WestCoastRunner

I'm not arguing that. As I said I have no sympathy if she is being harassed.

They cut a deal before the video was found. As far as her feeling remorseful. Who cares.

A great response. This is really what it boils down to. Argus continually complains about his hard earned money going to help the less fortunate including 'unwed mothers'. Geez.

Only because she got off easy and was allowed to have a family while her actions caused insurmountable grief and snuffed out 3 young lives.

Put her in a room with the parents (including her own). Let them at her.

Heh. Just too much stuff to focus on!

I know what happened. I followed the case closely. I'm giving my opinion that she should still be in prison. I have absolutely no sympathy for her nor care if she is harassed.Do you have batman's ear?

This thread is ridiculous. On the one hand we need to debate policies on 'unwed mothers', then it's welfare reform and now it's our healthcare system. What a stupid thread.

She got off easy because of a well hidden video, otherwise she would still be in prison. She belongs in prison.

Thanks Jaycee. This helps in my understanding of the financial issues.

What I am really grappling with here is the amount of money that is being handed over to the Chiefs. Why can't they provide for their communities? And I'm only asking as a naive citizen because I just don't understand what's going on with these communities and I don't think most Canadians do and are asking the same questions. I want to do what's best for these communities but I also want the chiefs to be held accountable. If it's the Canadian government then fine, lets address it but if it's also the Chiefs, let's address that too. There are far too many Canadians left in the dark on the issues with these communities.

Well, maybe. But I was asking directly about his thoughts on gay rights 'human rights' and how he felt about them so that we could engage in a discussion. My son is gay so whenever I can discuss people's opinions I feel it moves the conversation forward.

I have no idea what the mods think but seriously, aren't there way too many points here to focus on in one thread? This OP seriously needs to be broken up.

What is it about the gay rights programs and agendas that you disagree with and that you feel? I believe we have free speech on this forum.

WTF was your last post about?

ROFL. You are so right Tim. Let's dismiss every study that has been done to prove that these sites work.

You haven't provided any information to indicate these programs aren't helping. From a University of Calgary study (the School of Public Policy looked at social assistance data for people under the age of 65 from all of the provinces between 1969 and 2012) as quoted in the National Post Again, can you provide anything to indicate these policies aren't working: "You can look to immigration, to law, to societal attitudes towards drugs and sex and welfare and see how negatively progressive policies have impacted Canada everywhere."

How much convincing do you need or do you just like to keep espousing your personal opinions instead of review numerous studies that have determined these sites are helping. I can provide plenty of links that you can review if you want, however, I know your mind is made up so I won't bother.

There are 'unsanctioned' sites already in th U.S., so why hasn't anyone involved in these sites gone to prison? http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/03/25/ithaca-mayor-wants-haven-heroin-addicts/82213500/

You are attacking policies that provide a social net to people in need. It is difficult to debate your OP when your 'topic at hand' is all over the map, it's vague, it's generalized and you have no links to back up anything you say.

So why not just say 'deadbeat dads' instead of 'unwed mothers'. After all, children living in poverty usually have 'deadbeat dads'.

Can you provide cites to support these statements? Do you seriously think this OP will be taken seriously without supporting links? What do you mean by 'societal attitudes' to drugs and sex? I have no idea what you are referring to with this statement.

This OP is a veiled insult to 'single women' having babies as if these children came about from immaculate conception. Why wasn't a label provided to address 'deadbeat dads' if it's going to single out 'unwed mothers'.

I am grateful that we live in a country that provides a social net for individuals requiring assistance for a length of time due to economic and health circumstances that interrupt one's ability to earn a living.

I find it astonishing that America has no sanctioned safe injection site anywhere in the country. Hopefully this will change soon with a proposal for one in Ithaca, NY. The mayor wants to open one and he wants it modeled after Vancouver's site. An emergency room physician in Maryland would also like a safe injection site opened in that state and they seem to be making progress as well: http://www.cknw.com/2016/04/06/mayor-of-ithica-ny-wants-injection-sites-modeled-after-vancouvers-insite/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/03/25/ithaca-mayor-wants-haven-heroin-addicts/82213500/