September 13, 2007

Moron John Tory. I Mean More On John Tory.

The majority of human beings in Western civilization understand and appreciate the separation of church and state. With separation of church and state freedom of religion is at risk, in fact, everyones freedom is at risk.

Any politician who tries to narrow the gap of the separation is doomed in todays world.
It doesn't matter if the candidate is a nice guy, sincere, and preaching fairness. I for one do not believe there is such a beast as a sincere politician.

John Tory, by adding religious school funding to his platform, does not deserve to get even one vote. He especially has no business as a leader. A leader doesn't make such imbecilic decisions. Whoever else was responsible for making this part of a platform should resign and become a Walmart greeter.

Did they not bother reading polls or try to understand the thoughts of the majority of Ontarians?

Lets look back. In a poll back in June, 58% of Canadians supported a merger of Catholic schools into the public school system, with only 29% opposing the idea. 13% did not know.

And there was no one reason to overcome for or against, just the overwhelming majority do not want faith based schools when public schools are available:

Question 2: Why do you feel this way?
Should not be separate/different boards 17.7%
Cost savings 16.7%
Don't know 11.5%
Religion is important 10.4%
One system would create equality 9.4%
Separate schools have better education 8.3%
Discriminates against other religions 6.3%
One would improve education 6.3%
No need for change, system is working well 4.2%
Religion should not play a part in education 3.1%
Public system is better 3.1%
Need alternatives 2.1%
It's the same curriculum anyway 1.0%

If given the answers and told to pick one, I would have chose "Religion should not play a part in education" but I obviously agree with a few of the answers.

That poll isn't even about funding Muslim, Jewish, Quaker, etc. schools. So why would Tory the knucklehead even alienate more voters on top of the ones in the above poll?

In a new poll: Ontarians were read the statement, “A group of religious leaders from Ontario representing the Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim and Armenian communities is calling for the funding of all faith-based schools that meet provincial standards with taxpayer’s money. Currently, the Ontario Catholic school system is funded by taxpayers, but not other faith-based schools,” and asked whether they support or oppose extending full funding to faith-based schools.

On this basis, 62% of Ontarians oppose full funding for faith-based schools, including 45% who strongly oppose the plan. Just over one in three (35%) supports the plan, including 14% who strongly support it.

Every major party has close to identical stats when it comes to those who oppose and more importantly strongly oppose Tory's plan:

Among party supporters, opposition to faith based funding is as high among PC supporters (60% opposed, including 43% strongly) as among Liberal voters (60% opposed, including 46% strongly). NDP voters (68% opposed, including 49% strongly) and Green voters (67% opposed, including 55% strongly) are even more fixed in their opposition to faith-based school funding.

The majority of Ontarians still want to do away with Catholic school funding as well, though the numbers are slightly different from the June survey:

Ontarians were given three options: merge the Catholic and public school systems into a single publicly funded system; keep everything as it is, continuing funding for Catholic schools but not other faith-based schools; or, extend funding to faith-based schools. On this basis, a majority of Ontarians (53%) say the Catholic and public systems should be merged into a single school system. One in four (23%) say the status quo – of funding Catholic, but not other faith-based schools—should prevail, while one in five (21%) believe that funding should be extended to all faith-based schools in the province.

A Muslim writer tried to make a case for Tory's plan in the Globe and Mail by saying he had a second rate education in a Muslim school that his parents paid top dollar for. The comments to the article completely tell the story of the collective Ontario mindset.

Meanwhile, Tory knows he screwed up real bad, and he now has no chance of winning:

John Tory says the buck stops at the top, and he will take full responsibility if his party goes down to defeat Oct. 10 over his policy on funding for religious schools.

"I have had lots of leadership positions and you know that that's where the buck stops and you have to accept accountability," Tory said at a campaign stop at London's Covent Garden Market, when asked if he'd personally be accountable for the policy......"I am the leader, so I am accountable for all the things that happen, good and bad and I accept that as part of the leadership responsibility, and I always have," Tory said.
Tory should never have become Conservative leader. It is the year 2007. When a party elects a leader they expect the leader to have a chance of winning, if not what is the point? To lose? Especially when you had a good chance of winning, if you kept your "bright" idea to try to swing ethnic voters at the expense of losing your secular vote (that you obviously didn't think about at all).

