Zeitgeist

There are generally three types of people in Canada participating in the electorate: dumb unsophisticated left wing activists (the people in charge of Canada and your HR department), the Pollyanna “What, me worry?” apologists (most Canadians and the mushy middle go along to get along MSM consumers, etc.), and everyone else who ranges from important and brave critical thinkers to more radical elements on the right (who have much in common with the radical left activists). Generally the critical thinkers are ignored or suppressed because they’re a threat to the lunatic activists. That’s why the 50 year old man is exposing himself to young girls and winning women’s athletic competitions. Duh!

The electorate are busy, exhausted, and somewhat resigned to doing as their told, especially after a few years of attending anti-human racism equity sessions that tell them they’re privileged colonialists and that Canada should be cancelled. When someone has the balls and money to push back and go to court, the activist Liberal-appointed judges tell them that indeed they are patriarchal, colonial transphobic scum who deserve cancellation. Everyone with a brain who is employed in an organization/business large enough to have an HR department knows this game. Trans is just another designated victim group running roughshod over kids, women, and anyone who likes traditional family. Our kids are explicitly taught that this self-denialism and anti-science, ahistorical worldview is correct and must be followed or else.

This is happening because of a failure of the electorate to assert women’s, children’s, and religious rights. Unfortunately the courts are dominated by so-called progressives. Radical left activism, cancel culture, and the equity industry are destroying Canada. So much has already been said on this topic, yet the stupidity persists.

It doesn’t matter what actually happened. Stupid revolutionaries with a shallow knowledge of history are rewriting it. Our universities and institutions are riddled with such idiocy, which is weakening Canada and its meritocracy in ways that may be irreversible as such ideology is legislated and enforced by politicized courts and media. There are too many apologists looking the other way and claiming there’s nothing to see here. Canada has declined because of it, obviously.

There were very few non-white immigrants to Canada until after WW2. Yes they have made many contributions.

Fair enough. The changes in Vatican 2 were mostly around the use of the local language in masses instead of Latin, priest facing the congregation instead of the tabernacle, etc. It did pose problems with translations that arguably didn’t capture the original meaning. There was also a watering down of some obligations for church attendance, dietary restrictions, and so forth. On doctrine there were no essential changes. At least that was how modernization of the Church was defended. The very recent proposed and vaguely implemented changes are doctrinal in nature or at least muddy the waters of what constitutes teachings in areas of sexuality and sexual identity. The problem for Catholics and Catholic institutions in this context is that the lack of clarity makes the acceptance of what is considered sinful likely: active euthanasia, adultery, denial of natural identity such as biological gender, sex outside of marriage, etc. How can Catholic educators do their jobs in this context? I know this is irrelevant to many non-Catholics, but when the ideals of morality are no longer taught and are abrogated without regret or sorrow, conditions are set for very real social problems. When we know that broken families cause all sorts of ills for kids, for example, this kind of mixed messaging is very unhelpful. Anyway, subjects for other threads.

Actually all GAP policy is voted on at board meetings, and this process must be public and transparent. While I think you’re correct that personal foibles and secular values/trends are constant threats to doctrine that historically have crept in from time to time, these warps have also been recanted and corrected by subsequent popes. There have been schismatic popes. Basically you are saying that much doctrine is changing and changeable in the modern Catholic Church. I would say that’s a very novel idea that was certainly not the case until very recently, under Pope Francis. Highly respected and reverent clerics see this and are being doxed for calling it out. You’re missing much here that I don’t have time to address. One can acknowledge how someone lives without condoning it or judging the person. A man can love a man and a woman can love a woman, but even under Francis the conditions around such relationships are that they are non-sexual because such sexual behaviour is sinful and cannot be blessed. At least that was the case until this fall, and that’s the reason for the major upheaval in the Church. The great heresy that appears to be perpetrated in many “Catholic” boards is the conflation of love of the sinner with affirmation of the sin. You should know this, which is just one reason why your comments are off the mark. This isn’t about me or my opinion. This is doctrine that is continually reaffirmed at the top, or was until Francis recently began saying things that are ambiguous or unclear, perhaps intentionally. Now he has an out of control reformation underway in Germany and major opposition on his hands, especially from America, but even parts of Africa, Europe, and Asia. I don’t know how this plays out, and I’d like to believe unity, clarity, and restoration will return. I’m honestly not sure at this point. There’s much more to the story than feel-good EDI banality. Bishops are literally losing their livelihoods over this for what appears to be the assertion of doctrine. Many Catholics don’t have the time to consider or the knowledge of what’s unfolding, which is why parables about the evil of misleading the flock are being referenced. Again, big topic on which much more can be said, so if you actually care, I’m sure you’re bright enough to do your own research. Those are religious matters. Much can be debated on this thread without reference to religion. However, when it’s a Catholic board, you can’t ignore how Catholicity factors into the issue.

