Bilingualism is bull

[Re: “Anglos get dose of reality,” Letters, Feb. 28] I would like to reply to frustrated anglos looking for work: Do you seriously think a bilingual franco would have the same chance of finding work in Toronto as a bilingual anglo?

So don’t be surprised. For some anglos, when they talk about Canada being bilingual coast to coast, they mean from the Ottawa River to the Baie-des-Chaleurs.

Don’t try to order a meal in French in Saskatchewan. You’ll starve to death

>> Simon Rancourt

Why Ron Paul
should rule

[Re: “Women against Ron Paul,” Letters, Feb. 28] I would have to disagree on the point that Ron Paul is only out to help the straight white man. 

Yes, he is a Christian obstetrician against same-sex marriage and abortion, but he is more about defending your rights and completely against using the federal government to tell you what you can do with your body. 

He sees marriage as an institution having existed before government, and therefore the government should not be defining it. He is against abortion too, and would overturn Roe vs. Wade. That gets the federal government out of what he considers state business. 

With some states being overwhelmingly Christian and others being overwhelmingly not and in favour of prostitution, same sex marriage, legalizing marijuana etc., then there can be no federal position that satisfies everyone except to let everyone make their own rules where they live, and that is precisely Dr. Paul’s position. 

It’s the only solution to the catch-22 of governments getting both the pro-life or pro-choice movements off their back. Give people the freedom to make their own laws for their own cultures and places—otherwise the government can be taking away someone’s rights. 

I conclude with a question: Would you ever be willing to vote for a heterosexual, Caucasian Christian who believes the federal government should stay out of your business, or would your prejudices against his beliefs get in the way of that?

>> Kyle Hodes

[Re: “Women against Ron Paul,”] Why do women who support abortion assume that men who have misgivings about abortion are anti-women? Are you also saying women who have misgivings about abortion are anti-women by this standard? 

It is true Dr. Ron Paul, as someone who has helped deliver hundreds of human beings into the world, has opinions about the moral implications of aborting a perfectly viable foetus and even more so with large central governments controlling and legislating it. Hardly surprising given the fact that Dr. Paul also has misgivings about the moral implications of killing hundreds of thousands of humans as a result of bad American foreign policy. 

It is also important to note he states it is not the role of central government to legislate abortion yes or no. Therefore the claim he would put the women’s civil rights movement back is completely a “straw-person” argument. 

The letter writer, Ms. Zwicky-Perez, also makes the vague accusation that “Ron Paul isn’t that into gay or queer civil rights either.” What exactly does she mean?

Ron Paul clearly states that it is not the role of a central government to legislate our lives like we are all infants incapable of making our own choices. That may not be a pro-gay stance but it is at least pro-civil rights for everyone.

Is it not ironic that the control freaks on both the so-called “left” and the opposing “right” have so much in common? They both agree that all humans need all aspects of our lives controlled and legislated by large and inhuman central governments. This to me is the antithesis of civil rights for anyone be they straight, white, black, gay etc.

If Ms. Zwicky-Perez wanted a pro-abortion candidate who, like most sociopaths does not give a second thought about the issue of human worth and existence, she should have supported Republican Rudy Giuliani. As an added bonus, he likes to dress in drag, so you got your pro-gay thing going on as well.

Never mind the fact that, like Hillary Clinton, he believes in continuing a misanthropic foreign policy that is currently killing hundreds of thousands and will potentially kill millions of people around the world. 

What’s a life worth?

>> Phil Holloway

Misogynistic
bestiality

[Re: “Bit pull not a sexual object,” Letters, Feb. 21] Funny how someone wrote in to decry how portraying pit bulls as sex objects stereotypes them and their owners. How about the idea that having one’s girlfriend sleep with a dog is disgusting, misogynistic and derogatory to women, not to mention the stereotype it creates of men as unfeeling louts who think only with their dick.

Good job on getting increasingly misogynistic not only with your articles but also with the letters you choose to print.

>> Carolyn

WE WELCOME LETTERS TO THE EDITOR!