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.
If there's no real practice or action, public opinion means nothing. One can claim that the public opinion of America is against firearms and in favour of universal healthcare, but the reality is that guns are everywhere and healthcare is ****ing expensive; one can claim that the public opinion of China is against the pollution (well who'd be in favour of pollution?), but the reality is that the air is visibly yellow and will remain so for decades to come. Same goes for all countries, really.
I get your points but when judging a country's stance on moral issues, public opinion is important since the people are the country.
Canada went through this when we had a Conservative government. They only got a low 30 percent of the vote and did not represent , at least on most social and moral values, the Canada that most Canadians envisioned.
The same with Australia from what I understand. In a way we are victims of our form of government.
Trade with Canada: Montana, North Dakota, Northern Minnesota, North Country New York, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine for British Columbia and Yukon.
Trade with Mexico: Puerto Rico for Baja California Peninsula.
In a fantasy world, which this is, a more popular scenario is Washington State, Oregon and Northern California join BC, The Yukon and Alaska to form a new country.
Trade with Canada: Montana, North Dakota, Northern Minnesota, North Country New York, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine for British Columbia and Yukon.
Trade with Mexico: Puerto Rico for Baja California Peninsula.
LOL That wouldn't go over well. Puerto Ricans are more different from Mexicans than Americans are from Canadians and the two aren't very fond of one another.
I get your points but when judging a country's stance on moral issues, public opinion is important since the people are the country.
Canada went through this when we had a Conservative government. They only got a low 30 percent of the vote and did not represent , at least on most social and moral values, the Canada that most Canadians envisioned.
The same with Australia from what I understand. In a way we are victims of our form of government.
The US keeps changing Presidential Administrations and political Parties that gin the White House and Congress as well. Just Congress changing is less quickly. I see it as a good thing as no one party gains too much power. But the US system ALLOWS States to add its own Laws and adjustments as in Gay Marriage. Generally as more states move that direction. It will go national. But the US is a large enough nation as Canada. To have Regions of the nation have States that due to high Religious practicing conservatives against Gay Marriage. To have these Sates their majority choice over a National Constitutional stand forcing it.
I see nothing wrong with leaving States their overall different perspectives and a nation that allows Religious freedoms to see their perspectives respected or at least Tolerated.
If this is why a overall more Liberal Canada or just on C-D? Could not see merging (per thread topic) of the US and Canada? Then maybe a few here are being intolerant of a Freedom to Religions beliefs? Besides, generally in human history and especially European. Marriage was a RELIGIOUS Bestowed Practice. Only in recent times, especially in Europe. Has Religion lost its historic right to declare a marriage that then when registered with the government. Was legal in both perspectives. Today in most of Europe? A Church (religiously performed) marriage. IS NOT LEGAL ALONE by the government.
In the US and Canada. a registered Clergy. Still can perform a LEGAL Marriage of a man and women by the States, Provinces and Nationally. So that is still a SAME view in Canada ands US. So is this so in Australia. I just DO NOT believe a Church (or any religious organization) should be EVER FORCED to perform a Gay Marriage if religiously they do not agree with it.
I myself accept Gay Marriage but still would say I am Christian in affiliation. But NEVER want a Churched FORCED to perform them. Too many Churches that would anyway. Nor do I want the US to go the European way of NOT RECOGNIZING a REGISTERED Religious marriage. Seeing it as NOT LEGAL TILL A STATE(Government one) is done. There a Church wedding is not legally recognized.
Lol, what do people from the actual culture know about themselves?
LOL I know right?
Prime example; merge Mexico and Puerto Rico LOL
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.
