CdnFox

Well as it turns out that's not true. You'd have to demonstrate that. Aside from the very beginning, the vaccine hasn't really done much for transmission, Unvaxxed people catch and transmit just as much. The vaccine only helps prevent serious illness. And secondly you would still have to explain how that 'forced' anyone to do anything Well be that as it may, you're doing a lot of dodging around the subject As far as forced goes as discussed coersion is legally recognized as force - a 'choice' where the choice is coerced is not generally considered an actual choice. And i'm sure you could see why. So - people were forced. That's pretty hard to dispute. You could argue that was appropriate given the circumstances if you want to but that's a different argument, So your lack of answer shows you don't really think that the unvaxxed "forced" anyone to do anything.

That's the thing. The left and groups like antifa like to excuse their violence and hatred by claiming that it's just normal and it's not EVERYBODY and what can you expect. But the reality is that if they DIDN'T support that violence they would disassociate themselves with those groups. ANd the violence is pretty prevalent. If a conservative type of person does something wrong the other conservatives say "That guy did wrong, lock him up we want nothing to do with him!!" When someeone on the left does it they literally say 'oh well, everybody's got some violent loons in their orgs" and start rounding up bail money for them. Sorry - but that makes them accomplices and enablers. Precisely.

Yep, him and me and the vast vast vast majority of the others. Well that's fine - that's two of you then But if you actually were a conservative you would realize that while that might be a personal value of yours it's not a CONSERVATIVE value. Even Candice has said clearly she won't push for changes to the abortion laws. You see - she is VERY different from you as a conservative - she understands good conservatives don't demand other people think the same way. I see you have no idea what it means to be conservative. You sound more like you belong on the left with that authoritarian bullshit. "I'm the only person in teh world who knows what it means to be conservative and anyone who disagrees with me is not!" Plleeeaaassee - your mommie might tell you that you're the most important thing in the universe but nobody else is going to. Why don't you go ask her for a cookie and then you can go back to the basement for a nap. You have nothing to teach anyone about being a conservative. You'd be more at home with the far left these days, they like telling people how to think too.

Well it is retarded of course. You say the unvaxxed affected the vaxxed - you are asked 'how' - and your response is "Duuhhh i use plane inglrish. U no use dictonery". Well... that doesn't say how, does it. Confusing the language that you used for the lack of information that language imparts is not particularly intelligent. Being insulting on top of being dumb really is what puts it over the edge to retarded And we already discussed why your tax example was dumb. \ So it's not based on my perception of you, it's based on the reality of your words. So - did you want to give another example that ISN'T dumb? Or explain how the anti vaxxed forced other people to do things? Or did you just want to stick with retarded? Nutbar's choice.

Me for one. And i'll bet money right now i've fought in more elections, served on more policy boards, and attended more conventions than you. Did you want another name? How about Pierre Pollievre. He's been VERY clear he supports abortion in Canada as it is now and will aggressively resist change. And i can tell you a hell of a lot of other conservatives feel the same. They believe in LIMITED abortion, they believe in LIMITED welfare. Most see no problem with first trimester abortions. Most believe there should be SOME saftey net for those who fall on hard times (just not free late's. ) If you believe differently then you are in the distinct minority. Not the majority. Which is fine. Nothing wrong with holding a minorty view as far as the right is concerned, only the left requires absolute obedience to the doctrine. But don't pretend it's otherwise.

Oh it's not that i coudln't understand what you were saying. It's that what you were saying is dumb. And vague. I thought you might like to try saying something that ISN"T retarded. But, y'know, if retarded is working for ya then go with that. You do you.

Which is the best kind of Fascist at the end of the day.

Those aren't really 'woke' Lots of conservatives are pro abortion and pro welfare in moderation.

Well lets think about that. You're suggesting that in essense nobody should have a right to their body. So it should be fine for an employer AFTER you've been hired to require you to undergo whatever medical proceedures they think are a good idea. So... what if after working there for a time you found out you got pregnant? And teh employer said "Well you have to have an abortion or be fired with no benefits or pension". I mean - there's a lot of scientific evidence to suggest single parenting is a cause of a lot of social issues. And of course you can't work effectively when you're dealing with a baby. And you've just insisted it's not pressure to do so and that if a boss puts those condiitons in after you're hired it's fair.... Sound pretty good so far does it? How about after you're hired he demands that you take birth control pills or get fired? Get 'vaccinated' against pregnancy? That'd be ok right? Forcing women to take hormones? Oh --- but of course it isn't 'forcing' is it. So what if a woman can't find a job and has to live in poverty , that's her choice right? Do you see how dumb what you're saying is? The moment we say that people don't have the right to make a free choice as to what happens with their bodies we step in to a VERY dangerous circumstance. Especially if it wasn't part of the conditions of employment to begin with. In canada every worker also pays into an unemployment insurance, in case they become suddenly unemployed due to the business having to shut down or a sudden illness or for some other reason they can't work anymore. ANd the gov't even went so far as to take that away from unvacinated people. Saying that if you lost your job because you were unvaccinated then you would not be allowed insurance that you paid for. Brand new rule for covid. You're in the wrong here. And if the same ideas are applied to women you're going to be very upset you didn't oppose that kind of thinking earlier,

sorry to hear that.

