dialamah

So many Indigenous kids end up in Foster care because their parents don't know how to parent. This is because so many of these parents were not taught proper parenting skills because they were either in the residential school system or they were raised by people from the residential school system. This is called "intergenerational trauma". I can't believe you'd support what is essentially eugenics - sterilizing people because they aren't "good enough" in some way. Well, wait ... I guess I can believe it. And, as soon as you can answer what is going to happen to children born to women who didn't want them, but have been forced to carry them to term.

They tried to get rid of them through destruction of their culture. The UN defines this as genocide. So what? Really? They weren't given any benefits of modern society; in fact, such a goal was undermined by the policies of the government. For example, here's how the government undermined the ability of Indigenous to farm the land they were given. Indigenous couldn't vote until 1960. The state took their children to give to white people in the 60s; ever heard of the "60s scoop"? There was a law in BC and Alberta that permitted the coerced sterilization of women, mostly practiced against Indigenous women, until the 1970s. And, law or not, Indigenuous women are still being coerced. There's much more, but how anyone can claim Canada was just trying to "help" the Indian into the modern age is confounding.

It's not dishonest: 90% of the indigenous population was decimated by the arrival of Europeans. Those that were left were forced into reservations, and their children forced into residential schools. Read about it here. The government’s aim, however, was even farther-reaching. It did not seek only to rearrange indigenous communities from within. It wanted all indigenous people in Canada to become “enfranchised,” effectively destroying indigenous nations as distinct groups" . I understand the difference between the taking of a life and the destroying of a life, and both should be equally condemned - especially by someone who calls themselves a Christian - rather than minimizing the effect of one over the other. By the way, the United Nations defines genocide as the following: Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Canada, in it's treatment of Indigenous people fullfilled all of those criteria.

How soon we forget: Trudeau sorry for ‘incredibly harmful’ residential schools "because of actions that the federal government and other partners deliberately and willingly undertook.”

So you agree that cultural genocide was the goal.

The goal was to take the "Indian out of the child". How did they try to do this? Stealing them from their families as young as 5, cutting their hair; removing their clothes, burning and ridiculing them; beating them if they spoke their own language; forcing Christianity upon them; shaming them for the color of their skin, their parents, their villages - anything that identified them as "not white". They also fed them substandard food, and they spent most of their days working - not being schooled. They were fed substandard food, many of them were physically beaten over minor infractions and some were sexually assaulted. For the adults, they were literally confined to the reservation, needing a permit from the Indian Agent to leave; they were forbidden to practice any of their "heathen ways". Later on, the women were sterilized, without consent, if they went into the hospital to have a baby - this occurred as late as the 1980s. That's a small sampling of their treatment. "Take the Indian out of the child" was the underpinning of what went on - forcibly removing children from their parents and villages and putting them into an environment where they tried, through beatings and shaming, remove every thing that made them Indian.

From Wikipedia: Cultural genocide or cultural cleansing is a concept which was proposed by lawyer Raphael Lemkin in 1944 as a component of genocide.[1] Though the precise definition of cultural genocide remains contested, the Armenian Genocide Museum defines it as "acts and measures undertaken to destroy nations' or ethnic groups' culture through spiritual, national, and cultural destruction."[2] That is what Canada attempted with indigenous peoples. It was a deliberate and determined attempt to eliminate them by eliminating their culture - essentially turn them into brown white people. A quote from Sir John A. Macdonald,– was to 'take the Indian out of the child,' makes the intent clear.

She wasn't charged for organizing a protest; she was charged with mischief, obstructing police, intimidation and counselling others to commit mischief. In law, mischief means rendering a property useless, dangerous, ineffective, or inoperative. altering or destroying a property. interrupting, obstructing, or interfereing with the lawful enjoyment, use or operation of any property. I imagine all of that relates to streets that were impassable, and people who were too intimidated to leave their homes, or couldn't get anywhere - like to work - if they did and businesses that customers couldn't reach.

You must have missed the graph showing deaths from 2014 to 2022 and how deaths suddenly jumped in 2020 and 2021, and continue to be high at the beginning of 2022.

Yeah, you are. You said: Many died for various reasons and having The Rona didn't help matters. When people who have the flu die, you don't say they died for "various reasons, and having the flu didn't help matters"; you say they died of pneumonia. Just like you don't say that liver disease killed the alcoholic driver and the car accident that decapitated them didn't help.

Old people and fat people are also at risk if they get the flu or pneumonia. If they die, we don't say they died because they were old or fat, we say they died from the flu or pneumonia. Why are you applying a different standard for Covid.

We saved lives. Maybe even yours or someone you cared about.

Yes, and it did. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2021028-eng.htm

Old growth protesters have been dragged of roads by police and charged. Their free speech is clearly being abrogated by a heavy handed government, right? They are now turning to spraying graffiti to voice their objections, but we should let them because. /s The convoy blocked streets, interfered with businesses and disturbed area residents past what was reasonable. Yet, you people seem to feel that the locals don't count - they have no right to carry on their day to day activities. The convoy had three weeks to make their point and were given every opportunity to let others get back to their lives - but they refused. So screw them, just like they were ok to screw the residents and businesses caught in their protest. If people stopping traffic during rush hour (or on a logging road) can be arrested and charged, then why should convoyers expect different treatment. I don't agree with what Trudeau said but I agree with the removal of the convoy and the arrests of it's leaders. If the leaders can't get lawyers or they break their bail conditions that's hardly the government's fault.

Of course virtually every medical professional and virtually every politician in the world, as well as the families of those "non-covid" deaths are all in the same conspiracy. Have you people not even a hint of common sense?

If I started a thread and removed posts that were filled with insults, expletives and gay porn, would I be un-democratic or setting a standard for discourse? Just to be clear, I don't support the idea, but also don't think you can judge how democratic someone is based on posts they might delete.

Nothing here but deflection. If Conservatives are so much better, than you should be able to present their plan.

What would the right do that would be more effective and wouldn't result in hardship to Canadians?

People who want to experiment with drugs are unlikely to be deterred by consequences in the moment. Once addicted, consequences don't matter. I don't think harm reduction works well either, but also don't think harsh penalties work any better.

This is the guy you are all lauding as a free speech hero: Musk cancels sale of Tesla over customer's blog post. Fired employee for posting video of Tesla accident Looks to me like he's only interested in free speech that doesn't criticize him or his companies.

(eyeroll) Quite Often, I think you are a troll.

Remember when the emoticons came in? The right moaned about how the left would gang up on the right and dislike all their posts. Turned out the opposite, and I never saw a leftie complain about that. Still, there was enough moaning that the "dislike" emoticons were removed. I once data-mined over a two week period, and in that two weeks, the right offered more insults then the left by a slight margin. I would assume in another two-week period it'd be the opposite. However, if you take a look at just the forum topics, there's a lot more insults to the left than the right. As for complaints, If say both the right and left complain - else the left would never complain that the forum moderation was biased right, which someone does from time to time.

How?

It's always been open season around here, imo. And your contention that the moderation is biased either way is wrong; I've been attacked many times by right-wing posters, and nothing is done. I've also been warned about posts I've made. The rule as I understand is something like "Ignore the post, complain to the moderators, and we'll do something about it IF we agree and IF nobody has responded to/quoted the post you are complaining about".

Yet you assumed single parents were female and entirely at fault for being poor with children. "Perhaps poor single woman should not have kids. Perhaps being responsible and having a family with a mom and dad would work out better." Actions speak louder than words.