it is likely not going to stop any time soon. (But hopefully it will).
147: I don’t think that staying in Afghanistan is worth losing the lives of our soldiers. I do not know much about what is going on over there, but you never see anything on the news saying what advancements they have made. You only hear about all the bad stuff that is happening. If it was up to me I would take the troops out of Afghanistan, because it seems pointless to me to be there. I think that war is not the right way to resolve problems between two countries. Another way to resolve these problems is to get the political leaders to come to some sort of agreement. Going into a country with guns a blazing isn’t going to solve the problem.
January 11, 2009 at 7:37 pm
140: Over the past several months the world economy has declined significantly, but in my opinion there is no way it will result in a greater depression. These sort of things are cyclical and the age old law of, “what goes up must come down,” still holds true. In many cases declines in the economy are actually a good thing. After stock prices have dropped to a plateau, many intelligent investors will buy up as many as they can in hope that the stock will eventually begin to prosper. This is how many people made their millions off the last great depression. I think the only way in which a full blow depression could ever occur again, is if there happened to be another world war. Sorry to go against the rules of the question.
108: Not to offend anyone, but the people who think this planet’s climate hasn’t changed need to give their heads a shake. It has! With that said, this doesn’t mean that we are stuck in this hole for good. There are many ways in which each and ever person can help make a difference in their corner of the world. We, in PEI especially, know what many of these are. I think the reason that many people say climate change is inevitable is because they are bored to tears from constantly hearing about it. However, I think there is hope yet. There is no doubt in my mind that it would take an enormous sacrifice, more likely a full blow miracle, to actually reverse the damage that we have caused. I think our most realistic goal as a race is to slow the rate at which this change is occurring and hope to reach a flatline.
147: I believe that motive behind our mission in Afghanistan is appropriate, especially when you compare it to the reasoning behind the invasion of Iraq. Nevertheless, I do not think that we should still be there. Obviously I haven’t been there, so I really don’t know, but from where we stand in Canada, it really doesn’t look like we’ve accomplished a whole lot. If the theory that the only reason Canada went to war to begin with was because of the United States is true, then with Obama as president this should no longer be an issue. For the sake of the families who have loved ones overseas, I strongly believe that they should be sent home.
January 11, 2009 at 7:38 pm
In response to number 108, I do not believe all that I hear about climate change. That being said I do believe that we are having devastating effects on our environment. Some people claim that what is happening is normal and happened thousands of years ago as well. That may be true, but thousands of years ago we did not live the way we do. Today, we want more and more and we want it fast. This means companies end up polluting more to produce products we want. We are also cutting down more trees, wasting water, and polluting the air and water. While I don’t believe everything I hear about climate change I do believe most of it, I don’t think you can deny that we are destroying the environment.
January 11, 2009 at 7:47 pm
In response to number 140, I do not think that we will entre another great depression, while we might be experiencing hard times I don’t think that will happen. During the Great Depression there was also severe droughts and other environmental problems that helped cause it, plus a stock market crash. I don’t think our governments would let another depression happen, we have improved the way the stock market works and have plans that help farmers so I really don’t think we will entre another depression.
PS– Sorry if there spaced out Coffin, they were done at different times!
January 11, 2009 at 8:23 pm
#147
The topic of Afghanistan is a tricky one, because there is no one answer. Personally, I disagree with war and fighting to solve problems in general, so naturally I think it would be better for our people not to be involved in such conflict. On the other hand, would it be responsible to draw out now? what would the impact be? The whole situation is quite a mess, and there are too many factors involved for me to simply say ‘bring them out’ or ‘keep them in’. However, if this were a simple world, I would say that this war is simply not worth the heartbreak. I would take out our troops. In reality, in our complicated world, I can simply give opinion, not judgement.
January 11, 2009 at 8:33 pm
#108
We are stewards of this earth, and therefore have a responsibility to take care of it. this certainly means making ourselves aware of how our actions affect our planet, and possibly altering our way of life in order to preserve it. However, I have to say that this ‘green’ craze seems not only exaggerated, but even slightly suspicious. Al Gore himself is a rich man from all this work to ’save the planet’, revealing that money could certainly be a motivation for the craze. Also, the presentation of such a ‘threat’ can have almost the effect of a new religion; it has followers, its own ‘doctrines’, etc. The problem comes when this new ‘religion’ or philosophy overrides and even hides completely other, more important issues in the world. I think that people have to be careful about letting the issue of global warming etc take over, and be aware of the fact that there are other, more important things to deal with.