One thing that is being talked about privately (McGuinty won't mention it or else he could lose the Islam vote) is the idea of publicly funding Muslim schools, especially when taking into consideration the low income Muslim population that can't afford private Muslim schools. Yes, rightly or wrongly (probably rightly), there is tremendous concern that bad ass teenage Muslim kids would serve Canada better if they were in public schools hopefully becoming more tolerant and less likely to be recruited by friends of Omar, for example.

Another biggie is the fact that the retired or near retired people, who now have adult children, equate the spending of public funds on separate schools as misappropriated spending and totally unnecessary. And these people do turn up come voting day.



Again, this isn't about whether creationism vs. evolution is taught, it is the whole idea of public tax dollars going to where creationism is taught (not just as a comparative studies course) and what will be the future affect of this as far as a multitude of different faithed schools springing up and the probable implications that more segregation will be the outcome. Regarding creation vs. evolution, here is what John Tory really said:

This is the impression I have of John Tory if he were to teach evolution in an Ontario classroom:

September 11, 2007

Retired Ontario Principal On Tory's Plan To Publicly Fund Faith Based Schools

The following is an e-mail I received regarding John Tory's imbecilic plan to fund faith based schools in Ontario. I happened to ask the retired high school principal for his opinion of this idiocy:

"Funding for Catholic education in Ontario was guaranteed by the 1867 BNA Act up to the end of high school which back then was grade 10. The extension for the remaining years of high school was the last piece of legislation passed by the Davis government as part of a commitment made by Bill Davis to Cardinal Carter of Toronto. Ironically, it was Bill Davis who advised Tory to extend the funding to other faiths.

The discriminatory part of this Tory proposal is that it does not include extension to non-religious groups who also want an independent private school status -- these include such groups from Montessori to Upper Canada College, even though they are currently inspected by education officers from the Ministry and have to conform to Ministry guidelines.

Methinks Tory was ill-advised on this matter and will certainly not get my vote. Multiculturalism through educational and religious diversity is not only divisive but very expensive. In a nutshell, we can't afford to operate different systems that not only duplicate building costs and administrative personnel, but may well dilute educational programs into bird courses. For example, religion is offered by the RC system as an OAC for university admission. The marks in this course have traditionally been very high and can be used by Catholic students to gain bursaries and scholarships at the expense of students in the public school system.

Unfair -- you bet. Every whacko in the Christian community from Baptists to Creationists will want to get on this educational bandwagon, let alone the different sects of Islam. This proposal exposes Tory and his clowns for what they really are -- opportunistic political nags who are trying to win an electoral horse race by feeding the public horse shit."

About the "fairness" issue that I'm sure Tory will use in debates, I came across this comment at A Step To The Right:

John Heder said,

September 11, 2007 at 9:04 am

"This thread has degenerated into a atheist/believer sideshow, let’s get back to the real issue of publicly funded faith based education. As a teacher there is an issue in this morass that stands apart from the ethical dilemmas of the general public supporting an education that is based on religious precepts.
When I graduated 10 years ago from teacher’s college I started to scan the education ads in the Globe and Mail. The vast majority of ads had the footer “We are an equal opportunity employer”, and EVERY government of Ontario position had that rider. However…upon closer inspection, every Catholic position required the applicant to provide a pastoral letter endorsing that the candidate was a practicing Catholic. Yes, in the 21st century, in Canada, in a publicly funded institution, you can still bar an applicant because of their faith.
Imagine any other publicly funded position that was open only to members of a certain faith, or political party, or sexual orientation. It sounds absurd, but under the current model of faith based schools it is not only acceptable, but somehow defensible. Somehow the Charter of Rights and Freedoms seems to have been forgotten in this specific case.
If schools remain privately funded, these hiring practices, while reprehensible, are understandable. However once an institution accepts public money it should be accountable to the general public for its ethical and legal stance on non-discriminatory hiring practices.
I am happily employed as a teacher, and have no desire to work in the Catholic system or any other faith based school for that matter. I am, however, concerned for recent graduates who may find themselves barred from teaching mathematics, history, or any other non-religious course in a Catholic school just because of the unhappy fact they weren’t born into a Catholic family.
Before we jump into extending funding to all other possible religions, I think that this very important issue must be addressed."