Actually the issue for the Catholic boards is trustees who don’t support Catholic doctrine. That’s the heart of the matter. I’m quite sure the voters didn’t know that’s what they were getting and wouldn’t support such positions more often than not. It’s really about the question of whether a system that proclaims Catholicity and leans on the Constitution to justify itself is in fact following Catholic doctrine. If it is not, then it shouldn’t wear the badge. The public system must answer to the question of whether its policies reflect the constituents whose children attend, and if the justification is “human rights”, the questions must be asked, “Whose human rights?” and “How are competing rights being reconciled reasonably fairly through policy?” Who agreed to Pride flags in every classroom and foyer? Was the question put to a vote? Did the trustees tell voters what they would support at election time?

Easy, organizations/speakers like that are clearly against the longstanding values of the organizations and their members, by the very definition of the organizations. Why would an organization that opposes pre-marital sex allow child sex, let alone pedophilia? Get real. The Holocaust denier wouldn’t get any traction and would soon realize this, but again the contravention of organizational values is clear. Are you saying that opposing young children reading books about transgenderism and sex is morally equivalent to denying the Holocaust or promoting child sex? You don’t make sense.

Thank God we still have some truly smart and courageous social commentators. Black sums up our predicament brilliantly: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/conrad-black-physicians-college-embraces-social-justice-lunacy/wcm/b7c28cea-7302-4541-81c2-35f482ed80d5/amp/

Any kind of discrimination on the basis of race or claim to supremacy on the basis of race is wrong. Sadly, new forms of discrimination have arisen from unexpected places. Ibrahim Kendi, for example, says that we need to discriminate against whites now. Of course this line of thinking sows division, but this is now the dominant narrative in “anti-black racism” and EDI training. MLk has been replaced with judging people once again on the basis of race. We’re told to interpret the world through race and see colour first when looking at individuals. What a sad form of dehumanization, reducing everyone to racial identity and a collection of intersectionalities. Gloss over nuance by categorizing people according to superficial markers. It’s simplistic and regressive.

“Human rights!” has become yet another slogan to silence, dismiss, and categorize someone as bigoted while eliminating one of the most fundamental human rights of all: free speech. When school boards arrogate the authority to discern which discussions are admissible when such presentations contain no slurs against any groups and no slander against individuals, we find ourselves back in front of a Maoist/Stalinist committee for the discernment of counter-revolutionary thoughts and behaviour. The whole purpose of school board meetings, parliaments, city councils, and town halls is to discuss and debate. Any time that discussion is squelched, the organization opens itself up to accusations of pushing through an agenda without due process. It undermines public confidence in the organization and creates conditions for backlash. When governments fund special interest groups like Egale, which then uses our tax dollars to propagandize, influence, and sue organizations, it’s very hard not to feel like an agenda has been pushed on the public without a public mandate or consent. The government funded Human Rights Tribunal is similarly run by radical activists. Our current federal government has made this mistake too many times, kowtowing to special interests at the expense of the public, both figuratively and literally. It’s the grandstanding, “Look, I’m progressive. I’m sending a big delegation to the climate conference (in private jets). I’m funding Indigenous activists (who are going to sue our governments and denounce Canada as settler colonial). I’m welcoming millions from all different cultures into Canada (who will need housing and some will denounce Canada as settler colonialist and commit terrorist acts).” Canada has shot itself in the foot on constitutional rights and Canadian traditions. This attack on free speech is just one example among many of anti-Canadian forces in our institutions.

