That's news to me. I can think of a couple of negative things said about Trump. He's racist. He colluded with Russia. I must've missed the news that says he's absolutely guilty of those things. Anyway..... During the primary and during the presidential election, he's been called sexist. Groper. Liar. Uncouth. Philanderer. Brash. Bully. Clips of interviews, and videos were produced as evidence! Practically all mainstream media did a blanket bashing on Trump. There was always something negative to say about him, almost every day. ......and yet, he won. That's my point.

I found this: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/ask-a-health-expert/i-want-to-fire-my-family-doctor/article559515/

Perhaps, tell your friend to go see her MP, and ask for the MP's help. Maybe some support groups will know where or how to go about it. There's no harm in approaching them and asking for advice. http://www.mpncanada.com/living-with-mpn/patient-support-groups/ ------------------------------------- https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/07/30/make_all_complaints_about_ontario_doctors_public_trial_lawyers.html You could also try to see if CBC's MarketPlace can help: http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/contactus/

Catherine Elliott refuses to concede. With just a few months before the provincial election - this isn't good. True, there has been some irregularities, However: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-progressive-conservatives-pcs-new-leader-election-1.4571014 I tend to take the word of the electoral officer. Elliot has to take into account that she has failed to win the leadership in 3 races now..... .........whereas Doug Ford came in strong second to Tory at the last mayoral election despite the fact that he came to the race quite late in the game. That says something for the popularity of Doug Ford. Note: I was trying to create a poll for this, but unable to.

The two titles - only two spaces for titles here - and the choices are in place.......I can't find the place to put the OP.

For someone so young and inexperienced in politics, Tanya Granic Allen shows great promise. She and Ford, seems to see eye-to-eye on a lot of issues. She's said to have a special place in Ford's cabinet (which will give her the experience). I like how she handled the fiasco of that leadership race. She was the only candidate on the floor too, to be with her supporters (which tells me she's got good people skills). I'm keeping my eye on her........I predict she'll become a major player in the near future.

Remember all the negative things they said about Trump? Congratulations, Doug Ford.

They don't know. But, if I'm an evolutionist - basing it from what science is saying - I'll have to admit that whoever wrote Genesis, surely got it consistent with modern science.

It's just a hypothesis. https://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/40333/title/The-Sex-Paradox/ That scientific hypothesis is more in-lined with the Biblical Genesis narrative - unlike mankind, God never referred to creating genders with other creatures He created! It's consistent with the Bible!

He's retired now. With Parkinson.

I can't help you. Sorry.

Just so to be clear: The gay marriage isn't the proof of THIS particular issue - assisted suicide. SSM was given as an example of a slippery slope that came from the SSM legislation.

<shrug> Okay. Bye.

Why did animals abandon asexual reproduction? Instead of being able to reproduce by yourself - now you need a mate. How did it happen that there became two genders - each with its own physiology? What's the evolutionary origin of sex? Where did males and females actually come from? Can you explain? Provide your source please.

Just when you think it can't get any more bizarre than this.....lo, and behold. https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/01/16/gay-couple-launch-lawsuit-against-tiny-town-for-discrimination-against-their-business/ Gay or not....who in their right mind would think it sensible to invest building a bar - Rustlers Restaurant and Saloon - in a town with a population of 366? Which I assume are mostly Mormons! You know what they say with small-town mentality. I don't know how long this couple had lived there, but it usually isn't easy to be a newcomer in old, small communities. What more if it's predominantly peopled by a certain group.....the harder it gets to be accepted. They'll tend to be protective of one another - if other Mormons have restaurants/bars - maybe you're seen as not only someone who they're not supposed to associate with, but as a competition as well. The problem is compounded by religious doctrine: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/do-mormons-shun_us_5a007e70e4b076eaaae27173 LOCATION - is always the key in any business. Know and choose your location well. No one stops you from moving and opening up businesses into these towns.....but you've got to understand that it may not be that easy to fit in.

How do you know the disabled person wasn't signing under duress? How do you know if he wasn't manipulated, and "led" psychologically to that decision? How do you know he wasn't made to think that the only noble way is to not make himself a burden to anyone anymore? If a person is depressed, and he's dependent on others for his basic needs - he's likely to be susceptible to anything. Why do we say troubled kids are more susceptible to join gangs, to get abused, to be victimized, to be bullied? Bottom line: there are disabled people (not only those that are fully dependent on others for their basic needs) who feel threatened by the legislation. There are others too - although not disabled at all - who are concerned about the possible consequences for that legislation. Like I said, everything starts to seemingly good reasons. Bubbermiley gave same-sex marriage as an example of the slippery slope that he said did not come true because no one has LEGALLY wedded an animal. He's only looking at one possible consequence that was brought up in debates (meaning, others who claim to have been born with a certain orientation would want the same right that will be given to gays). When they were first arguing for Same Sex marriage - the reason being given for it seemed only fair and good: they want to be able to have the same benefits (insurance, governmental etc.) that are being given to married heterosexual couples. Sound so simple. Heart-rending stories were given, like a gay dying of AIDS wasn't allowed to be visited at the hospital by his partner whom he'd been living with for years, because he's not recognized as family member. Now, that SSM is legalized, we find that that wasn't the end of it. We started sliding down the slippery slope. We got LGBTQ _and whatever. We have issues over religious belief - which are hurting businesses, issues over washrooms, over school curriculums, frivolous lawsuits etc..., Check this lawsuit by a gay couple who want to establish a business: Lawsuits over "discrimination against homosexuality" which were done in the past when homosexuality was deemed illegal, seems to be coming, if not here already. Of course, anything that sets PRECEDENT in court rulings, open up the way for some other groups.

I thought that's been explained - review my posts.

IF you can prove that it wasn't really euthanasia.....but plain and simple murder. Who's to say it wasn't? That's the problem.