Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When I read the title of the piece, the first thing that popped into my head was " Liberty? This sounds like it was written by an American".
Liberty isn't really a word we banter around here in Canada. So I found it interesting that indeed David T. Koyzis was born near Chicago and now lives in Canada.
That aside, his views come from a religious standpoint and are geared towards a religious audience, which is fine, but I'm not comfortable with someone pushing their religious views into law.
It sounds like he wants to re open the abortion debate in Canada, something even this Conservative government doesn't seem willing to do.
As for Trudeau's edict? At first it sounds sort of outrageous, but I think it's a smart move. He isn't barring people who believe abortion is wrong, he barring people who want to force that belief onto women. At least that's my understanding.
Positive and Negative Liberty is something I've never heard of before so my understanding may be off. Canada is probably more Positive Liberty since that seems to lean towards a common good, rather than a me, me, me, Negative Liberty which seems to be more about oneself.
Well, I would have to say that while the article is an example of rights (I say 'example' to mean it is an argument, not that I am saying or not saying that abortion is or is not a right for the purpose of this post), I am not sure how it ties into negative and positive rights, which are a bigger philosophical question.
If I want to use the example put forth in the negative and positive rights link, that of the difference between saying that "no man is my master" versus "I am my own master" instead, then most people in democracies would agree that the first, that no man is their master, is true, while the second one can be or not be true - people have bosses and allegiances, whether that is to nation or family, so is anyone really his own master?
Back to the article though, I can't seem to find a link as to what happened after Broten said that. Because I'm pretty sure that what she said can't be enforced due to the right to freedom of religion.
The 1st article is published in firstthings.com, a US website/Institute whose stated goal is "to confront the ideology of secularism". The article's main point/complaint is that Trudeau is insisting that Liberal candidates follow the Liberal Party ideology - which currently has no room for pro-life views. Apparently this is an infringement on liberty. Sorry, but if you don't hold the party view then join a different party, start your own party, or get enough like minded people to take over the party. All are well used and time tested methods in Canadian politics.
Since you seem so interested I things Canadian, I suggest that you read the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms. That portion of our constitution is very clear and straightforward. Everything there is to know about Canadian freedoms is right there.
Since you seem so interested I things Canadian, I suggest that you read the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms. That portion of our constitution is very clear and straightforward. Everything there is to know about Canadian freedoms is right there.
I believe, although I could once again be incorrect, that our curious friend is actually attempting to determine how those of us on this board view those freedoms guaranteed by our charter as whether we think of each of our freedoms as either a "good/positive" or a "detrimental/negative" freedom.
I also believe Mouldy is trying to narrow it down to our 'theocratic leanings' as regards the good or the bad determination on those freedoms.
I further believe this will prove a frustrating endeavour at best as most of us do not make the link from our charter rights and freedoms to religion in any way shape or form, but rather on the simplistic judgement of basic moral right and wrong instead. Mixing religion into the recipe just adds another layer of confusion for most Canadians as right and wrong do not need to be "adjusted" or "fine tuned" by the consideration of a religious ethic that might instead serve to turn them on a 180.
Someone will eventually arrive at the conclusion that to have an acceptable, or even laudable sense of morality, it is not a requirement to have any religious beliefs at all.
Some time ago (last year, I think), I started a thread in the P&OC section titled "Freedom of versus freedom from religion" in order to get opinions about how such rights complement or contradict each other.
Basically, positive freedom is freedom of something, whereas negative freedom is freedom from something.
Some time ago (last year, I think), I started a thread in the P&OC section titled "Freedom of versus freedom from religion" in order to get opinions about how such rights complement or contradict each other.
Basically, positive freedom is freedom of something, whereas negative freedom is freedom from something.
That's complete balderdash. Every freedom that exists has both aspects of "from" and "of".
Liberty? kind of a grey area here in Canada as in some respects you got it and in other respects you dont.Must be big in the USA as they talk about this concept all the time and even flaunt a statue of liberty .Chris as liberty is a huge topic to debate do you have any particular areas of liberty you may feel are different in Canada vs USA?
Definitely our gun laws are different.
Quote:
lib·er·ty
ˈnoun: liberty 1.
the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
that our curious friend is actually attempting to determine how those of us on this board view those freedoms guaranteed by our charter as whether we think of each of our freedoms as either a "good/positive" or a "detrimental/negative" freedom.
