Womens only swimming day at public pool.

[taxme]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Deleted

Might as well.  

[cannuck]

23 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) A few questions.  You hate Trudeau, so you hate his constitution but... your complaint points seem to be vague except that 1) you hate Trudeau and 2) property rights.  Not sure how you would declare property rights in a constitution anyway.  What do you mean ?

2) Again this is all about hatred for a guy who was in power 34 years ago.... seems pretty irrational.  Also you talk about PUBLIC pools, then PRIVATE organizations.  Which is it ?  If private property should be free to discriminate then public property should be exempt ?

The US has federal laws against discrimination in restaurants and such 'public private' (my word) places, as well as income tax and eminent domain.  Just like your far-left counterparts who rail against our capitalist "system", I invite you to submit something better.  Perhaps a system of government founded on hating Trudeau ?

Michael, sorry don't have time for much of a response, on the way out of the door for a few weeks travel.

Yes, hatred (to put it mildly) for the a-hole from the days that this country was jerked sharply to the left and essentially destroyed.

Surprised you can't see the difference between public and private property.  There is simply no way that ANY government should be able to dictate what I do with and on my property, as long as it doesn't REACH OUT and hurt anyone else.  Just because the Yanks in their drift to the left into political correct nonsense is no reason some other country can't get it right.   A system of government founded on hating almost everything Trudeau stood for could well be the best and most successful on the planet.

[Queenmandy85]

21 minutes ago, cannuck said:

There is simply no way that ANY government should be able to dictate what I do with and on my property, as long as it doesn't REACH OUT and hurt anyone else.

In Canada, all land is owned by the Crown. We lease "our "property from the Crown in a freehold lease. Actual ownership remains with the Crown. As a conservative, I know you appreciate this.

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, cannuck said:

1) Yes, hatred (to put it mildly) for the a-hole from the days that this country was jerked sharply to the left and essentially destroyed.

2) Surprised you can't see the difference between public and private property.  There is simply no way that ANY government should be able to dictate what I do with and on my property, as long as it doesn't REACH OUT and hurt anyone else.  Just because the Yanks in their drift to the left into political correct nonsense is no reason some other country can't get it right.   A system of government founded on hating almost everything Trudeau stood for could well be the best and most successful on the planet.

1) Destroyed ?  Utter hyperbole.  The world has changed immeasurably since the 1970s and the country is very different now.

2) I know the difference, but your communication was ambiguous.  You are advocating that restaurants should be allowed to have 'whites only' sections.  If you want to call that a 'drift to the left' you must mean since the 1950s.

[cannuck]

8 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Destroyed ?  Utter hyperbole.  The world has changed immeasurably since the 1970s and the country is very different now.

2) I know the difference, but your communication was ambiguous.  You are advocating that restaurants should be allowed to have 'whites only' sections.  If you want to call that a 'drift to the left' you must mean since the 1950s.

Yes, destroyed - compared with what we could be and should be today.  Instead, we have become the leftist backwater that mostly lives by exploiting a rather finite quantity of resources.

And, yes again.  I should be free to serve busty white chicks or provide a safe haven for the Bacon, Lettuce and Tomato community or whatever else I wish to do with on my own property.   I should be free to hire and fire ANYONE I choose - it's my nickel, not yours.  Public space, very different.

Appropriately, the opposite of right is not just left, it is also wrong.

Edited June 2, 2018 by cannuck

[BuzzKillington]

Next they'll bring in prayer matts and a special room so they can face Mecca and wail at the imaginary skygod five times per day. 

Just watch...

[GostHacked]

On 6/1/2018 at 11:54 AM, Michael Hardner said:

I know the difference, but your communication was ambiguous.  You are advocating that restaurants should be allowed to have 'whites only' sections.  If you want to call that a 'drift to the left' you must mean since the 1950s.