Again, if Tory is seeking fairness he needs to put a stop to all religious school funding.


I received another email from the retired principal:

"Whatever happened to our democratic tradition re the separation of Church and State? Methinks we should consider reminding our provincial politicians of America's original national motto, e pluribus unum, which was apparently plagiarized from an ancient recipe for salad dressing.
Anyway, e pluribus unum means "out of many, one", and amidst the current controversy re multi-faith educational funding it would mean that in a multicultural society, people in general would be best served by putting aside their religious differences, and mixing with others to form one harmonious public educational system -- a true cultural melting pot based on secularism rather than faith."

Also, it seems that a book burning moderator over at Blogging Tories didn't like the way the discussion having to do with John Tory and his ridiculous education platform was going so they closed the thread. Why not let it close because of lack of interest? What babies. The truth is that I was being ganged up on by creationists/theist/anti-evolutionists and decided to defend myself, which is completely related to the topic at hand because I'm giving legit reasons why it is baseless to put faith in the school system.

I started another thread on Blogging Tories here.
It does irk me when idiotic theists invent new definitions for words like "religious."

September 9, 2007

Ontario Won't Take A Step Back Into The Dark Ages

If John Tory doesn't drop the proposal to fund religious schools with tax dollars very soon, he might as well drop out of the election for Ontario Premier.

There is no spin that will satisfy the thinking Ontario voter on this one. Here are the spins put on by Conservative die-hards:

Catholic schools get funded so to be "fair" all religious schools should be funded

The reason that Catholic schools are funded is because of a deal done by the founders of our country. It has nothing to do with fairness, but is in fact a political deal that I imagine could only get changed if it came down to a vote by the people. The fairness angle was already defeated by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1994. H/T The Fifth Column
Public funding of anything religious is just plain ridiculous. Where would it stop? Mormonism? Scientology? The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Evolution is just a theory, there is nothing wrong with funding schools that teach alternative theories as long as those theories aren't taught in science class

"Evolutionary biology is a strong and vigorous field of science. A theoretical framework that encompasses several basic mechanisms is consistent with the patterns seen in nature; and there is abundant evidence demonstrating the action of these mechanisms as well as their contributions to nature. Hence, evolution is both a theory and a set of established facts that the theory explains."

"For scientists, evolutionary theory deals with how evolution occurs, not whether it occurs — this is an important distinction lost upon creationists."

As far as "other theories" go, that is what church and home is for. There is no reason to fund the brainwashing of children. Parents have plenty of ways to brainwash their child without having schools do it for them. Religious history can be taught in school (I even found Henry the 8th's divorce case to be interesting). Religious dogma has no business in school.

By funding religious schools it will force those schools to follow the Ontario curriculum

There is plenty of leeway when it comes to following the Ontario curriculum and having loads of time to teach nonsense and intolerance as well. When did Catholics stop teaching kids that Jews killed Jesus in class? They still teach that condoms are bad and that gays are sinners don't they?

So they have to teach evolution in science class. That doesn't mean that they can't attempt to ridicule evolution in other classes (this is what churches and wilfully ignorant parents are for, not publicly funded schools).

There are only 53,000 students who are in non-Catholic religious schools in Ontario today

Yes, that is today. But what about tomorrow? If a Jewish family, or Muslim family, or Baptist family, or Mormon family, etc. has a choice between a local public school or a local school that is the same as their household religion, how are those numbers not going to explode? Build it and they will come. When Bill Davis took a step back into the middle ages and funded Catholic high schools in 1985, more schools were built very quickly and filled. This will create a new Ontario, one that embraces segregation and intolerance.