americana antifa could have told you,

Fair - i think i read that wrong initially. hogwash. It has exactly the same meaning, the fact that each individual percieves the meaning differently doesn't change that. You could say the same of almost any word or question, and certainly any work of art. Tell an artist that art has no meaning, see how that works out That's racist. The woke believe everyone is racist except marginalized groups who can't be so if you claim to be non racist you're being racist, you're just not acknowledging it. That's super racist. That's racist and oppresive. And there's nothing wrong with that

it's not hard to work out. Of your points: 1 - not woke at all. Must recognize trans equality. That's a hard left wing position. 2 - not very woke at all. Defunding the police is a large part of the intersectional racial agenda 3 - not woke at all 4 - not woke at all, should support unconditional welfare and better yet ubi 5 - not woke at all, you must support illegal immigration and a 'no borders' policy. 6 - not woke at all, you should be against anyting that is classified by your left wing peer group as 'misinformation'. So most of those are not just 'not woke' but would draw the hatred of anyone who was woke. So 'not woke at all' would be correct. Go back to sleep

In what way? No, that would be like saying if there is store a and store b - if i choose to shop at store b then somehow i'm repressing store a. Now - if i were to threaten to burn store a's place of business down if they didn't meet my price.. different story ';) It really isn't. I get that you're trying (poorly) to some how make it sound complicated. None of that was complicated. Did you want to try again'? Maybe with thinking this time?

God dude we get enough of that from airhead antifa. Enough with the nazi garbage. It's not a code for 'nazi'. It's a code for being a privileged brain dead buffoon perhaps but lets just all stop calling everything 'nazi'.

if you don't have a definition for it then how could you possibly agree that something was 'woke'. That's like saying ' i have no idea what a wombinator is, but i agree that is one". well of course it has meaning. Just because YOU don't have a definition doesn't mean NOBODY does, and it certainly doesn't mean you can't think about it now and develop one Pretty simple, If as the dictionary says you subscribe to the left wing ideology of social justice especially racial, then do the degree that you do you are 'woke'. Sure why not. Although that would leave a larger question of 'acceptable by whom?" Meh. We'll find something else for him to be happy with.

I wonder about that. The fact is right now it's DEATH to your career and insta-cancel if you don't appear hard left in the entertainment industry. You MUST express a strong left wing view. But - there's a lot of reason to believe many people are faking it and don't really lean that way. I suspect if there WAS a 'safe space' so to speak where there was no punishment for "wrongthink" then a very surprising number of actors would turn out to be more right of center or center

I don't think that's really fair. You can take most words and ask people to define it on the spot and get the same effect. As people what 'obese' means specifically and you'll either get very vague and general answers like 'fat' or you'll get a number of technical answers like x percent of body weight is fat or you'll get something in between like VERY fat instead of just overweight or fat. And we've had that word for over a century now People use words with a general idea of their meaning or at least how THEY mean it and that's pretty much true of every word. Now you're right - the op should have included a definition that could be generally accepted in the OP. His failure to do so makes the thread very difficult. But that doesn't mean there isn't an accepted definition. It is generally agreed by most people that a practical definition of the word is the one presented by the dictionary, and most would agree that it is NOW becoming used as a pejorative for any ideology or policy that is "excessively" or impractically left wing exclusively. And as a reasonable person - you can fix the problem of the OP's mistake not including a definition by simply starting your post with YOUR definition so that there's a frame of reference for your reply.

If they threatened to fire you without compensation if you did not comply and that job was your primary income that you use to feed and house yourself and your family - they ABSOLUTELY forced you. That's called coersion. Now - you can argue that such force was necessary given the pandemic, you can argue that sometimes we have to step on individual civil rights and liberties to address a greater right held by a greater number of people. But - you can't really argue that you took the vaccine by 'free choice' if you were being significantly pressured to do so. This isn't complicated, and it's been recognized in law for a long time.

Whenever you fall back on cutsie buzz words like 'projection' and 'deflection' etc it's pretty obvious you're feeling like someone "got" you and you're having trouble coping. It's predictable and consistent. And we both know when i'm laughing at you (along with most of the others here) the only thing 'triggered' is my sense of humour watching the human train wreck which is your life Seriously i don't think a single person here respects you or your opinion much but you come here every day and look the fool for our amusement. I can only assume that masochism is a real hobby for you

Just because you can't think of more than one sentence before your brain cramps up doesn't mean the rest of us can't Ummm - yeah, that's not what projection means But - hey, you can't think for more than one sentence sooo... i'll let it slide this time. You have a good night there little guy

So you choose to waste more time - but because you do it over a longer period it's better? ? That's pretty dumb isn't it. That's like saying "Sure i lost 6000 dollars gambling, but i'm proud of that because i did it over a period of time". Either being here's a waste of time or it isn't. But what's really funny is that as far as i can see i've contributed more to the actual discussions than you have in far fewer posts. All you've done is show up and whine and cry about how others type faster than you and it makes you SOOO mad. Listen kid - your mommy may care when you cry and pound your fists on the ground but most other people are just going to think you're a child. When you grow up and actually have something intelligent to add to the conversation rather than trying to bully your betters then we can talk, In the meantime this appears to be nothing more than you with sour grapes that you look stupid and others are a little more intelligent than you and actually engage in conversation But hey - if you want to follow me around like a frightened chihuahua yapping from the other side of a fence then you go ahead I can always use the chuckle

You sure we shouldn't make this thread about recreational drugs? I feel like it should be about recreational drugs...

Steel AND iron-y. Nice!

Yeah - i think everyone would probably have backed it. I kind of feel that wasn't the only issue, i mean chretien didn't fix it, harper didn't fix it, justin didn't fix it, everyone knew it needed to be fixed. I think if they just pulled the cpc and ndp in and said quietly "Look - lets just get this done and we want your full public support for it" they'd probably get them to agree to the best way to move forward and get it done.