Businesses reserves the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. They can also say they want whites only. There is no need for a law to force them to serve a group they are not willing to serve. And even if they are forced to serve you, what kind of quality do you think you are going to get? The better way is to simply boycott the place of business and move on. So much time is wasted on protesting these places instead of focusing on the many other businesses that would be MORE than happy to serve you. Hit them where it counts, in the pocketbook.  

Public places and public services cannot make those discrimination as it is a public service that serves EVERYONE. It is illegal for public services to exclude or discriminate against anyone. Private business are not bound by that.

[Michael Hardner]

It's not legal, and if you think it's right anyway fair enough but to the point it's not conservative orthodoxy.

[Guest]

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/jun/30/women-fest-first-man-free-festival-sisterhood-song

“We’re also happy to have non-binary people provided they have a vagina; but not non-binary people with a penis because we have to draw the line somewhere.”

It would be fun to be a fly on the wall in that ticket office...

Well, maybe not.

[eyeball]

15 hours ago, bcsapper said:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/jun/30/women-fest-first-man-free-festival-sisterhood-song

“We’re also happy to have non-binary people provided they have a vagina; but not non-binary people with a penis because we have to draw the line somewhere.”

It would be fun to be a fly on the wall in that ticket office...

Well, maybe not.

Just don't show up with a fly.

[GostHacked]

19 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's not legal, and if you think it's right anyway fair enough but to the point it's not conservative orthodoxy.

A private business should be able to do what they want. And that means refusing service to who ever, for whatever reason. There is no reason to force private companies to do this.  If a private business can have a 'ladies only night',  then that is discriminating against men and should never be entertained. As a ladies night only they are refusing service to men.

[Michael Hardner]

3 hours ago, GostHacked said:

There is no reason to force private companies to do this.  

Sure there is.  But the argument happened in 1964 with the Civil Rights Movement under LBJ.

It's way off topic, but the point is that Conservatives aren't talking about undoing that legislation.

[taxme]

On 7/1/2018 at 9:11 AM, BuzzKillington said:

Next they'll bring in prayer matts and a special room so they can face Mecca and wail at the imaginary skygod five times per day. 

Just watch...

"Just watch"? I believe that there are some schools in Ontario that have already bent over and handed Muslims prayer rooms on public property. I don't doubt it that the school bought the mats for them to pray on. You know we politically correct liberals here in Canada we aim to please. And sorry teach, I have to go and pray now, so hold off with the education stuff will ya and wait for me until I finish praying to Allah Akh  Bar. It will only be about 15 minutes or so three times a day. Go take your coffee break.  

[edmons]

On 7/1/2018 at 7:11 PM, BuzzKillington said:

Next they'll bring in prayer matts and a special room so they can face Mecca and wait at the imaginary skygod five times per day. 

Just watch...

Saw it coming.

[Hates politicians]

On 10/27/2016 at 2:48 PM, taxme said:

I was listening to David Menzies on The Rebel the other day, and he was commenting on how a public swimming pool in the Toronto area had gone female only for one day a week. Is this right? I this what we call equality? How can a public swimming pool say to men that they cannot go for a swim a certain day of the week? Is this discrimination against an identifiable group? It looks to me like it is. Don't the men in that community pay taxes to help maintain and keep that pool properly maintained and running? Is this a case for the Human Rights Commission then?

According to Menzies, he says that the reason for this act of discrimination was to please the muslims who's religion says that women are not allowed to associate with men in certain public areas. So, once again we see that Canada has bent over backwards to please another foreign culture and has given in to the demands of another ethnic group that does not want to become Canadian but wants Canadians to become a part of their culture. Why are these people allowed to come here and start telling Canadians as to how things are going to be done in Canada? 

Sikhs in BC don't have to wear motorcycle helmets because of their religion, yet the rest of us have too. No Christmas scenes allowed in public schools and government buildings because it may offend some other people and their religions. Now muslims get to tell Canadians that they cannot go swimming with muslim women for one day a week. Who and what religion is net? 