Wouldn't you rather Muslims, for example, have to follow the Ontario curriculum than do their own thing in privately funded schools?

Again, has I explained above, by publicly funding Muslim schools, more Muslim, if not the majority of Muslims in Ontario, will wind up going to Muslim schools. This is a recipe for disaster. Here is a post at Beaman's World that illustrates what the expected outcome will be. Yes, homegrown terrorism in Britain has been funded by the public.
Collectively, Muslims tend to be very passive when it comes to radical leadership. This opens the door for the bad guys to infiltrate and take over. We don't need any bad ass Muslim teens in Ontario who have been brainwashed by Taleban trained leaders who preach hatred of the West.
There are 33 Muslim schools in Ontario right now. Do we want 250 of them that are completely full?

This will create competition and competition will create better teachers

No, this isn't about competition that will create better education. The only competition here is for parents to decide if they want their child to be taught religious dogma and superstitions during part of the school day while being segregated from children with other beliefs, or if they want their child to be taught facts and real theories (ones that can be falsified).

Ontario isn't Turkey or the USA. Stockwell Day's nonsensical beliefs humiliated the Conservatives previously. The majority of Ontarians can see through this bs proposal made by Tory, at least the Ontarians who came through the public system can.

If I had my way, I would take away funding from Catholic schools (at least have a vote for it). And I wouldn't even allow any religious school to have accredited status unless they followed the Ontario curriculum. And I wouldn't fund them a dime.

I don't see why parents, Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, etc. need to brainwash their children in school. It is completely selfish. If they feel that strongly about their beliefs, take them to their place of worship as much as possible and teach their nonsense at home as well (sure, it is a form of child abuse, but what do you expect from insecure zealots). Most who attend post secondary school wind up in public colleges and universities anyway. Religious schools are just a way to segregate and control a child when they are too young to know better or make up their own mind.

September 5, 2007

John Tory Just Committed Political Suicide

From the Toronto Star: There is no reason creationism could not be taught in addition to evolution and "other theories" if private religious schools are brought into Ontario public school boards, Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory said Wednesday......"It's still called the theory of evolution," Tory said. "They teach evolution in the Ontario curriculum, but they also could teach the fact to the children that there are other theories that people have out there that are part of some Christian beliefs."

Sorry Mr. Tory, but Canada, and specifically Ontario, isn't Turkey or the USA. The masses are much more appreciative that science isn't one gigantic conspiracy theory against God and creation.

I don't have any kids but I do care about the future of Western civilization and the world. There is no way more of my tax dollars are going towards God in the classroom. No chance. And I know most Ontarians feel the same way.

It is bad enough that we support Catholic schools with public funds, but to my knowledge, they have kept creation out of the science class. They somehow got grandfathered in. The Pope has been very progressive towards science and especially evolution. I still would like to stop funding Catholic schools, but in the meantime, there is absolutely no way we are going to take a step back into the Stone Ages (which creationists believe happened sometimes between Adam and Noah, less than 6500 years ago).

I have to blame my people, the Jews, on this one. A Jewish group has launched a campaign to get public funding because the Catholics get it.

Not that it is going to happen, but if successful, that means our tax dollars will be used to fund Muslim schools as well. And don't think they won't start springing up everywhere. I expect Jehovah Witness schools and Scientology schools as well.

What this amounts to is a formula for segregation and worse: reality denying idiots will come out of the school system intolerant of everyone with different beliefs, all paid for with our tax dollars.

Do we want our tax dollars to help teach the alternative theory that Canada is Muslim land?

Tory used the old idiotic line that evolution is only a theory. Well so is gravity. Maybe we should teach children that perhaps God keeps everyone from flying off the earth with magical invisible fingers.

I became a staunch Progressive Conservative supporter because of their stance against Islamic terrorism and their ability to keep church and state separated (even though they seem reluctant to do so on their part many times).

I can live with McGuinty's lie about dropping funding to Catholic schools for now, though I'm still having a hard time with the fact that Liberals have attracted Hamas supporting MPs. There is no way I'm voting Communist (NDP) either.

