Posts Tagged ‘Canadian’

Nothing Changes Exclutionary Politics To Continue Under Newly Elected Conservative Party Leader Andrew Sheer

The Conservative Party of Canada’s leadership race has been decided. Andrew Sheer edged out perceived front-runner Maxime Bernier. A vote for  Maxime Bernier was considered to be a vote for change and 49.05% of Conservatives members voted for that change.  A vote Andrew Sheer was considered a vote for a softer approach and sell to the Harper vision of Conservatism, 50.95% of Conservative membership voted for that option.

What this means is that:

  • nothing will change of any substance in Conservative Party policy, or vision except the delivery;
  • at the end of the day this party will be the same anti Muslim immigration party it was under Stephen Harper’s Party;
  • the Conservative Party remains the same ideologically driven party that it was under the leadership of Stephen Harper;
  • there is a lot of Conservative members that are not onside with Andrew Sheer.

With the exception of two candidates those who vied for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada were the same people who:

  • failed to get one pipeline approved in the USA;
  • failed to get the soft wood lumber issue settled even though Canada won its case in court;
  • forced workers back to work with legislation, giving the workers less in terms of what they were seeking than what they were offered in arbitration;
  • suspended diplomatic relations with Iran, expelling Iranian its diplomats from Canada overnight for no apparent justifiable reason;
  • threatened to cut off aid to the Palestinians if they attempted to take Israel to court over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity;
  • attempted to sell Canadian foreign aid for future trade considerations;
  • closed veteran’s hospitals all over the country;
  •   shut down veteran’s affairs offices all over the country;
  • refused to talk to veterans and the families of veterans;
  • refused to talk to veterans and First Nations and gagged Canadian scientists;
  • cared so little about the safety of the men and women who serve in our military that they removed life saving features from the contract with Sikorsky to build Canada’s Maritime Military Helicopter (The 30-minute run-dry capability.  The ability to secure the helicopter’s ramp in various positions during flight. Crew comfort systems during extreme temperature operations. Unobstructed hand and foot holds for technicians to conduct maintenance.  The ability to self-start in very cold weather. – Cockpit ergonomics factors.  A system to automatically deploy personnel life rafts in emergency situations.);
  • were responsible for the F-35 fighter Jet, Chinook, 7.6B Cyclone Maritime Helicopter, close combat vehicle fiascos;
  • prorogued parliament four times and shut down debate at least 100 times, both more than any other government in Canadian history;
  • supported a Prime minister of Canada who refused to take part in first ministers conferences.(This means that Stephen Harper, refused to talk directly to the leaders of the provinces and territories about the concerns and needs of their provinces face to face);
  • who agreed with Prime Minister Harper when he referred to real Canadians as those Canadians who share European culture, heritage, values and religion.

The Conservative Party of Canada is the same old tired Conservative Party promoting the same old divisive and racist policies.  Andrew Sheer while waiting for the next election will:

  • spew hate filled rhetoric  and  visceral with a smile instead of a frown;
  • crack down on freedom of expression, religion, and rights guaranteed to all Canadians under the Canadian Constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms, with a smile instead of a frown;
  • talk about what he feels are Trudeau’s bad policies and decisions, instead of promoting and declaring his parties own position and policies.
  • knock his positive approach to things, while promoting negativity, pessimism and fear of what the future holds
  • knock Trudeau’s charisma, to try to make his boring self look good.

When Stephen Harper became the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada the party advisors tried very hard to make him look approachable. He was made to serve at BBQ’s, scheduled to do more televised interviews. At the end of the day Harper could only look like what he was a cold calculating person, whose main goal politically was to literally remove the Liberal Party and all that it had accomplished from the face of Canadian politics. In the federal election of 2015 it became clear that Canadians had enough of Stephen Harper’s dictatorship like style of governance. The anyone but Stephen Harper campaign not only denied Stephen Harper his political priority, but swept Justin Trudeau into office with a majority government. Was electing a Stephen Harper clone a wise move with just two years to go until the next federal election?

I do not think that Andrew Sheer is going to fool anyone outside of his base supporters and party members with his smile that the federal Conservative Party has changed, or grown, anymore than Stephen Harper did serving burgers.   A leopard cannot change his spots and even if it were possible just this once, they did not even try.

  • Andrew Sheer will have a hard way to go trying to keep his party together as the divides are great. immigration, abortion, gay rights, back bencher inclusion are all sticking points.
  • Andrew Sheer is as boring as Justin Trudeau is charismatic.
  • Andrew share wants to continue with old policies that cost the Conservatives the last federal election.
  • Andrew Sheer is predictable.

