Jump to content

Canadian Catholic student arrested for saying men are different from women.


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

1. I have seen no contradictions to what is laid out in various articles.

2. Of course not. If he was derisive, insulting, obscene, etc., that would justify suspension. But given the discussion is on gender and bathrooms I would think even in a non-religious school setting, even on the subject of biology he would have a right to politely express his belief  

3. So how does a school justify an opinion shared by three out of four people getting you banned from campus as a safety threat?

4. How do school boards justify shutting down meetings and calling police whenever a parent dares to question their fanaticism on this subject?

5. And btw, anyone who says that merely speaking about something causes an 'unsafe environment' should lose their right to vote, never mind run for office of any kind. Because clearly, their emotional fragility puts them below the minimum needed to be considered an adult.

 

1.  Right.  But 'no contradictions' still doesn't mean we have details, and we don't.  As with the Oakville Teacher Troll, the board keeps its details quiet for legal purposes I'm sure.  We only have the student's perspective as told through his legal/PR team.
2.  Maybe so.  We shall see.
3.  4. Three out of four people in some American poll ?  I don't think they paid attention to that when setting policy.  The policy is undoubtedly about showing tolerance for LGBTQ policy.  If people are questioning policy in the right forum, and expressing their opinions then they should tolerate it as long as it's not trolling.  Without details on these things, I for one won't call for action.
5. Hey, you know - people get upset these days.  You kind of got a little hysterical because somebody sang "Our home on native land" so I wouldn't throw stones or anything...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Suspended for disagreeing with the religious fanatics of the woke movement.

Hyperbole and exaggeration.   

Come to the table with clean hands and a clear head if you want to start throwing around the term 'fanatic' or your credibility is at risk.

I'm trying to make hyperbole unfashionable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

I knew this was a lie, since it was from Fox, but I fact-checked it anyway. He was arrested for trespassing.

CdnFox asserted that the headline of the article was clear and I assumed it was.  I couldn't see the headline because the fanatic OP is blocked from my view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Americana Antifa said:

Well the article was from Fox, so I figured it was full of lies. And I was probably right, considering the headline was a lie.

The headline from fox was not actually a lie.

which makes your statement a lie.

Why do you feel the need to lie to justify your position? If your position can't stand on it's own without lies then maybe you need to reconsider your position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

CdnFox asserted that the headline of the article was clear and I assumed it was.  I couldn't see the headline because the fanatic OP is blocked from my view.

It is clear - i think i posted it as well when we discussed it but here's the link to the whole article so that you can see it. I had  assumed  when you said you couldn't read the 'article' that you could see the headline tho, and that the article was blocked due to adblocker software or the like.

Next time  you can just ask  :)

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/canadian-catholic-student-arrested-charged-saying-men-women-different-embarrassing

Canadian Catholic student arrested, charged after saying men, women are different: 'Embarrassing'

So leaving out the 'embarrassing' part which is subjective, it is true that the student was in fact arrested and charged after expressing that men and women are different. He made those statements and at a later time after he was arrested.

Now - as i'm sure you'll recall i said that headline was a little misleading even tho it is true. A person might read it as he was arrested immediately after saying that for saying that. Like, he said it and they slapped on cuffs. Which isn't accurate.

But headlines are meant to convey the story in a very very compressed space and there is no doubt that his statements and the schools response lead directly to his arrest later.  So the headline is not a lie. It's just not the whole story,

But as you can see they certainly tell the whole story. So even if someone was confused by the headline the story itself contains all the facts. 

So there's no lie. Emotionally charged language in the article to create a sense of outrage? Sure -that's media today.  But i think you'll have a tough time pointing to anything that's factually untrue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

Try to not be retarded for a few minutes.

every good writer knows you have to write to the level of your audience :)  The post was for you after all :)

Whenever i use reason and common sense you seem to get confused. I 'm just trying to make it digestible for you ;)

 

31 minutes ago, Americana Antifa said:

The point is every place of business has a TOS. If you violate the TOS, they will probably kick you out.

