2SLGBTQIA+ community leaders are denouncing the Conservative leader’s speech accusing Justin Trudeau of imposing “radical gender ideology” on children.
I’m concerned about the safety of school children.
I’m concerned because I’ve been told that having SOGI-specific anti-bullying policies improves the school climate for LGBTQ and heterosexual students, reducing discrimination, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts for all students. Is that true?
I’ve been told LGB youth are still seven times more likely to attempt suicide than non-lgb youth. Is that true?
How does the number of regretted irreversible child sexual reassignments compare to the number SOGI minority suicides? I’m sure you hope to reduce the number of people harmed by regretted transition, but are you worried that federal meddling in SOGI education will increase suicide rates?
Aside from SOGI education, what impact do you anticipate “outing” kids to their parents will have on their mental health and risk of suicide?
I’m concerned that federal government overreaching to meddle with school curriculums and policies will result increasing numbers of dead kids. What’s the best way to protect kids? In this case I think the best way to avoid having dead kids on your conscience is to remind your constituents that education is a provincial responsibility and steadfastly refuse to engage on the topic.
Anyone wishing to send a similar note could more explicitly ask about reconciling his SOGI education policy with his commitment to small government (he expresses a commitment to small government on his website), and whether he develops policy based on common sense (hunches) or scientific data (he alludes to preferring both on his website).
This is not me attacking you in any way, I do not think that you mean anything by leaving off the T a couple time in your post.
But just so you know, there are groups that specifically leave off the T because they hate trans people; The LGB alliance is a group that have claimed that accepting transpeople is homophobic. I’ve seen them make claims that there is an agenda to make same sex attracted individuals transition, just so that they are not homosexual anymore.
“Justin Trudeau does not have a right to impose his radical gender ideology on our kids and on our schools,” Poilievre says in the video.
Unfortunately, this ain’t shit. This video will have zero effect on his election chances. If you weren’t already assuming this of his politics, you’re not paying attention. This is not unexpected and if this video does anything it will embolden his supporters more than it will his detractors. It’s really unfortunate but it’s just the truth of the situation.
Call me when he’s caught actually saying the quiet part out loud and then maybe I’ll make some popcorn to watch him squirm.
If you weren’t already assuming this of his politics, you’re not paying attention.
Oh, I have some bad news for you about the majority of the electorate…
The real issue here is that this night still not be blatant enough for Joe Voter to associate PP von Milhouse with being a Bad Person, and therefore make them feel like a Bad Person for voting for him.
Man, these people protesting all these silly clandestine “agendas” and shit have the easiest job ever. Like, imagine protesting things that don’t really exist anywhere but your hivemind
Don’t know about agenda but at least the first term Trudeau was pushing gender equality pretty hard putting it in trade deals. international.gc.ca/…/trade_gender_fta-ale-commer…Also tried to get them into USMCA but don’t belive they did, but Canada had no power in that deal coming in so late.
Is it that Trudeau shouldn’t have tried to get some equality? Or that he tried to encourage others to that were dealing with Canada to at least think about it?
There are probably other scenarios, and I really do feel like I’m missing your point. If you are so inclined, would you please clear up the confusion.
Really!? Lame attack to try to redirect anger away from the multiple scandals and the carbon tax debacle. Oh and this “Rural Economic Development Minister Gudie Hutchings says if Western and Prairie provinces want to secure carve-outs in the federal government’s carbon pricing policy, they should elect more Liberal ministers who can share their concerns with the government.” - ctvnews.
Well, the carbon tax thing wasn’t a debacle, per se, but he did oppose what economists agree is the best motivator for changing our energy usage while also protecting the low and middle class.
So his opposition to the carbon tax - when you look at the actual numbers - is a little stupid and a little telling as to whom he’s fighting for (hint: not us).
But he’s done a good job at blowing some tan-suit scandals way out of proportion to hide the leaked plans to kill healthcare, so I’d almost agree you’re right, but it may just be bumbling of some career politician who’s never had a job other than that and wouldn’t know a punch card or a hair net if they fell on his assistant’s lap .
The debacle is the MPs and NDP falling for the populism carrot that is carve-outs. It won’t be the last one either. It will always be framed as “helping the old lady keep the heat on” and not what is is - an oil subsidy that keeps people tied to a highly price-volatile and polluting heating source. You can also help that old lady by tweaking the rebate algorithm, but that wouldn’t help out the oil industry near as well.
Am I supposed to be surprised by this? He’s a conservative. A massive chunk of their platform is just “Fuck people not us”.
I’m not remotely surprised. Not disappointed. Just tired of pretending like I’m supposed to be civil to people who politically support spineless sacks of shit who want myself and others dead.
If you’re a Conservative, just block me now and get it over with because I want fuck all to do with you
And they get away with it because again … the population falls into thirds
A third supports this stupidity, a third oppose this stupidity and a third are completely ignorant and don’t care who wins the argument.
Movements like this come out of small group of small minded people with a lot of funding and monetary support. They just don’t appear out of thin air. Their rhetoric grows because they are able to market it to many people in many places, often and effectively. It takes money to do that, not influence, not charisma, not luck … it’s just money.
The NDP has leagues of diehard supporters, but none of them ever get heard because they don’t have a marketing machine behind them. I know because I’m an NDP supporter.
The marketing is only half the problem … the other half is the ignorance of the masses. Conservatives know that they can sway a good percentage of the population … they also know that with careful marketing, they can sway those that sit on the fence or are just ignorant of everything. It’s all they need to nudge themselves into power.
Everyone needs to vote, everyone needs to make their voice heard … it’s the only way we can stem the tide of conservatism that is building.
The Conservatives are the only party whose political survival depends centrally on their ability to hoodwink the ignorant. Right wing politics always involves this trickery, because in reality it offers nothing to benefit most of the people who vote for it, and a lot to harm them.
But they keep wining and seem to be getting more popular around the world. I think when times get hard people just say I want it to be like it used to be.
Lets be honest the Liberals are not winning with Trudeau as the leader and well have a hard time without him. They’re in power when there has been really bad inflation and house prices increasing, they’re going to take the blame. Is it theirs I don’t know considering there was a study and they found the President of the US does not have much impact on the economy and it’s luck on where we are in the economic cycle. Is it the same here?
Add comment