Jump to content

I sense a spring election for Canada


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Who's taking a pro child-porn position here?  Is that something you just made up, to argue with yourself about...again?  🤡

Stop answering your own question.

Here's another one - which appears to be real. 

Pierre - MILES AHEAD IN THE POLLS - decides to side with the 15% of Canadians who think that trans people should be banned from bathrooms.  

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-ban-trans-women-sports-bathrooms-1.7120972

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Pierre - MILES AHEAD IN THE POLLS - decides to side with the 15% of Canadians who think that trans people should be banned from bathrooms. 

If public bathrooms are a provincial jurisdiction perhaps PP could offer funding to assist provinces that want to transition from gender to pronoun specific public bathrooms.

Is it just me or does it feel like we're all acting like a bunch of Roman violinists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Is it just me or does it feel like we're all acting like a bunch of Roman violinists?

Including today's announcements, whatever of them may be true.

None of it amounts to anything, but it is fun to watch rage-a-roni call us child pornographers for bringing this up.

Edited by Michael Hardner
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hey, don't butthurt the messenger... 

If Pierre wants to ban Playboy magazine because Jesus is weeping far be it for me to promote dirty sins.  I'm just bringing the message to the flock here.

Yeah I know but why did you pick my post from anothet thread.

I was just pointing out that Sen. Julie Miville-Dechene, an Independent Senators Group member introduced the bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

Who's taking a pro child-porn position here? 

You. And mike apparently. You literally said that PP's position to restrict children from porn sites was "Almost too dumb to believe'.

And once again - you say something stupid and then try to backpeddal while claiming somehow it's all my fault. Have you EVER said anything you're willing to stand behind for 5 minutes?

 

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hey, don't butthurt the messenger... 

If Pierre wants to ban Playboy magazine because Jesus is weeping far be it for me to promote dirty sins.  I'm just bringing the message to the flock here.

Right - because restricting playboy from children is 'banning' it.

I think you're going to find that's more popular than you think.  Most people are  ok with not giving 7 year olds porn -  i didn't realize you were all for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I thought we all just bought Playboy for the articles.

I'm one of the few who actually masturbate to Marshall McLuhan interviews...

58 minutes ago, Legato said:

Yeah I know but why did you pick my post from anothet thread.

Because another poster asked for a cite...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Right - because restricting playboy from children is 'banning' it.

I think you're going to find that's more popular than you think. 

Most people are  ok with not giving 7 year olds porn -  i didn't realize you were all for it.

It's a slippery slope and we all know where he wants to go.

Most people don't let their children on the internet unwatched.  Most people don't want to have their freedom restricted because of bad parents elsewhere.  That sounds like a conservative value actually.  You know - nanny state and all that...

FoxFACT: Pornhub gets 3.7 million visitors from Canada a month and that's just one channel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's a slippery slope and we all know where he wants to go.
 

He wants to go where children dont' have easy access to porn. 

Anything beyond that is 1diotic. And we already do that kind of thing. There's no "culture war' agenda here - kids shouldn't have easy access to porn.  It's like saying "he won't let children buy smokes or alcohol, must be a hidden agenda".

11 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Most people don't let their children on the internet unwatched

Every single parent almost without fail has children that go on the internet unwatched.  Welcome to the 21st century.

So - if for some reason they want to let the kid watch porn the parents can still sign in and let the kid watch "Milf gets anal" to their heart's content, but it's now much harder for the kid to do it themselves.

Why in god's name do you have a problem with that? Why in the world do you want children to have easy access to porn?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You. And mike apparently. You literally said that PP's position to restrict children from porn sites was "Almost too dumb to believe'.

Yes, because child pornography = images/video with children in it. 

PP's position is to try to (somehow) limit children's access online to pornography. 

There's a difference there, but I guess you're too stupid to see it.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Yes, because child pornography = images/video with children in it. 

PP's position is to try to (somehow) limit children's access online to pornography. 

There's a difference there, but I guess you're too stupid to see it.  

 

Forget it, let's just all agree to call Poilievre's proposal what it is: a plan to subsidize the Mexican snuff film industry.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

 

Every single parent almost without fail has children that go on the internet unwatched.  

Mine don't.  There are no unlocked devices in the house.  Every parent who has kids that we know manages that way.

Maybe if you had creatures to care for other than your failing ant farm you could speak from authority for once.

🐜 

Edited by Michael Hardner
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Sad, sick response . . . you should know better.

Hey, it's HIS plan, I'm not for it.  In fact I wish to say that Canada should NOT be funding said snuff films, nor any such film.

And..

Yes..

You people use politics for entertainment so give me some slack.. I'm getting bored. I reserve the right to treat ridiculous ideas and ridiculous people with ridicule.

What's the definition of ridiculous?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Yes, because child pornography = images/video with children in it. 

PP's position is to try to (somehow) limit children's access online to pornography. 

There's a difference there, but I guess you're too stupid to see it.  

 

Oh look moon box is yet again backtracking and trying to twist the argument.

So - explain why you're  in FAVOUR of children seeing porn if you disagree with PP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You have vocabularititis.  You use words bad.

 

So neither you nor moonbox can explain why you think it's bad to restrict access to porn sites for children.

you have psychosclerosis. Abnormal hardening of the brain.

As usual - no substance to your arguments, no reason or logic behind your position, realized you both said something kinda dumb and now you're trying to avoid it.

Gosh - you're just SO conservative :)  Not like a left winger at all. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You have vocabularititis.  You use words bad.

No shit. And them posts back with more of the same.

If you're not willing to scan your license and medical ID and credit card and fingerprints and send them to YouPorn as proof at login you must be a pedophile.

Too quick to parrot the mouthings of a populist with no idea of how what he wants can be done to think first.

Edited by herbie
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, herbie said:

No shit. And them posts back with more of the same.

If you're not willing to scan your license and medical ID and credit card and fingerprints and send them to YouPorn as proof at login you must be a pedophile.

Too quick to parrot the mouthings of a populist with no idea of how what he wants can be done to think first.

ROFLMAO - why does the left always have to lie to try to make their point :)

Is there a reason you want children to have easy access to porn? Does this affect you?

You.. ahh... you ARE over 18 right? I mean i think everyone's always assumed you lived in your parents basement  but i always thought you were at least 18

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So neither you nor moonbox can explain why you think it's bad to restrict access to porn sites for children.

you have psychosclerosis. Abnormal hardening of the brain.

As usual - no substance to your arguments, no reason or logic behind your position, realized you both said something kinda dumb and now you're trying to avoid it.

Gosh - you're just SO conservative :)  Not like a left winger at all. :P

It's Hardnering of the brain, and it's good for you.

 

I'm not making any arguments here.  I'm refuting your claims, which are circus tenty.

 

Yes, that's right.  Restriction of porn isn't aligned with conservative ideology.  It's more of an 80s second wave feminist vibe.

Saaaay was that YOU teaching me Social Relations and Society, Summer of 78?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's Hardnering of the brain, and it's good for you.

It really isn't - that's just another term for brain rot :)

Quote

I'm not making any arguments here.  I'm refuting your claims, which are circus tenty.

If you're refuting something you're making an argument.  But i would agree - you're doing it so badly that it would be fair to argue you're not doing it at all.

Quote

Yes, that's right.  Restriction of porn isn't aligned with conservative ideology.  It's more of an 80s second wave feminist vibe.

As if we needed more proof you're not a conservative....

  • Like 1
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
      10,719
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Ronaldo_
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

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