Jump to content

Former PM Pierre Trudeau started his "just society" for Canada


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

So, why did Alberta UPC vote for Premier Danielle Smith. If ever there is a catastrophic government, the current government of Alberta is it. It is not that she makes more stupid mistakes than Glenn Clark, though she is just getting started, so give her time, it is that  her stupidity is on a whole higher dimension than anyone has ever conceived in this country. Glenn Clark set the bar for stupid First Ministers very high, but Premier Smith is sailing over it like she has rocket propulsion. As an Albertan, I would think you would be embarassed to be pointing fingers at any other politicians. At least, all the silly talk about "Alberta wants out" is over. With Premier Smith at the controls, Alberta will need all the help it can get from the rest of Canada.

With any luck, she won't get past the next election.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-abacus-survey-reluctant-ucp-voters-1.6687137

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

There is also the legal imperative that everyone is presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court. 

 

That only applies in court in a criminal case.  You said it yourself "in court".   When it involves something like someone going overseas to join a terrorist organization (ISIS) that executed people by beheading or possibly shooting, they automatically should be considered as giving up any Charter Rights.  The legal system in Canada was not designed to be able to deal with overseas terrorists.  There is no way to collect the evidence.  Why allow them back?  There is no plan to de-program them if that is even possible.  Did you forget they are indoctrinated terrorists?  If there is no way to undo that, how can they be allowed to mix into society without endangering Canadians?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Who's freedom of religion was violated since the charter?

Many people's freedom of religion has been violated.

Doctors who are supposed to refer people to where they can get an abortion or medical assistance in dying even though those things go against their conscience and religious beliefs.

Nurses put in a similar situation.

School children being indoctrinated with woke sexual orientation gender identity ideology against their parents wishes.

Christian ministers, elders, and church members now forbidden to counsel or may be at risk if they counsel an LGBTQ person even if the person requests counseling.  That is a grey area and I am not fully up to date on the situation.

Companies forced to hire people on the woke ideology.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Many people's freedom of religion has been violated.

Doctors who are supposed to refer people to where they can get an abortion or medical assistance in dying even though those things go against their conscience and religious beliefs.

Nurses put in a similar situation.

School children being indoctrinated with woke sexual orientation gender identity ideology against their parents wishes.

Christian ministers, elders, and church members now forbidden to counsel or may be at risk if they counsel an LGBTQ person even if the person requests counseling.  That is a grey area and I am not fully up to date on the situation.

Companies forced to hire people on the woke ideology.

Don’t forget racialized-only job postings.  Racism dressed up with illogical rhetoric.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, blackbird said:

That only applies in court in a criminal case. 

You are incorrect. What it means is everyone must be presumed innocent, UNLESS proven guilty in a Court. That means presumed innocent by everybody. You and I know nothing about the se individuals and their circumstances. It is not for us to judge them based only on allegations. 

In the past, I have had to testify in court. I always made a point that my evidence was never a presumption of guilt. I testified to what I saw and heard. I observered this person or vehicle at this location at this time doing this action. This is what was said by these persons. etc.

A person may have gone to Syria to join ISIS, but did they join? If they did, what actions did they take? We cannot blame an individual for the actions of a group. Some people went to Syria to fight the brutal government of Bashar al Assad. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, blackbird said:

School children being indoctrinated with woke sexual orientation gender identity ideology against their parents wishes.

Christian ministers, elders, and church members now forbidden to counsel or may be at risk if they counsel an LGBTQ person even if the person requests counseling.  That is a grey area and I am not fully up to date on the situation.

Companies forced to hire people on the woke ideology.

There is a vast difference between "indoctrinated" and informed. Children who are born gay stand the risk of being abused by parents who were uninformed about the circumstances of sexual orientation. It is some parents who have been indoctrinated in the bigotry lifestyle to the extent they will terrorize their own children. It is not that common but in my experience some parents can treat their children with brutality rather than loving support.

You and I have different views of what constitutes the Christian Church. In a Christian Church, they would counsel an LGBTQ person to realize their orientation is a gift from God, regardless of it's direction whether it is straight or gay. We are born with our sexual orientation and who are we to question God's desire for us.

Woke ideology means to be aware of injustice. In the US, not hiring a person because of their woke ideology is a violation of the first amendment. In Canada it is a violation of Charter rights. Woke is a legitimate view of the world just like conservatism.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

We are born with our sexual orientation and who are we to question God's desire for us.