If the purpose of choosing a new leader was to convince Canadians that:

  • this was a fresh thinking political party, they have failed;
  • they now had a leader that defeat Justin Trudeau in 2019,they have failed;
  • they are still the same old arrogant, out of touch with Canadians party that cost them the last election, they have succeeded.

“Marry Out Move Out,” Is Grand Chief Michael Delisle Seeking Reconciliation Or Isolation?

We are not being racist! We are being forced to do racist things by  non native government rules and laws?

We are not being racist! We are being forced to do racist things by non native government rules and laws?

What is up Canada, why is it that political leaders feel that just because history has allowed them to get away with doing something wrong for a long time (The Canadian Government ignoring the treaties entered into with First Nations and Kahnawake’s, Marry Out Get Out law) that it is not incumbent of them to change with the times and do the right thing, because it is the right thing to do, rather than try to keep justifying their continued use of wrong actions using the negative deeds of  the past as prcedence to justify present day discrimination against others who have done them no wrong. Someone needs to tell the Grand Chief of the Kahnawake reserve that he cannot have it both ways. He can’t keep talking about the injustices of the Indian Act and how it needs to be scrapped totally out of one side of his mouth, while quoting from the  Indian Act the passage he feels justifies and legitimizes  his reasoning for evicting non natives from the homes they share with their native spouses based on racial discrimination. I believe to do so weakens the claim of all First Nations that they are seeking conciliation, rather than confrontation and isolation and makes the Grand chief at best a hypocrite and at the worst no better than the founding fathers of this country and every government that has governed Canada ever since. I believe in the adage that says that, “You cannot come to court with dirty hands.”

 If I were to suggest  to Michael Delisle, the  Grand Chief of the native reserve of Kahnawake that perhaps it is time to forbid all natives from leaving  their reserves for any reason, so that,

  • Natives and non natives need never again have to worry about inter mingling.
  • Native anti inclusive, non multi cultural, divisive and anti social ideologies would not be exposed to non native children and further add to the hate already infecting our society.

would this be okay with him, or would he rightly consider me just another ignorant racist person, who is part of the problem, rather than being part of a solution?

 If I were to suggest to Michael Delisle, the  Grand Chief of the native reserve of Kahnawake  that  all natives living off reserve should be rounded up wherever they are and forced back onto the reserve, because the non native society of Quebec can do without the extra burden  placed on it financially, because of  all the alcoholic and, drug addicted natives who live off reserve, living amongst  our non native alcoholic, drug addicts in order to reduce

  • The stress that natives living off of reserve are causing to our civic, provincial and federal budgets, because of their alcohol and drug abusive behavior that usually finds them in trouble with the law
  •  The  ever-increasing number of natives found living amongst our own non native homeless persons, who sleep and beg in our non native metros, streets and in our public parks.
  • The number of native women and girls who stand outside of  our non native bars willing to prostitute themselves for  a few beer and a bed to sleep in for the night.

would he feel that the reasons I just gave for rounding up all natives and forcing them back onto the reserve be considered  as  sound reasoning necessary to the survival and quality of life for the non native society of Quebec, or would I rightly be seen by him as an intolerant, ignorant person, looking for a reason to continue the hating and the blaming and the need to punish anyone even if it meant punishing the innocent, rather than a person seeking reconciliation?

I ask because non natives have laws making it illegal for a native to be refused anything based solely on the fact that they are a native. I grant that we have our racists too who just cannot and will not live together in harmony and true inclusiveness and who think that the races should be kept a part and blood lines kept untainted and pure for “survival reasons” and so the laws against discrimination are not always followed by some racist folk, but we non natives have the laws in place.  Grand Chief of the native reserve of Kahnawake, Michael Delisle needs to understand that in the non native world, there are no laws and therefore no penalties for marrying out of your race, working, owning property, or socializing off reserve even if some natives are alcoholic drug addicts. I guess we non natives are not  that afraid that our culture, language, religion and values could be threatened with extinction due to  marriages between native and non native people entered into for the sole reason of love.

I cannot believe in the 21st century Canada that natives on one hand could ask us non natives to help them  find their missing women and girls, join in their Idle No More protests, fight alongside them for their right to self governance and self-determination, would say to us non natives on the other hand that we are not good enough to marry their men and women and live amongst them, sharing in their culture and way of life. What kind of leader is Michael Delisle, that he would support a law that would deny his own people the right to choose whom they wish to marry, have children with and share their whole life with by supporting and promoting a racist, exclusionary and discriminatory law that stands to force families apart and evict non native spouses off of Kahnawake reserve, solely on the basis of race saying , “Marry out, move out?”