It’s entirely the opposite. Strickland was an important voice for holding bad clergy to account. I realize that this is all too inside baseball for most of the posters on this site. You need to look at the history of what’s unfolded. Pope Francis has just taken away the apartment and salary from Bishop Burke, a highly respected American bishop whom Pope Benedict 16 had given tremendous responsibilities. Pope Francis has not given a reason for the dismissal. I would agree that if you’re someone who thinks that all charge is progress, you might think that what’s happening in the Vatican is some kind of positive reform. However, the Church is supposed to adhere to essential core doctrine which is unchanging. Otherwise there was no way to salvation for anyone who lived in the past, as the Church “had it wrong” until today. It reflects the same presentism or woke mind virus that decries our country as settler colonial and therefore invalid because it wasn’t correct by the fleeting standards of a today that will soon become the ignorant and passé yesterday. Anyway, much more can be said on this and it’s easy to anticipate the responses of the shallow and uneducated. The point of canonical books of wisdom established over thousands of years, sometimes predating any current religions, is that they speak truths. They are records of great human trials. Adherents to the Church and all Christians believe that there were prophets and actual incarnation of God, which established our parables, fundamental Church teachings, and in many respects, the values underpinning our culture, nation, and Common Law, but again, these are big topics that go beyond the scope of this thread. If you don’t believe in some or any of this, that’s your prerogative. These are matters of faith. I would simply say that there’s a massive fissure in the Church, especially between the American bishops and Rome. Pope Francis has deplatformed highly respected bishops without explanation other than the fact that they issued dubia or questions in accordance with Canon Law. It raises questions about vindictiveness. It undermines the narrative of unity and inclusion, which is of course the dominant virtue both for this papacy and in secular society today.

Learn some respect, hollow man.

Catholic Catechism directly states that there are only two genders, the natural born biological ones. To say that the question of whether transgender constitutes real gender with attendant gender rights is something that shouldn’t be asked, let alone opposed, in a Catholic school system with constitutionally protected religious rights is absurd, if not completely stupid. Of course people have the right to oppose the recognition of transgenderism and novel “trans rights” on the basis of their religious beliefs. In fact, the Catholic education system defines itself on the basis of Catholicity. If you think that the transgender question is a fait accompli, expect endless culture wars, because most people can’t pretend that green is orange or do what they think is wrong for very long.

So for you everything is about capital. It’s important that you understand the ideological framework of that lens, which is materialism or Marxism. Freeland has the same angle. It’s much more common in our institutions than people realize. The problem with your perspective is that there is no moral imperative except an economic one. We are only consumers, exploiters, and workers. As a Christian and a spiritual person, I have to believe there’s a greater moral imperative centred around the sacredness of each individual and the family. It’s perhaps a socially conservative position relative to current prevailing ideology, which is EDI, ESG, materialist, and nihilistic.

Discussion of policy is silenced in the name of “human rights” with regularity. Not only is this an infringement on free speech, it makes it impossible to debate ideas or set policy through careful consideration and discussion. The overwhelming take-away is that such policies and the newly created “rights” are handed down from on high without public awareness, let alone discussion or questioning. It creates a sense among the public that a small group of well-funded and highly motivated activists are setting policy that isn’t necessarily in the public interest if by public we mean the majority of people. I understand the value of minority rights. However, we’re seeing longstanding rights like free speech, religious rights, women’s rights, men’s rights, etc. The reason we’re finally seeing populist conservative pushback is because the public is waking up to the tremendous ideological capture of our governments and public institutions, including schools. The “Huma Rights Tribunal” which exists because of funding and government will has an outsized influence on how our society operates. It looks far too much like social engineering run by equity activists. One group is the tail that wags the dog.

It’s highly relevant to the day to day running of school boards because use of pronouns has become front and centre, to the extent that Ottawa-Carleton no long refers to girls and boys or he/she or him/her. Everyone is they/them, which seems like a form of dehumanization or at the very least a denial of identity. It’s an assertion of a grammatically incorrect subject-pronoun (dis)agreement. It’s compelled speech. It’s denial of biological reality. It also seems highly related to the particular self-interest of the board’s transgender Chair. Similar switching off of the microphone at board meetings has happened when delegates questioned dubious board policies.