I guess I'll support the PC's federally, but the Liberals provincially. Tory must go for me to change my vote.

Canadians, including many PC bloggers are pissed as well.

Read The Atheist Conservative, The Kitchener Conservative, readers have blasted Tory (yes I know that the CTV attracts many Liberal and Communist supporters), but even the Globe and Mail readers (where the money and thinkers are), have gone ape on Tory.

How about teaching evolution and the Koran in church as alternative theories? Sarcasm off.

September 2, 2007

Judeophobe Skank On Youtube Turns Out To Be A Cop

The following video could be comedy, but it isn't. These two sisters are complete Judeophobes who don't have a clue (Shepardic?. If they are going to be Joooo experts, they should do a bit more research). The older sister, Susan L. Purtee has been discovered to be a patrol officer in Columbus, Ohio.

They post on Youtube as the Subie Sisters aka The Patriot Dames.

Picture courtesy of PC Apostate. Thank you Chris Womak:)

She has been a cop now for 15 years and is apparently close to retirement and a pension. Why she was hired in the first place is a mystery. Back in 1991 the following report was made:

"Undependable, walks off the job (quits) when things don't go her way; job history is deplorable, has not had a steady job for any length of time; several references of insubordination. She claims that she has had so many jobs because she doesn't like direction…

"Has worked 20 years and has nothing to show for it (heavily in debt)," he continued. "Applicant is shallow and does not accept criticism well."

The board's opinion, dated July 31, 1991, was unanimous: Purtee was not acceptable.

On Nov. 10, records show, the city hired her anyway.

She was 100th in her class of 116 at St. Francis DeSales High School, and at the time of her interview was driving an uninsured car.

"Seems to use poor judgment on big decisions," wrote Kim Jacobs, now a division commander.

"Does not like people telling her what to do," wrote Lt. Rickert M. Shewring. "Very opinionated. Is judgmental about people."

Board members noted that she had married and divorced twice, once to a man 32 years her senior and then to a man she met at her first husband's funeral who "left country due to immigration problems," in the words of one reviewer.

After a year of marriage, that husband borrowed all of Purtee's money, $1,500, and left the country because he didn't have his green card, the background report said. They divorced in 1986.

I don't understand why this hasn't made cable news or network news yet. I thought, according to the Subie sisters at least, that the Joooos controlled the media:)

The Utube Blog reports that Purtee has been reassigned to a desk job for now and offers the following opinion about Purtee and free speech:

Analysis: I was interviewed yesterday by a local radio station about whether the officer can be disciplined or whether her speech is protected by the First Amendment. The short answer is: Under Supreme Court case law, I believe the Columbus Police Department can discipline Officer Purtee — even fire her — without any First Amendment problem. (I can’t speak to the City’s internal employee regulations or code of conduct.)

The test under the First Amendment for speech by a public employee is twofold: (1) “Whether the employee spoke as a citizen on a matter of public concern,” and (2) if so, “whether the government entity had an adequate justification for treating the employee differently from any other member of the general public,” such as restricting “speech that has some potential to affect the entity’s operations.” Garcetti v. Ceballos, 126 S. Ct. 1951, 1958 (2006).

In this case, it’s at least debatable whether the speech in the videos involve a “matter of public concern.” If they don’t, then there’s no First Amendment claim for the public employee. But even if they do involve matters of public concern, the government has discretion to restrict speech that has some potential to affect the entity’s operations. In this case, the Columbus Police Department would have a very strong basis to conclude that racially incendiary videos disseminated by a police officer — even while off-duty — can undermine the public’s trust and confidence in the police department, and in the fair and equal administration of law enforcement. Courts would give a lot of leeway to the police department in this kind of case.

In an audio available at the Vanguard News Network. One idiot white supremacist admits to be in contact with Purtee by email, and stated that in the near future he expects the Subie Sisters to be featured on the network. Vanguard's motto "No Jews, Just Right."

What do you think about Purtee still being on the force?