I wonder, if the world put as much effort and heart into world peace and ending poverty as it has recently into solving ‘global warming’, how much better a place would we live in? Food for thought…
(by the way Coffin, I responded to #’s 147, 148 and 108)
January 11, 2009 at 8:42 pm
#108…
I believe that everything we hear about climate change is indefinite, even biologists and scientists are obscure of what really is going to happen in the future, they can only predict theories of what they think will occur. It’s the same as weather forecast predictions, most times it is pretty accurate but it doesn’t always turn out as predicted. Having said this, I still believe that weather will take it’s shape and form in any manner, that these expected predictions are possible. However, I think that at any given time, climate could completely change for the good. So I am kind of sitting in the middle. I do believe everything I hear about climate change, in the way that I believe it is possible Yet, I feel that climate could change at any moment. Knowing that we were the ones who got ourselves into this hole, I imagine there is a way we can get ourselves out. Now that we are aware of the possible outcome of this predicted climate change, there are many steps we can approach to overcome this act of nature.
#147…
I think that the majority of Canadian troops who are out there feel proud serving for our country. However, I feel that it is our loss in the long run because if you really think about it, what are we gaining other than reliability? I know it is well worth the extra support to America but when there is no dramatic change taking place, that’s when you got to think, is it really worth losing those many Canadian lives? It seems to me that the war has been dragging on for a long time, too long as far as I’m concerned. Especially after seeing so many Canadian soldiers’ deaths and knowing that there are more Canadians out there. I think Canadian armed forces should be pulled out until it is felt necessary to have them there. Until there is a more peaceful solution recognized by both countries, then should the armed forces be pulled in.
#148…
I believe that any human race should be able to bring a change without bringing a disastrous catalyst along with it. The sad, truthful fact about it is that we’re too stubborn and self-indulgent to be capable of working together as a group. Too many people are too concerned about their own issues rather than the issures pertaining to the world. I think that there are other possible solutions as opposed to violence. There is clearly too much violence that has occurred in the past, I think that if we have recognized that than we should be able to see that violence doesn’t solve anything. Violence is just another way of showing that something is stronger than another, and in many cases, it should not depend on strength but rather worthiness.
January 11, 2009 at 8:46 pm
148 –
In response to the question as to whether humans are capable of instigating a major change without the assistance of a disastrous catalyst, I would argue that no. I would argue that human nature will defeat us every time and human nature is that of terrible consequences. It is entirely possible that we are capable of initiating change but it has been shown that we cannot. Even if we know that something is wrong and we know that logically we must change; it appears that we must see for ourselves the result before we can ever change our ways. Certain things that we know are unnecessary, or even stupid we still do simply because we do not want to change, it takes death or despair as a result of said stupidity before we can truly change our ways.
126 –
What can Canadians do to stop political corruption in foreign nations? Nothing. The world we live in supports and condones corruption. Greed is a part of who we are as humans and our leadership over people simply promotes the opportunity to take advantage of them. One could also argue that we are in no position to either lecture, or attempt to ‘fix’ another countries political state. Until we ourselves are in a perfect state we are in no position to attempt to change another’s.
144 –
To answer what my opinion is on Israel invading the Gaza strip is that my opinion doesn’t matter. Battles like these have been going on for decades and this is just another one of them. Although none of us have the full story, according to the popularly told story (CBC News) a Hamas militant group fired rockets at Israel, Israel then responded with military force… what a novel idea. Although there is much more to this I simply mean that people need to understand that there is never only one side to a story such as this one. As of late I came across a protest for this battle. I suppose the protesters believed that by standing in a street saying it was bad was going to make it stop; this has been going on for decades, it isn’t going to stop now; it won’t stop until wars can no longer be waged.
January 14, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Just for the sake of discussion…
Should it be standard practice for newspapers and magazines to cite their sources? No essayist would be taken seriously if he made claims and did not cite them: should it be the same for publications of this kind? Why?
February 13, 2009 at 9:44 am
Some people…