Michael Hardner

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.

Seems to me that would be the obvious reason to hire illegals no? I assume that if illegals are working, they're making less than Americans. Okay, I just googled it and looked at the first paper I saw listed. It says that the wage Gap for undocumented immigrants versus legal immigrants is 35% https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0927537119300831

I'll bet you the employer is sad about having to pay higher wages now...

I covered my point in my exchange with user. Do I agree with this ? Of course. It's pretty non-controversial as it is, which User pointed out. The question they asked is 'what racism' ? Here's the point, from the thread title: The U.S. has a checkered history of racism and still struggles with it.

I don't need to explain what a word means. Furthermore, now that I understand better what you are saying we can move on. Discussions can end. I know you want it to continue, but there's nowhere for it to go. Sorry.

The assessment is implied by your response: you say that the OP is correct, so I get that, and then ask about institutional racism such as illegal/protected. You are asking that question but not denying it. I used the poll in case you were denying the obvious. I am informed and have nothing to add to your query.