The counter point is that the school has much of its TOS set by the mandate it operates under. It's not a private independent facility with no ties to the gov't. It has certain duties it takes on board.

If the school overstepped then it's the school that must be changed.

Quote

You can scream "WOKE" all you want, but it won't change how society works.

Actually it does funny enough. People are getting sick of the 'woke' and it's starting to have an impact

But that's not relevant. What we do in this case as i noted is change the school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

He made those statements and at a later time after he was arrested.

Not only temporal connection, but a direct causal as well. Without him making his thoughts known, in a calm and respectful manner, a grossly inadequate reaction of the school would not have occurred; without inadequate reaction, he wouldn't have to exercise his charter right; and then the arrest would not have happened. The solutions of the left are almost always worse than the problems they were trying to solve. To fix mass poverty they had to create mass gulags and still leave everybody poor except of course, their governing elites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, myata said:

Not only temporal connection, but a direct causal as well.

Yes, one leads to the other. If he had not voiced his opinion then there was no trespass violation, his presence on that day would have been perfectly acceptable.

It is quite reasonable and accurate to say that his stating his opinion lead to his arrest. Just not that he was arrested for his opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Just not that he was arrested for his opinion.

Trying to narrow it down a bit further: arrested for being persistent in executing the right to express his opinion? These schools are owned by us, the citizens, taxpayers. We did not pass the ownership to anybody else? Since when we do not allow expression of opinions in our schools? Since when we are punishing by exclusion for expressing of opinions? What we will allow next if keep riding merrily and thoughtlessly, down this well trodden path?

Edited by myata
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

Cry me a river and go for a swim. Every school, every website, every place of business has a TOS. If you go to a diner and start shouting racial slurs, you'll have to leave. Is that religious fanaticism? Is that the woke movement?

Y'all are such crybullies. You want to be a dick, but you don't want to deal with the consequences.

I always found it odd how the language and attitudes of the extreme Left so often mirror the language of the Trumptards and the far Right. Both express an absolute confidence that their vision is perfect, and anyone who disagrees is absolute garbage. They even feel a sense of glee at their anger. And neither side accepts the slightest disagreement with their vision, nor even tries to defend their vision except with broad talking points usually gleaned from the internet and various slurs and insults.

No one is suggesting this kid shouted. No one has said he cursed or threatened. He even said he never misgendered or deadnamed anyone. The discussion was ON the subject to which he contributed. There is thus no comparison to someone shouting racial insults in a diner or anywhere else. 

He disagreed with the established story and was punished for refusing to bow his head and meekly accept the narrative.

Despite the fact three quarters or more of the country agree with him.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1.  Right.  But 'no contradictions' still doesn't mean we have details, and we don't.  As with the Oakville Teacher Troll, the board keeps its details quiet for legal purposes I'm sure.  We only have the student's perspective as told through his legal/PR team.

There was a whole class of kids there. They're not bound by legal fears and someone would have talked, even if anonymously.

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

3.  4. Three out of four people in some American poll ?  I don't think they paid attention to that when setting policy. 

Do you honestly think it's any different in Canada?

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

The policy is undoubtedly about showing tolerance for LGBTQ policy. 

I always find it interesting how little tolerance these policies designed for 'tolerance' are. In fact, the people who seem to be most in favour of tolerance towards beliefs they hold seem to be the least tolerant of anyone expressing beliefs they don't hold. Another way the Left is like Islamists.

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

If people are questioning policy in the right forum, and expressing their opinions then they should tolerate it as long as it's not trolling.  Without details on these things, I for one won't call for action.

Because you hold the same views.

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

5. Hey, you know - people get upset these days.  You kind of got a little hysterical because somebody sang "Our home on native land" so I wouldn't throw stones or anything...

The welfare artist expressing her contempt and disdain for Canada, Canadians, our culture, heritage, and values has much the same mindset as the Leftists who infest schoolboards expressing their similar disdain and contempt for Canada, its traditions, heritage, and values.

I, on the other hand, am a taxpayer who funds both and doesn't like funding people who despise everything I believe in and would spit in my face if they thought they could do it without instant retribution. 