That is the biggest fallacy in existence besides man-made climate change.   A lie of the Devil.

"Scholars at Johns Hopkins University released a new report on Monday which argues that there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that lesbian, gay, or transgender people are born with this sexual orientation or gender identity.

“The idea there that sexual orientation is fluid, that people change as people grow,” Lawrence Mayer, a co-author of the report and a scholar-in-residence at Johns Hopkins University’s psychiatry department, as well as a professor of statistics and biostatistics at Arizona State University, told The Christian Post. “There are probably some people that identify as heterosexual [sic] that then later on identified as homosexual, so it goes both ways. The importance there is the fluidity and flexibility that these things change in time.”

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay or Transgender – PJ Media

50 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

In a Christian Church, they would counsel an LGBTQ person to realize their orientation is a gift from God,

Not in a Bible-believing Christian church.  That is completely contrary to the teaching of the Bible.  Those are false, apostate churches.

"Isaiah 8:20 KJV: To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. "

"26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

Romans 1: 26, 27 KJV

How do these so-called churches get around those verses?

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Woke is a legitimate view of the world

That is only because the world is a fallen, corrupt place.  No Bible-believing Christian who understand the fall of man and has been born again accepts the evil world system any longer.  The woke ideology is part of the evil world system and must be rejected by anyone who believes in God and his revelation to mankind.  Bible believers are in the world but not part of the world as it says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

You are incorrect. What it means is everyone must be presumed innocent, UNLESS proven guilty in a Court. That means presumed innocent by everybody. You and I know nothing about the se individuals and their circumstances. It is not for us to judge them based only on allegations. 

People who went overseas to join ISIS are in a totally different situation.  The Canadian justice system is not made or set up to deal with them.  They joined a terrorist entity and it must be looked at in that way.  The protection of Canada and society must be the primary consideration.  Experts are even saying there is no system in place to de-program them and no way of knowing if they will be a serious threat or not if they are free in Canada.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

No, Notley's against it too.  But without the wingnut quotient.

I wouldn't trust Notley.  She is the provincial NDP leader which are believers in man-made climate change for one thing.  She is more of a Trudeau puppet than the UCP and Daniel Smith.   Do you live back in Ontario or why would you trust Trudeau or the NDP provincial or federal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I wouldn't trust Notley.  She is the provincial NDP leader which are believers in man-made climate change for one thing.  She is more of a Trudeau puppet than the UCP and Daniel Smith.   Do you live back in Ontario or why would you trust Trudeau or the NDP provincial or federal?

Anyone who doesn't believe in man made climate shouldn't be in any kind of governing role.  They probably shouldn't be allowed out at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Anyone who doesn't believe in man made climate shouldn't be in any kind of governing role.  They probably shouldn't be allowed out at all.

Scientific Consensus+Risk means we must address this.

It's necessary to allow fringe science dwellers to talk about this but the time for debate has passed and fortunately we have a public and global consensus on this now.

Edited by Michael Hardner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Scientific Consensus+Risk means we must address this.

It's necessary to allow fringe science dwellers to talk about this but the time for debate has passed and fortunately we have a public and global consensus on this now.

No we do not.  There’s no clear evidence that a climate crisis is imminent nor that human behaviour is causing or can avert a climate crisis.   Destroying our living standards on the basis of these assumptions is stupid and irresponsible.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Anyone who doesn't believe in man made climate shouldn't be in any kind of governing role.  They probably shouldn't be allowed out at all.

You might be ok with shelling out your dollars for the fictional war on climate change, but I like milllions of others see it as a huge scam.  Try Google for the fraud of man-made climate change.  Many scientists shave debunked it.  Where is the proof that man is causing it.  Man contributes a tiny amount of the CO2 in the atmosphere and there are also other factors that cause global warming such as water vapour, the sun's radiation, etc.

There Is No Climate Emergency, Say 500 Experts in Letter to the United Nations | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

I know you don't like to read but if you want to learn something about it, you should make the effort.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

Same way you do for inconvenient verses…. either pretend they don’t exist, or interpret them in a way that suits what you already believe. 

Actually I often quote other sources on the interpretation so it is often not just my own opinion.  Unlike you who just post childish one-liners that make no sense, just like what you just said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,770
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Akalupenn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...