Jump to content

Poilievre tells Trudeau to 'butt out' of New Brunswick's policy on LGBTQ students


Recommended Posts

The Constitution makes human rights a federal issue. So provincial decisions that affect human rights issues are federal concerns. The PM is supposed to take notice of what may be federal concerns.

Repeat, PP having no actual electoral platform only survives by his big mouth.

  • Thanks 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, herbie said:

The Constitution makes human rights a federal issue.

Nope.  That's why we have provincial human rights councils :)   Sorry sparky - dead wrong there.  The constitution has rules that apply to ALL levels of gov't when it comes to human rights, not just federal. Or did you forget the constitution is also the document that creates federal and provincial gov'ts in the first place ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Because the chance of abuse is very real.  Why would anyone of sound mind think they should put a child in danger?

If you're like 99% of the rest of the world then no one loves you as much as your parents did. Almost no one else truly wants the best for you to the same extent that they do/did (condolences), not even a spouse.

If you ever have kids yourself then you won't want a teacher, coach, counsellor or anyone else secretly conspiring with your child to make their most significant life decisions. 

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Once you become famous there are people who will just lie about you on social media and in print for whatever reason, and others who cheer for you to fail.

I won't name drop, but know someone who worked closely to Canadian politicians.

Off screen, you would see yelling matches with couples, vitriol. Some were great with staff, others barking and just miserable to be around.

Cameras rolling, smiles, halo and they are loving of everyone.

My political family was just like this. Nasty to be around, and their image, is something they would be willing to sue you into oblivion over. It mattered more than anything.

When you're dealing with someone who pulls government and media levers, you're dealing with someone who can completely destroy you.

If they are highly intelligent, this is when they are dangerous. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Because the chance of abuse is very real.  Why would anyone of sound mind think they should put a child in danger?

So you're in favor of cutting conversation with the parents, blocking it totally because it "might" be dangerous...( I'm assuming when you refer to dangerous you mean from physical abuse) That the schools are better equipped to handle this problem than parents. Your suggesting parents are incapable of having this conversation with their children...That kids are nothing more than objects under their parent's control.  Parents around the world thank you for your confidence...

I'm curious about what other topics do we block parents from?  Not sure how you parent, but i took an interest in my kid's lives, and would have noticed a change in behavior and if this topic ever comes up, I can ensure you that violence would not be an option regardless of my conservative views...I have full confidence that the majority of parents feel the same way...

 

 

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

56 minutes ago, herbie said:

I think PP should take his own advice.

For a guy who won't get a security clearance and demands to know security matters, to knowing better than all of Corrections Canada and blurts out personal opinion, to now telling others to STFU on issues that aren't his concern that might possibly be theirs.

Useless twat with a big mouth.

Because it is important that schools be able to keep information about parents children away from them...thats what your supporting here... really...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Nope.  That's why we have provincial human rights councils :)   Sorry sparky - dead wrong there. 

Sparky?

What are you squid ink? Provincial human rights councils are there to ensure the Charter of Rights is held to, not to make up what your rights are! Most of the provincial ones were in place before there even was a Charter of Rights and Freedoms and don't override it.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

That doesn't preclude a populist from wasting time and money on something that would get struck down by the Supreme Court though, sorry.

OF course not. Nor does it make one learn anything at all from years of Harper gov't crime bills either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Because it is important that schools be able to keep information about parents children away from them...thats what your supporting here... really...

So in the very few instances the teacher knows and the parent doesn't, there's a damn good reason for that isn't there?

Listen class, if your parents are rednecks or Bible thumpers and you're gay or trans, please don't tell me or I'm required by law to rat you out to them.

A teachers job is to teach and if a kid learns better being called he instead of she, so be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, herbie said:

Sparky?

What are you squid ink? Provincial human rights councils are there to ensure the Charter of Rights is held to, not to make up what your rights are!

 

Are you smoking crack? Nobody said anything about making up what your rights are. They are there to enforce the rights of the Constitution and the charter. If it was only federal then they wouldn't be provincial would they. Did you not realize that the Constitution and charter of rights applies to both federal and provincial governments?

Quote

 

 

Most of the provincial ones were in place before there even was a Charter of Rights and Freedoms and don't override it.

 

Of course they were. They were there to enforce the rights of the Constitution. And nobody said anything about them overriding either. The provincial human rights councils are there to enforce the human rights as guaranteed by the Constitution and the charter. But if it was only federal we wouldn't have provincial ones we would just have a federal one.

It is hard to imagine how you fit so much stupid into one person.

23 minutes ago, herbie said:

OF course not. Nor does it make one learn anything at all from years of Harper gov't crime bills either.

Those WERE federal.

You don't understand how ANY of this works do you.

18 minutes ago, herbie said:

So in the very few instances the teacher knows and the parent doesn't, there's a damn good reason for that isn't there?

Nope. But if you disagree then show us what the damn good reasons were?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Not sure how you parent, but i took an interest in my kid's lives, and would have noticed a change in behavior and if this topic ever comes up, I can ensure you that violence would not be an option regardless of my conservative views...I have full confidence that the majority of parents feel the same way...

A majority do.  But some will beat their child for being gay.  
 

If you knew that a child would be abused because they were gay, would you tell the abusive parent anyway?  

Edited by TreeBeard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

A majority do.  But some will beat their child for being gay.  

Then throw those ones in jail, but the fact that a tiny fraction of parents might be angry with their children Doesn't justify removing the rights of all parents to know about their child's mental health status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG you just argued that exactly what I said was correct yet still claim it wasn't.

Missed the fact that there were Provincial rights before there was even a Cdn constitution to enforce and said that was what their purpose then.

Took a comment on another subject and pretended it made your argument.

Can't even imagine why a kid wouldn't mention their sexual feelings to their parent even when there was a sarcastic example included.

Yet, I'm the one that doesn't understand things?

 

Edited by herbie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom protects privacy from unreasonable searches and seizures. In addition, the federal Privacy Act provides a high level of protection against the disclosure of personal information.

By forcing their issues in the manner deplorablists have chosen either the politicians but more likely the courts will now be forced to come up with an age or range of ages at which this high level of protection against the disclosure of personal information trumps whatever rights a parent like anyone else might presume to have to that information.  Such is the way of social change when such dinosaurs park themselves in it's path - more rights instead of more laws.

Good job!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, herbie said:

OMG you just argued that exactly what I said was correct yet still claim it wasn't.

 

No, you argued that civil rights was a federal matter. 

Here's what you said: "The Constitution makes human rights a federal issue."

Nope. The constitution does NOT make it a federal issue. That's why i pointed out that there's provincial human rights tribunals - to address the PROVINCIAL responsibilities under the constitution and charter.

It's not a federal issue. It's a constitutional issue. It affects feds and provinces within their responsibilities as outlined in the constitution. Which means if something is a provincial responsibility - it's a provincial issue.

Holy shit you're stupid.

 

Quote

Missed the fact that there were Provincial rights before there was even a Cdn constitution to enforce

Are you insane? Without a constitution there WERE no provinces.  The constitution is what CREATES  the provinces!

How do you think Canada existed without provinces?


Clearly you're on some form of drugs today.

40 minutes ago, herbie said:

Can't even imagine why a kid wouldn't mention their sexual feelings to their parent

8 year olds don't have sexual feelings.  But it doesn't really matter what they "want".  8 year olds don't WANT to tell their parents if they're failing math either - but their parents need to know.

Quote

Yet, I'm the one that doesn't understand things

NOW we're communicating.  :)

I don't know what the hell is wrong with you today but your reply goes WAY beyond not understanding things - you're very clearly under the influence of something.  Get straightened up and when you're back to normal we can have a conversation, you're just embarrassing yourself at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Section 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom protects privacy from unreasonable searches and seizures.

That applies to gov'ts, not individuals. The charter outlines what the rights and duties are between people and the gov'ts and gov't orgs, not parents and children.

Quote

In addition, the federal Privacy Act provides a high level of protection against the disclosure of personal information.

Not to children from their parents. It says that information can't be distributed without lawful reason and only for the purposes stated by the gov't. Complete swing and a miss if you think it interferes with a parent's duties.

And no it's very low level protection. What's the penalty for breaching the act specifically? Nothing. You would still have to address any harms by showing loss or cost same as anything else.

Quote

By forcing their issues in the manner deplorablists have chosen either the politicians but more likely the courts will now be forced to come up with an age or range of ages at which this high level of protection against the disclosure of personal information trumps whatever rights a parent like anyone else might presume to have to that information.  Such is the way of social change when such dinosaurs park themselves in it's path - more rights instead of more laws.

We have that age - it's 18.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, herbie said:

Listen class, if your parents are rednecks or Bible thumpers and you're gay or trans, please don't tell me or I'm required by law to rat you out to them.

Are you honestly that stupid? We're not just talking about teachers failing to mention to a parent that their child is/might be gay or feel like they're trans

The only reason this is even a topic is that some US states they are getting so extreme that they want guidance counsellors to be able to start putting children through gene therapy treatments without the knowledge or consent of their teachers. It's absurd. 

It's less extreme for a teacher to provide counsel to a student on that topic without the power to initiate treatment, but it's still interference, and still 100% across the line. That's because teachers have their own agendas, as witnessed on "Libs of Tik Tok", and they can't be relied upon to tell children the truth. There's a really big difference between:

"Yes, Johnny, you can eventually have the outward appearance of being a female, and have a reasonable facsimile of female genitalia, but you will never be able to get pregnant like a woman and you will also lose the ability to have children as a male. If you are ok with never having children of your own then this might be something that you'd be interested in." (it's a bit extreme for an 8 yr old to decide that they never wanna have children even with a proper discussion with their parents)

and...

"Yes Johnny, you can become a woman." 

There are leftards on this site who feel like a man can just unilaterally declare that they're a woman and suddenly they are one: "PRESTO MAGICO!!! Now everyone has to consider me and treat me like a woman! I can menstuate and get pregnant-ish!"

An 8 yr old would never guess that their teacher is playing a dirty trick on them by saying that they can be a woman, of course the child would think that they can be fully female, with the ability to bear children, breastfeed, etc. 

No parent should ever tolerate another human being interfering with their child on such an important, life-altering decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, herbie said:

So in the very few instances the teacher knows and the parent doesn't, there's a damn good reason for that isn't there?

Listen class, if your parents are rednecks or Bible thumpers and you're gay or trans, please don't tell me or I'm required by law to rat you out to them.

A teachers job is to teach and if a kid learns better being called he instead of she, so be it.

This is not about a few cases it is about all children every case and keeping the parent informed about THIER child......whether you are a good parent or not... 

Listen, class, if the child is telling the world he or she is whatever alphabet in a long list of them, then they have outed themselves...there are no secrets at school, and the parent is going to find out sooner or later.... And since this is a tough subject to broach...maybe it is embarrassing for the student...Thats why they do not want to confront their parents.... I would say this would be the case in a majority of cases...not that they are afraid of getting the shit kicked out of them.... parents are a the largest source of support and comfort regardless of what the child thinks they are. Why would you want to deprive them of that... 

And you are 100 % right teachers are there to "teach" not to withhold vital info about my child from me.. and of the very few cases that this ends in violence because a "vast majority" of parents are not violent towards their children.... then the teacher is trained in recognizing the effects of physical violence and is obligated by law to report it ASAP... The issue will be resolved through social services and child welfare... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

A majority do.  But some will beat their child for being gay.  
 

If you knew that a child would be abused because they were gay, would you tell the abusive parent anyway?  

You mean the vast majority, more than 99 % would not resort to violence, any violence against their children...and we need special laws for the 1 % of parents who are pieces of shit.... well sir we already have those laws... 

And if the child is with an abusive parent already, there would be a record or signs, of this abuse... would I personally tell the abusive parent No i would not... but like i have already mentioned, there are no secrets at schools, sooner or later that abusive parent is going to find out... and no law is going to prevent that....And when it does there are laws to handle that situation as well... what else are we NOT going to tell parents.. when they skip school or don't do their homework, or get expelled because we are afraid of abusive parents beating their child... Because that is what abusive parents do, beat their children, for any reason or for no reason......and they will do so until someone stops it...  

 

Edited by Army Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

A majority do.  But some will beat their child for being gay.  

I'd be willing to bet that if we were all being honest, children in leftard households are subjected to far more harm than those in conservative households. 

You can't tell me that those freaks who go out shrieking on the street when their candidate loses, or who burn, loot, and commit assaults for all the various Dem causes, don't abuse smaller people when they feel that level of crazed, demented anger at home.

If an average leftard's child saw a Trump speech and told their parent that they liked it I can guarantee you that they'd experience some form of abuse, be it verbal, physical, or through some form of deprivation. 

Here's a story about a group of young adults who got so caught up in anti-Trump, anti-white anger from the first wave of the Dems'/CNN's BLM propaganda that they caught a random, disabled white kid and tortured him on a FB livestream, thinking it was somehow OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Army Guy said:

So you're in favor of cutting conversation with the parents, blocking it totally because it "might" be dangerous...( I'm assuming when you refer to dangerous you mean from physical abuse) That the schools are better equipped to handle this problem than parents. Your suggesting parents are incapable of having this conversation with their children...That kids are nothing more than objects under their parent's control.  Parents around the world thank you for your confidence...

I'm curious about what other topics do we block parents from?  Not sure how you parent, but i took an interest in my kid's lives, and would have noticed a change in behavior and if this topic ever comes up, I can ensure you that violence would not be an option regardless of my conservative views...I have full confidence that the majority of parents feel the same way...

 

 

You’ll never convince people like Treebeard or Herbie or Eyeball.  They don’t believe in personal responsibility.  They believe that governments know better than parents how children should be raised.  

 

1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

You mean the vast majority, more than 99 % would not resort to violence, any violence against their children...and we need special laws for the 1 % of parents who are pieces of shit.... well sir we already have those laws... 

And if the child is with an abusive parent already, there would be a record or signs, of this abuse... would I personally tell the abusive parent No i would not... but like i have already mentioned, there are no secrets at schools, sooner or later that abusive parent is going to find out... and no law is going to prevent that....And when it does there are laws to handle that situation as well... what else are we NOT going to tell parents.. when they skip school or don't do their homework, or get expelled because we are afraid of abusive parents beating their child... Because that is what abusive parents do, beat their children, for any reason or for no reason......and they will do so until someone stops it...  

 

The irony is of course that it’s this anti-family mentality that brought us residential schools to “civilize” and help the natives by removing kids from their families who couldn’t possibly know best how to raise their own children.  Make no mistake, the scariest and most damaging abuse is coming from the people who want to keep parents out of the loop of kids’ most sensitive concerns.  They want to feed them bullshit like the idea that one can choose a gender and that this choice to pretend that biological fact isn’t real is somehow no big deal and without consequence.  It’s setting kids up for failure, because reality doesn’t go away. Perhaps there are in very rare cases people whose mental health benefits from playing this imaginary game, but it’s so potentially abusive to simply affirm transitions without the involvement of the people who care the most, the parents.  Given the track record of abuse in institutional settings, why on Earth would any responsible person trust schools to take better care of kids than kids’ parents? Clearly governments learned nothing from the 60’s Scoop and residential schools. 

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell me all about your parental rights. Are they written down somewhere? Like the right to refuse your child a blood transfusion? Your right to know if a doctor wrote your 14 yr old daughter a scrip for the pill? Your right to discipline your kid with a switch?

  • Thanks 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, herbie said:

Tell me all about your parental rights. Are they written down somewhere? Like the right to refuse your child a blood transfusion? Your right to know if a doctor wrote your 14 yr old daughter a scrip for the pill? Your right to discipline your kid with a switch?

Nice false equivalence.  Why don’t we talk about the attempted right of non-family members to counsel, rename, prescribe, and in some jurisdictions mutilate a child without parents’ knowledge and consent?  How could that ever be dangerous or abusive?  

Edited by Zeitgeist
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
      10,753
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Matthew
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Venandi earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • DUI_Offender went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

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