• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Ed Power
    August 17, 2013 - 09:17

    My apologies, Mr. Burke, I did misread your original post. Thank you for clarifying your comments.

  • Colin Burke
    August 15, 2013 - 20:17

    Mr. Smith, people ought to care about others' sexual behaviour only, perhaps, if they are citizens of the same country and therefore obliged to defend the others' sexual behaviour. For instance, it would be wrong to oblige practicing homosexuals to be citizens of a country where other citizens were willing actively to uphold legislation punishing deviations from strict heterosexual monogamy, even if some homosexuals were to welcome that kind of legislation as an incentive to refrain from doing what those latter homosexuals might rationally regard as gravely immoral.

  • Colin Burke
    August 15, 2013 - 08:28

    Mr. Power, I did not say that anything homosexuals do privately makes me angry; you misread; what I said was that people's adversely critizicing homosexual behaviour does not make me angry -- as it seems to make many people, especially practicing homosexuals. What I meant was that I have read nothing about homosexual behaviour which would move me energetically ("angrily" if you prefer) to defend it or to scold those who rationally object to it as immoral and therefore not to be promoted but confined as closely as possible to the bedrooms of the nation.

  • Doug Smith
    August 10, 2013 - 14:57

    The group Real Women, remind me of the Catholic church trying to force its views on people. Why can’t these narrow minded people just concern themselves with their own behaviour? Groups such as the above just don’t respect individual rights and have no place in a thoughtful and respectful country. Why on earth does anyone care about someone else’s sexual behaviour as long as its legal and does no one harm? Why promote discrimination? Doug Smith, Grand Falls-Windsor

  • Will Cole
    August 10, 2013 - 08:47

    With regards to Landolt and her ilk, that's why it's referred to as "the lunatic fringe".

  • Ed Power
    August 10, 2013 - 06:02

    Why would anything that two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home - or bedroom - make you "angry", Mr. Burke? To be quite frank, it is none of your business. As former national leader said, "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation". Neither does the church, the ancient writings of Hebrew shaman notwithstanding. It is the religiously-based anger of "REAL Women" and people like yourself, coupled with a gross misunderstanding of biology, that fuels the hatred - and murder - being directed at homosexual people around the world today. Anger, that sees US based Christian ministers, churches and politicians funding and promoting ignorance and bigotry in places like Uganda. Many of these same people rant about Sharia law being imposed in the US to their gullible congregants, and then skip off across the oceans to impose their own version of Sharia law upon the citizens of other countries. Naturally, they fail to see the irony in this.

  • Laid Back Larry
    August 09, 2013 - 15:03

    I wonder if the Russkis are real scared of John Baird!

  • Colin Burke
    August 09, 2013 - 12:08

    Joey Smallwood once told a young writer -- the future Mr. Justice P.Lloyd Soper -- that one should write not to show that one is angry but in a manner which will make the reader angry -- where, of course, anger is rhe right emotional response.The writer of this editorial has made it clear that he or she is indeed angry at REAL Women of Canada. However, I have yet to read or hear anything about homosexual behaviour which would make me angry when people adversely criticize such behaviour. Can the editorialist here concerned offer me anything of that kind?