I realize you're reasonably content with all of that. Everything I've seen you write suggests you're a globalist type who'd be just as happy living in Thailand or Tokyo, New Dehli or New York. Someone who has no real attachment to Canada, in other words.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hyperbole and exaggeration.   

There's nothing exaggerated about it when he holds the same view as three-quarters of Canadians and gets suspended and then declared a safety risk because he dared to express that view. Where is the exaggeration? Where is the hyperbole?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

Try to not be retarded for a few minutes. The point is every place of business has a TOS. If you violate the TOS, they will probably kick you out. You can scream "WOKE" all you want, but it won't change how society works.

There's a difference between a business and a place I'm funding. When that place I'm funding has a TOS that says three-quarters of the population who fund them are dangerous because they disagree with the TOS then those three quarters of the population should be able to pull their funding.

Edited by I am Groot
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

1. someone would have talked, even if anonymously.

2. Do you honestly think it's any different in Canada?

3. I always find it interesting how little tolerance these policies designed for 'tolerance' are.  

4. Because you hold the same views.

5. The welfare artist expressing her contempt and disdain for Canada, Canadians, our culture, heritage, and values has much the same mindset as the Leftists who infest schoolboards expressing their similar disdain and contempt for Canada, its traditions, heritage, and values.

6. I, on the other hand, am a taxpayer ... 

7. Everything I've seen you write suggests you're a globalist type ...

1. You are assuming that there was a media connection there.  Not a good assumption to make.  
2. Yes, but it's still irrelevant.  People don't and shouldn't "poll" to assess matters of right and wrong if that's what you're suggesting.  There is a role for polling but I'm not sure how you are suggesting it be used here.
3. I know what you mean.
4. Again, your argument fails because you feel like you know my personal views and how they impact my analysis.  You are guessing at best.
5. And you are seething about it based on your own posts.
6. That doesn't afford you any extra say, in anything in my books so I stop reading that entence there.
7.  See #4 and stop fantasizing about my viewpoints thanks.  Just discuss with me, is all I ask.

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

8.There's nothing exaggerated about it when he holds the same view as three-quarters of Canadians and gets suspended and then declared a safety risk because he dared to express that view.
9. Where is the exaggeration? Where is the hyperbole?

 

8.  We're actually discussing the details now, so you can't ignore the rest of the discussion and use it to make a new point.  I maintain that the details are not known.  You seem to think absence of details means something.  I disagree.
9. "Suspended for disagreeing " is the exaggeration.  He was suspended for trespassing we have all established that.  Yes, there was a chain of events but if he was just going to make a human rights case about his views he didn't have to trespass.  You're being intellectually dishonest by repeating things we've already covered in the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

This is the headline: Canadian Catholic student arrested, charged after saying men, women are different: 'Embarrassing'

So the implication there is that he was arrested for being transphobic. I'm sure you're going to be dishonest and deny this, because you're conservative, but we both know that's what they were saying.

Male and female are biological categories. Man and woman are gender categories. Please find a science book and have someone who can understand big words explain it to you.

How does worrying about females’ safety and well-being make one “transphobic”?   As for your reference to non-biological gender as scientific, it is not.  Non-biologically-based gender is pseudoscience.  Using cosmetic surgery to make one appear as a different gender is just that.  It’s not biological reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

This is the headline: Canadian Catholic student arrested, charged after saying men, women are different: 'Embarrassing'

So the implication there is that he was arrested for being transphobic. I'm sure you're going to be dishonest and deny this, because you're conservative, but we both know that's what they were saying.

Awww  muffin :) Tell me you know you're losing a discussion without telling me ;)  LOL

Of course the statement implies that the reason he wound up getting arrested is because of his correct statement that men and women are different.  And that is demonstrably true, that is how he wound up being arrested, there is a direct connection there. But it does NOT say he was arrested FOR that or charged FOR that. It implies a connection, and there is one. I'm sure even you wouldn't be stupid enough to claim the events aren't connected at all.

So it's entirely true.

