![]() ![]() Re: The Truth About ‘Robo-Calling,” Andrea Mandel-Campbell, March 15. There are millions of referees they’re usually called voters. ![]() ![]() Michael Ignatieff is reported to have said during his remarks to a law school audience that there is no referee in politics. Re: Ignatieff Admits His Mistakes, March 14. Where is that Liberal party? Government spending cuts are critical to liberate enterprising people to create new wealth. Paul Martin and Jean Chrétien were the last Liberals to get it right with their spending cuts. ![]() But no country prospers by spending more and raising taxes. And I am not beating any drum for the Conservatives on this either. I sense that Liberals have little to no grasp of how a country is made to prosper. He argues that bringing the budget into balance and granting Canadians income tax relief is something “which moderate and sensible people can easily take issue.” Gasp. He laments the loss of Dion’s Green Shift (“a potential game-changing asset”) and the abandonment of Ottawa’s environmental policy and energy strategy. John Duffy once again shows us why the Liberals are so out of touch with most Canadians. Re: Opportunity (Finally) Knocks For The Liberals, John Duffy, March 13. Who’s that on the $50 bill? Why, it’s eugenics-supporter Nellie McClung. I suppose, however, that airbrushing the truth about Douglas may reflect views held in broader Canadian society, as the country seems quite willing to bestow honours on eugenicists. What is most troubling about Tommy Douglas is that in almost 50 years of public life, he never publicly disavowed these repugnant views on eugenics. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Margaret Somerville, director, McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law, Montreal. The fact that McClintic and Rafferty did not have respect for Victoria Stafford’s life, and much as we believe they deserve to die, does not alter the harm to respect for life that intentionally killing them would necessarily entail. That is the case because doing so falls outside the parameters outlined above and, consequently, would harm the societal level values of respect both for each individual human life and for human life, in general. Much as we might despise people such as Terri-Lynne McClintic and Michael Rafferty, and believe that they deserve capital punishment, if convicted of heinous murder, as a society we can’t afford to kill them. If we believe that respect for human life must prevail in all circumstances, the only possible justification for taking human life is to save innocent human life, when taking life is the only reasonable way to do so. I do not care what extenuating circumstances may exist, I do not care what their upbringing was like, I do not care if they were on drugs - if they are both found guilty of murder, these two do not deserve to live. Should Michael Rafferty be found guilty of first degree murder, he will no doubt receive the same sentence as Terri-Lynne McClintic: life, with eligiblity for parole after 25 years. Activate your Online Access Now Article content If you are a Home delivery print subscriber, unlimited online access is included in your subscription. Manage Print Subscription / Tax Receipt. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |