Michael Hardner

The one thing that is distinctive about the current era, is the common expectation that American natural disasters like this will inevitably result in ridiculous finger-pointing and divisive stupidity. Sad, if you care about people... funny if you want them to fail.

"My ilk" would look at that and ask ... where exactly does it tell people to hate Canada ? Answer: it doesn't. I invite you to attend a school board meeting and tell the audience that the school board 'hates Canada'... You can start your movement there, I suppose. If you want to reboot our little discussion and tell me what your issue is that, let's wipe the slate clean and do that.

1. No, it's not whattaboutism it's a statement on the way we collectively discuss problems. 2. I don't think anybody knows much about our history, young or old. It's more like they know about general themes of what the history of the country is. Maybe that's a problem, but it deserves a serious discussion not a conspiracy theory of left-lib teachers conspiring to make us hate Canada and destroy it. 3. My guess is that the people designing the system are trying to do that. You probably don't agree. 4. Keep throwing conspiracy theories out there, Graham, that will help things. Keep making it about me, that will help things. If you don't have the discipline to discuss issues with your opponents without saying they hate Canada, you won't be taken seriously and maybe that's a good thing. 5. I agree with you, but demonizing people isn't helpful either.

The conspiracy is right in the tag line "taught to hate Canada". If you think there are problems with the system, or rogue teachers departing with the curriculum then those are serious issues to be dealt with seriously. The first step in the discussion is to state the problem, and allow that we will be taking this seriously with parties that have strong and opposing views. To state that students are taught to "hate" Canada is deceptive, at best, and not the way to start a serious conversation on this. My kids have seen enough of this country to have an opinion on it, and they like it and appreciate it. Nobody in the school system is "taught" to "hate" Canada. It's a conspiracy theory, and I will continue to call it that until you take the discussion seriously. And to you...

Same tired conspiracy horsesh1t. We should be focusing on education cuts and tax breaks for the super wealthy, not this made up claptrap about 'hating Canada '. We have never known a lot about our history nor has the USA. They repeat a handful of significant events over and over... That's all. I might wait until grade 3. Of course, the goalposts change from hating Canada to knowing the name of the 2nd PM. This made up controversy is so old, it's boring... Why can't Johnny read?

Yeah. They love it, and they love singing the anthem. They're elementary school age.

And if they can't answer, then they were taught to hate Canada...

My kids are in the system and they're more patriotic than we ever were.

I think you may be missing something. He may be actually picking up on Trump's strategy to troll, aggravate, and inflame.. for whatever reason. Of course his words will be taken literally by some, his supporters won't. And for Trump supporters they won't take Trump's words literally. So it's just tribes at this point.

Why should they be arrested though? Conservatives like myself, we want to maximize freedom of choice.

He must have a hard time working as a vet then.

CdnFox has a point, but the lack of symmetry in how much/little attention people pay isn't so easy to explain as that. Why did Canadian media pay more attention to the Boston Marathon bombing then the Quebec mosque shooting? People on the left will simply say that it's racism. They are wrong also. The problem is rather unfathomable, however you can frame the question very succinctly as a great Canadian named Harold Innis did: "Why do we attend to the things we attend to?" Maybe AI will figure it out.

There was a tag added "Context needed: While tragic, the child's condition has always been terminal, and has progressed beyond the stage where the drug is considered useful. The only remaining benefit is seizure control, which can be managed by less expensive ($1mil/yr) medications."

My statistics Prof used to say that you could use linear regression to come up with a flawed formula for the area of a square. The idea being that absolute truth is out there, and approximations and game theory will never get you there. The counterpoint to that, now, is that humans do not live on a theoretical two-dimensional plane. They live in a real world. I find it impossible to imagine that A I will develop a Picasso, Chuck Berry, Joni Mitchell, Captain Beefheart, Basquiat, Laurie Anderson, Leonard Cohen

Pretty much everybody has a moral position, just as they have clothes. They're not usually that interesting. It's not why we have a discussion board. What's interesting is thoughts, analysis, perspective on events and on other thoughts, analysis, perspective.

I'm not surprised. As you say, we get along.

1. Sure... look at you citing the dictionary and all that... 2. I didn't know that so I googled it and it seems wrong: https://scienceforgeorgia.org/knowledge-base1/dispelling-myths-around-puberty-blockers/ 3. No. Lots of wealthy Republicans buy boob jobs for their kids but that's ok because they're your tribe. I'll show myself out...

This is about puberty blockers, not mutilation. The fact that you have to abuse language shows that your point is weak. And in fact, parents are free to approve mutilation of their children. It's just when the spectre of transgender people arises that they get upset...

No, I asked a question too.

Perspective being... that other countries don't have freedom ? We could ban protesting and criticizing the government too. Were you a Trudeau supporter by chance ?

1. No. 2. Ok. 3. That's obvious. 4. It doesn't make sense to me that you think current moral attitudes are validated by past attitudes. Why? And why 50 or 100 years? Why not 200 or 500? Also you avoided responding to my point about parents' rights, which was why I posted a response.

Yes. And yes I do. I think parents should be consulted for some decisions also. If you don't, then you can't really claim that you support parental authority to make these choices. You're either for parents rights or against. If you support parents right to deny gender care but not to provide it, you're not in favour of parents rights you're just against trans care.

Is strange that people have actually decried decisions that take away parents rights, when it comes to some aspects of trans politics. Seems to me that parents rights have been taken away in this case no? I'm just asking. If you care about parents rights, shouldn't you care when the government takes the way for any reason? https://repolitics.com/forums/topic/54465-are-you-a-man-or-a-woman/page/59/#findComment-1795594

All the cackling chuds out there will be long dead when people ask... Why was nothing done?

And yet, here you are... A Francophone, whose people were tolerated by the British.