4 hours ago, Americana Antifa said:

Male and female are biological categories. Man and woman are gender categories. Please find a science book and have someone who can understand big words explain it to you.

Sorry sparkie - there's dozens of medical texts that refer to men and sex.  In fact men's sexual issues are  a pretty common topic.  In fact - dictionary definition time:

MAN

plural men ˈmen

 in compounds  ˌmen,
 or  mən
: an individual human
especially : an adult male human
 
OHHHH NOOOOOOEESS - The DICTIONARY is transphobic and thinks that men are male!!!!!!!!
 
Men and women refer to adult male and female people. It's still about sex kiddo :)
 
Let me know when you get tired of being wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

See the Fox headline? Can you see what it implies what the student was arrested for? Do you see in the headline what he was actually arrested for? No you can't. You have to read the whole thing which most Fox believers can't.

And the few that can read think everyone else are the fake news.

While they keep you focused for 5 pages on the evils of 'woke' while they distract you from reality

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CdnFox said:

It's a publicly funded school performing a publicly mandated service. It's not just someone's restaurant. They do have duties beyond that.

Doesn't mean shit. If the principal of a school or the head librarian or the lifeguard or the assistant grocery manager kicks you out, you leave or you're trespassing.

F***ing KARENS

Edited by herbie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, herbie said:

See the Fox headline? Can you see what it implies what the student was arrested for?

It doesn't say. Only a stupid person would make the assumption all the facts were in the headline. It implies that his opinion later resulted in his arrest and that's actually accurate, there is a connection there.

7 minutes ago, herbie said:

 

Do you see in the headline what he was actually arrested for? No you can't.

Correct. They never say he was arrested or charged for having that opinion. it doesn't say 'Charged with opinon".

7 minutes ago, herbie said:

You have to read the whole thing which most Fox believers can't.

LOL - this from a guy who couldn't get past the headline without making incorrect assumptions :)

7 minutes ago, herbie said:

And the few that can read think everyone else are the fake news.

Which would make the news story incorrect... how?

7 minutes ago, herbie said:

While they keep you focused for 5 pages on the evils of 'woke' while they distract you from reality

It was the second sentence in the whole article.  It probably just felt like 5 pages for you because you have to sound each word out. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Awww  muffin :) Tell me you know you're losing a discussion without telling me ;)  LOL

Projection. You know that the headline is lying about the reason he was arrested. Why are conservatards always so dishonest?

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Of course the statement implies that the reason he wound up getting arrested is because of his correct statement that men and women are different.  And that is demonstrably true, that is how he wound up being arrested, there is a direct connection there. But it does NOT say he was arrested FOR that or charged FOR that. It implies a connection, and there is one. I'm sure even you wouldn't be stupid enough to claim the events aren't connected at all.

You're being bad faith. The headlines purposely left out what happened in the middle to make it look like he got arrested for being stupid about gender. They did this because most righties don't read the article, they just read the headline. I wouldn't be surprised if that's what you did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

How does worrying about females’ safety and well-being make one “transphobic”?  

I don't believe he was, but let's just assume that was the case. He didn't have to say that men aren't women. He could have said trans women are stronger than cis women, or whatever transphobes say when they're pretending to not be transphobic. He could have said men will pretend to be trans women, that's another popular one.

And really, people who say "men can't be women" are almost always being bad faith. Even after they've been taught the difference between sex and gender, they just repeat the same talking-point like an NPC.

 

Quote

As for your reference to non-biological gender as scientific, it is not.  Non-biologically-based gender is pseudoscience.  Using cosmetic surgery to make one appear as a different gender is just that.  It’s not biological reality.

See what I mean? You know that sex is biological, while gender is cultural. But you're pretending not to understand. I'm all for educating people, but at some point, we just have to treat transphobes like transphobes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, I am Groot said:

There's a difference between a business and a place I'm funding. When that place I'm funding has a TOS that says three-quarters of the population who fund them are dangerous because they disagree with the TOS then those three quarters of the population should be able to pull their funding.

Are we talking about a private school here? Because you can pull your funding and take your kid somewhere else.

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
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

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