Why do foreign religions get their way but the Canadian tradition of celebrating Christmas is not allowed in public places?  We are told by our fake political leaders that we are to accept all religions and show being tolerant towards others and yet those others show no tolerance towards Canadian Christian traditions and religions.Is it time to put an end to all religions forcing their beliefs on others now? If Christmas is suppose to be offensive to others than muslim only swimming days are offensive also to others, and Sikhs should be force to wear helmets just like everyone else has too. Is this Canada or the rest of the world?

Try and go to some muslim country and try forcing your religious beliefs on that country. We all should know by now that will not happen. In some countries they will kill someone who is and practices Christianity. Canadians  need to stop being led by the nose by a bunch of multicultural fake politicians and the fake media that keeps telling us that we must be tolerant and understanding and not show being offensive to another culture and their religion. What about those coming here and trying to show intolerance towards our culture and Christian religion.   

 

What say you, eh?  Do you agree with me or disagree with me?  Over. 

These muslim woman can stay home then. If they dont want to be around men. The sickhs that cant put on a helmet should be fined for no helmet period. If your turbine is in the way then I guess you wont be riding

[taxme]

1 hour ago, Hates politicians said:

These muslim woman can stay home then. If they dont want to be around men. The sickhs that cant put on a helmet should be fined for no helmet period. If your turbine is in the way then I guess you wont be riding

Better still these Muslim women can go back to their country from whence they came if they do not want to assimilate and learn to live and work and play with men. No new immigrant should be allowed to immigrate here and start to demand that they be treated differently to how Canadians are suppose to live by the rules created for them to follow and obey. Does a Sikh wearing a turban and hitting a wall at 60 MPH going to save him from a head injury or death? A helmet may just save his head.  I doubt a turban will.   And does anyone here think that if a Christian went and lived in some Arab or East Asian country that they can disobey their laws by using their Christian religion as an excuse to not abide by their laws? 

This is why I always say that thanks to multiculturalism new immigrants can come to Canada and kick our laws and rules in the ass and pretty much can get away with it. Canada has too many soft and politically correct politicians who will not stand up for Canada and it's traditions, values and culture. They appear to prefer to want to destroy them instead. Personally, I believe that there are just too many traitors and treasonous politicians in Canada who appear to show no love at all for Canada or our Western culture. But most of them appear that they love their non-Western foreigners and saving their cultures. There is really something seriously wrong going on in Canada these days and it is not working for me. 

[Goddess]

My feeling with the turbans/motorcycles is that they should be free to not wear a helmet as per their religion.

However, I feel it should be the same as with smokers - it should be difficult or extremely expensive to get insurance for motorcycle riding without a helmet.

And they can't sue anyone when their brains are splattered all over the pavement from an accident that they could have easily survived had they been wearing the proper safety gear.

If they want the right to not wear helmets, then they should also have to eat the consequences and responsibilities.

Edited July 11, 2018 by Goddess

[Hates politicians]

22 hours ago, taxme said:

Better still these Muslim women can go back to their country from whence they came if they do not want to assimilate and learn to live and work and play with men. No new immigrant should be allowed to immigrate here and start to demand that they be treated differently to how Canadians are suppose to live by the rules created for them to follow and obey. Does a Sikh wearing a turban and hitting a wall at 60 MPH going to save him from a head injury or death? A helmet may just save his head.  I doubt a turban will.   And does anyone here think that if a Christian went and lived in some Arab or East Asian country that they can disobey their laws by using their Christian religion as an excuse to not abide by their laws? 

This is why I always say that thanks to multiculturalism new immigrants can come to Canada and kick our laws and rules in the ass and pretty much can get away with it. Canada has too many soft and politically correct politicians who will not stand up for Canada and it's traditions, values and culture. They appear to prefer to want to destroy them instead. Personally, I believe that there are just too many traitors and treasonous politicians in Canada who appear to show no love at all for Canada or our Western culture. But most of them appear that they love their non-Western foreigners and saving their cultures. There is really something seriously wrong going on in Canada these days and it is not working for me. 

Your dead on with the treasonous politically correct politicians statement. Personally I would drag them out into the street hang them up and horsewhip them. From there the stockade. Politicians are destroying this country.