Groot has called out the self-destructive stupidity of the activists who are running our government institutions and large businesses under the banner of DEI and “progress”. He’s right and the sucky leftist nanny crowd are wrong. Very wrong. We have traded MLK’s idea of equality for new forms of segregation. We have traded quality education and our meritocracy for identity politics and favoured status for groups based on superficial traits like race without regard to the uniqueness of individuals. We have lost the plot as a society because we’ve forgotten the foundations of a healthy democracy and economy: free speech, meritocracy, religious rights, and individual rights. We’ve also forgotten that government should only be in the business of providing services, not dictating how people think or raising children. The attack on the family unit, the natural procreating family, as well as the values that support it, are in my opinion the most worrying trend. We have stopped valuing human life and understanding that healthcare is about keeping people healthy, not killing them or giving them hard drugs for recreation. I understand the importance of supporting workers and safeguarding the poor and infirm, providing opportunities for those who are underprivileged, and many of the values of the traditional left. No doubt social safety nets are important. The problem I see is that our permissiveness and naivety have weakened Canada, caused a loss of confidence in our traditional way of life, and imported international conflicts and values that run counter to our founding peoples’ values. Trans-humanism and AI are threatening our natural identities and humanity. The obsession with climate fear could also eliminate the middle class and push more people into subsistence. What some have called progress is actually regression. Our mortality rate is up, our GDP per person is lower, there are more wars, and people feel a sense of powerlessness before the vicissitudes of a more top-down internationally-driven governance that uses better surveillance and data to direct more of our behaviour. The pandemic won’t easily be forgotten. Basically governments have become too controlling, too big, and too ideological. Our basic constitutional freedoms have been compromised and in exchange people are force-fed BS about how privileged they are or how victimized they are based on pseudoscientific narratives. These problems come mostly from the left today. We need to restore traditional family values, our basic rights, and clip the wings of woke-green activism in our governments and organizations. Call out the communists, nihilists, gender ideology activists, and other radicals claiming Canada is a settler colonialist oppressor state when it’s probably been the most accepting and tolerant country of any on the planet. Respect the roots of this country or lose it. Canada didn’t just fall from the sky. It can be dismantled more easily than most people think. I myself have lost my passion for the country and see more to admire in certain US states, because I no longer think our government works for Canada and Canadians. I hope it changes for the better soon.

You can Google it for yourself: ”On a per-person basis, Canadian GDP has now declined for four straight quarters. ”

Shallow knowledge of exorcism

Then you don’t know the history. Attitudes like yours are why Canada has gone downhill. You don’t understand what the forces for good are.

You don’t see how ignorant and pretentious you sound painting everyone with the same brush and referring to a number of posters as “you people”. No one said Palestinians can’t have a country except Palestinians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-hating_Jew Netanyahu says this is a global conflict and he's right. It's Israel's right-wing that's wagging the world's dog. I’m well aware of Chomsky’s narratives. I would beware of the ways that the word “Zionism” has been used to promote antisemitism. There were Jews for thousands of years in Judea and the areas roughly defined by Israel’s current borders. There is peace between peoples of different religions within Israel but outside of Gaza. While I agree that there’s a harsher right wing faction in the Knesset and some of the settlement in the West Bank has been provocative, none of this has been terrorist and the Israeli state has never promoted terrorism. Israel has problems, but if you don’t recognize the distinction between a country defending itself and retaliating against terrorism versus an organization that commits terrorist acts and refuses to work constructively and recognize Israel’s right to exist, we have a problem.

Your mistake is thinking that the left are mostly against Hamas. The western support for Hamas comes from the left. As for your notions about pluralism in Gaza, get real. Iran and Hizbollah and Hamas are happy to use the left’s sympathies whilst opposing all opposition, hating progressive values (including LGBTQ2S+), and wishing for the death of Israel and America, including the mass murder of innocent civilians. In this context Israel must be fiercely careful and defend its polity and population, which includes Muslims and Palestinians. Hamas are using the same left-wing rhetoric of “settler colonialism” to garner sympathy from BLM and radical Indigenous activists seeking reparations, and communists. Of course Hamas hates these groups as much as they hate the Jews. That’s why you have to be very careful not to buy into the victim narrative Hamas is using. Hamas is actively undermining the wellbeing of Gazans in actual fact through its terrorist activities and mismanagement of Gaza.