I guess there is always a good reason in some peoples minds and hearts for their exclusionary practices and mean-spirited laws, while they feel justified in complaining about the same things when it is them on the receiving end. Pauline Marois and her Charter of Quebec Rights and Values, or Stephen Harper and his Real Canadians  speech talking of saving Canada for real Canadians sharing the same  European culture, language and religion. In my opinion  in spite of all that they have been through in Quebec and Canada, Grand Chief of the native reserve of Kahnawake and most of his people have learned nothing about the fate awaiting those who would practice, bigotry and intolerance in the name of survival.

Michael Delisle  has just swatted a hornets nest and might find that the price to pay for engaging in a racist, isolating and divisive manner comes with a hefty price tag.  He claims that non natives can live anywhere they want, but his band is forced to live on a small reserve, but the last time I looked natives can live anywhere they choose to, go to school anywhere they choose to, work anywhere they choose to, own property anywhere they choose to and seek medical assistance etc., in our non native towns and cities? Now I have always supported First Nations in their right to self-determination as all post up to this one have shown, but I have also shown my distaste for racism, no matter who is doing the hating.  I am no supporter of reverse discrimination, or racism no matter what the justification for it is said to be.  This kind of behavior is not working for Stephen Harper, did not work for Pauline Marois and will not work for Grand Chief Michael Delisle either.  I would like to continue to support First Nations in their struggle to overcome the many hurdles that they are still facing, but do not want to be supportive of a racist culture of exclusion based solely on race. I hope that Grand Chief Michael Delisle will rethink his position and remove this clearly racist, discriminatory law. Is this what the right to self governance and self-determination is all about for all First Nations? I hope not, because I as a non native supporter of First Nations do not want to be supporting over 600 separate governments within Canada that have apartheid  type laws, policies and ideologies.

What Do You See When You Look In The Mirror?

What Do You See When You Look In The Mirror?

What Do You See When You Look In The Mirror?

What is up Canada, what do you see when you look in the mirror? How could we the people of Canada allow ourselves to forget who we are, forget what we stand for and forget all that we have learned through our history whether it be good, or bad? How could we give up our rights and freedoms and settle for a life better suited to an ass, that toils for its master, with no say? How could we become a people who show no empathy, no sympathy and no compassion for others, because we are afraid to speak up for ourselves and so accept blindly what our elected officials say to be true? Why do we answer, “We believe you,” every time a politician asks, “Do you believe me, or your lying eyes?”  When did we as Canadians decide that we did not care as much about the suffering of mankind, the state of our environment, and our freedom of choice, as we did about turning a profit? If you would say that what I have just said is a lie, then why we do we as Canadians keep proving what our politicians are always saying is true? Why do we keep loyally voting them into office time and time again, when they insist that, “turning a profit in all that they do is what Canadians expect, want and elect their politicians to do? Politicians begin by only saying what they think will get them  elected and will only do what they think will get them re-elected, so who else’s fault could it be, that we are being governed by politicians who think that turning a profit for Canada is what we as Canadians want them to do more than anything else, if they want to get our vote? I honestly do not know how, or why we as people have allowed ourselves to become blind, deaf and mute to all that is happening around us, but I will say that we Canadians deserve everything that we are getting from this strong, stable, majority, conservative government, because,

