Not at all, well on topic. I knew full well it would touch an exposed nerve and elicit some informative posts from the Canadian residents of MLU, in that respect it was a somewhat selfish ploy to advance my understanding and get an overview of the "popular" opinion, if ever you couldn't deduce that outcome with 5 brain cells or less.

Jon Skagfield said: "It forces the government , in order to stay in power, to appease special interest groups. There was a report released sometime back that said one hundred thousand people was all it took to force the government to change legislation. So a tightly knit group can steer the government."

Isn't this minority rule ?

And previously he rightly said: "We all know the current Liberal party's pandering to the immigrant vote, but granting Sharia law to resident Muslims simply violates our parliamentary (or more properly, our constitutional) democracy."

Isn't this sedition and treason?

One might hope the crowned head of the Commonwealth has a few words with the people in charge there, preferably bangs some heads together, but don't hold your breath.

Bear in mind too, the problems posed by the 21st century social order in daily life, is "resolved" by these Middle East doctrines, if I may group them thus, by an immediate and ruthless return to "Fundamentalism".

In fact no answer at all, but a turning back of the clock to 2,500 years ago.

Whilst "you" and "I" permit, nay encourage, these people to retain their culture and build specific and restricted meeting places for their important religious practices, how many Christian churches have been built for the westerners in the Middle East? The very suggestion would have your head off. Surely, fair's, fair?

Lets not forget at the very fundamentalist root of it, all us western, "Christians" are scum of the Earth infidels. Unacceptable.

I thought here in England we got over the "my lot are holier than your lot and if you don't believe me, I'll punch your head in" many hundreds of years ago with civil wars and gummint purges, surely we don't have to go round the buoy again, do we?

All British monarchs are sworn to "F the D", you can't have the job without it, and Fid. Def. or latterly F.D. appears on all coins since George I in 1714. As you all know of course Fidei Defensor is Latin for "Defender of the Faith" which for us means The Church of England.

Are we getting close to the point when HM QE II needs to do a bit of pro-active F-D ing?

R.