[Hates politicians]

On 7/8/2018 at 3:46 AM, edmons said:

Saw it coming.

 

On 7/8/2018 at 3:46 AM, edmons said:

Saw it coming.

 

On 7/8/2018 at 3:46 AM, edmons said:

Saw it coming.

 

On 7/2/2018 at 6:49 PM, taxme said:

"Just watch"? I believe that there are some schools in Ontario that have already bent over and handed Muslims prayer rooms on public property. I don't doubt it that the school bought the mats for them to pray on. You know we politically correct liberals here in Canada we aim to please. And sorry teach, I have to go and pray now, so hold off with the education stuff will ya and wait for me until I finish praying to Allah Akh  Bar. It will only be about 15 minutes or so three times a day. Go take your coffee break.  

Bruce power built them a prayer room and they get paid for their whole shift as well.

[dialamah]

2 hours ago, Hates politicians said:

 

 

 

Bruce power built them a prayer room and they get paid for their whole shift as well.

Wow, they must be excellent employees if Bruce Power was willing to accommodate them to that degree.

All the smokers I have ever worked with have been paid for their entire shift, despite several smoke breaks.  

Also, research tells us that people who take several smaller breaks per day are more productive than those who take fewer breaks, even if the breaks are longer.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2017/02/06/want-to-get-more-done-try-taking-more-breaks/

Maybe more, but shorter breaks would be good for everyone.

[BuzzKillington]

Gonna git my burkini out and join them. They won't even be able to see my beard with yesterday's soup still in it!

Here's to swimmin' with bowlegged women! Got your rubbers, chief?

Here lies the body of Mary Lee; died at the age of a hundred and three.

For fifteen years she kept her virginity; not a bad record for this vicinity.

 

[Wascana]

On 7/11/2018 at 2:02 PM, Goddess said:

My feeling with the turbans/motorcycles is that they should be free to not wear a helmet as per their religion.

However, I feel it should be the same as with smokers - it should be difficult or extremely expensive to get insurance for motorcycle riding without a helmet.

And they can't sue anyone when their brains are splattered all over the pavement from an accident that they could have easily survived had they been wearing the proper safety gear.

If they want the right to not wear helmets, then they should also have to eat the consequences and responsibilities.

Yeah but it's kind of annoying thinking about using healthcare money to pay for religious choice to ride motorcycles in the dumbest way possible.

[GostHacked]

On 7/11/2018 at 4:02 PM, Goddess said:

My feeling with the turbans/motorcycles is that they should be free to not wear a helmet as per their religion.

However, I feel it should be the same as with smokers - it should be difficult or extremely expensive to get insurance for motorcycle riding without a helmet.

And they can't sue anyone when their brains are splattered all over the pavement from an accident that they could have easily survived had they been wearing the proper safety gear.

If they want the right to not wear helmets, then they should also have to eat the consequences and responsibilities.

Yeah I kind of like this approach. I'd never get on a motorbike without a helmet, jacket, pants, gloves, boots. The idea of skin grafts after sliding across the pavement at 60kph is not very appealing. Yep, make their insurance higher, as their actions are way more risky to them more than others. BUT make them pay up front for their future stupidity.

[Guest]

I have to disagree.  I don't think religious accommodation should stretch into the area of having different laws for different religions. 

[taxme]

On 7/12/2018 at 1:06 PM, dialamah said:

Wow, they must be excellent employees if Bruce Power was willing to accommodate them to that degree.

All the smokers I have ever worked with have been paid for their entire shift, despite several smoke breaks.  

Also, research tells us that people who take several smaller breaks per day are more productive than those who take fewer breaks, even if the breaks are longer.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinkruse/2017/02/06/want-to-get-more-done-try-taking-more-breaks/

Maybe more, but shorter breaks would be good for everyone.

I think that I will take a break now. I deserve a break at least five times a day after having to deal with liberal snowflakes all the time here. See you later.