  • It was us the Canadian voter who put them into  power with a majority government after they were forced to shut down their minority government for misleading parliament, which means they were guilty of intentionally misleading us the Canadian people.
  • It is us the voter who sit in our homes quietly as this government takes our rights and freedoms away from us one right and one freedom at a time,  instead of going into the street and creating such a scene that this government would be forced to change their ways.
  • It is us the Canadian  voter who says and does nothing while this government creates laws like Bill C-23  Fair Elections Act an act most experts and me feel is designed to allow this government to legally commit election fraud, as well as deny an element of voters that does not traditionally vote for their party (students and seniors), their  right to vote.
  • It is us the Canadian voter who  has allowed this government to pass Bill C-13 into law. We have not protested Bill C-13, even when we found out that it was not the anti cyber bullying bill it was promoted as, but a cynical and sadistic use of those who died like Amanda Todd   to reintroduce Vic Toews’s Bill C-30. We the Canadian voter say and do nothing while this government presses to legalize warrantless snooping and gathering of Canadian’s private internet information, by law enforcement personnel choosing instead to lend a blind eye to this government’s sidestepping of judicial scrutiny as well as transparency with the Canadian  people?
  • It was we the Canadian voter who cheered as this strong, stable, conservative government began using  time allocation to shut down debate and using prorogation to avoid answering difficult political questions, making record use of these two things and making a mockery  of the Canadian system of democratic governance.
  • It is us as Canadians who do nothing while this government unilaterally sends our military into war ill-equipped; not because we are unable to do better and still wish to do our part to help our allies fight the terrorist threat of ISIS, but because the conservative government decides time after time not to get new equipment, but rather to refurbish and refit old out dated equipment in order to save money by balancing its budget in time for the next federal elections in 2015, making political points with us the voter by sacrificing the safety and combat readiness of those who protect Canada and all Canadians.
  • It is none other than the Canadian voter who remains silent as this government takes away every support system that our veterans have come to rely on and deserve throughout the history of Canada. We sit on our sofas and watch as this government shuts down veteran’s hospitals all over Canada, refuses to help treat veterans suffering from PTSD and refuses to find and help all of the veterans that we all know comprise a great deal of the homeless people literally living, suffering and eventually dying on the streets that they helped to protect with their service.
  • It is us the voter who stand by and allow this government to mistreat the first nation people of Canada by forcing into law bills like Bill C-25 to legislate away the right to exist for some Mi’ckmaq First Nations People. Bill S-6, Yukon and Nunavut Regulatory Improvement Act: Proposed Amendments to the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act (YESAA). Problem is that first nations people were not consulted for about the amendments at the time of the meeting involving first nations leaders and the government in other words the government tried to back door the amendments.
  • It is us the voter who would prefer to hear political rhetoric that be told the truth, like we witnessed when Canada’s Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney used a 10-year-old reports to create an immediate threat of an attack from ISIS directly on Canadian soil
  • It is us the voter who continues to allow this government to change who we are in terms of foreign policy when dealing with things like humanitarian assistance, by (a)refusing to help nations that have nothing we want in terms of trade, or strategic military value, or only offering to put in what the equivalent of what private donations can be collected by a government decided cut off date. (b)rewriting our immigration system so that it discriminates against certain type of refugees, who now will find themselves thrown in jail upon their arrival to Canada detained without benefit of trial and treated as a possible terrorist and enemy of the state, instead of made to feel welcome, helped and assured that at long last they have found safety and refuge in Canada. It is we the voter who sat quiet and debated intellectually amongst ourselves while this government imprisoned 492 Tamil men, women and children of the MV Sun Sea, because they believed that there were terrorists among them. To date how many were found to be terrorist? How many of these Tamil refugees that this government re-victimized once they stepped foot on Canadian soil were actually deported as proven terrorists? How many of them were resettled in Canada and how many of them still are in jail as the government delays and stalls the case in the courts? Was Bill C-4, the Preventing Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada’s Immigration System Act really necessary and why do we as Canadian voters not care?
  • It is us the voter who have allowed this government through our collective silence to make a mockery out of our democratic system of government. To allow for the most part agencies like Elections Canada, Privacy Commission, Parliamentary Budget Office and Auditor General’s Office  to be reduced or are in the processes of being reduced to little more than powerless  symbolic shells;  their decision-making and oversight power given over to the government’s ministers.
  • It is us the Canadian voter who have allowed this government to turn this great country into little more than another American state. The most common answer used  by this government when asked why Canada is doing anything concerning  environmental issues, economic issues and even issues concerning decisions about when to go to war is, “We have no choice but to do what the USA asks of us…”
  • It is us the Canadian people who are doing nothing as this government tries to remove judicial oversight from the our way of governance, by demeaning it and marginalizing it value, seeking to steal authority from the Supreme  Court of Canada, take its powers and add them to its own.

Canada is being governed by this government with the same lack of  democratic principles as the banana republics and maniacal dictatorships that we denounce as not representative of their people’s desires and needs, oppressive, dangerous to themselves and the rest of the world and in need of regime change.  How could we the people of Canada just bend down our heads and without even a fight, or a modicum of resistance allow a yoke to be put over our heads and a bit placed in our mouths? When the people of a country can  be made to forget who they are, forget what they stand for and forget all that they have learned through their history whether it be good, or bad they become little more than jackasses that toil for their master, with no say?

How could we become a people who pretend to feel no empathy for others, because we use the excuse of our world-renowned passiveness as our excuse to not speak up for ourselves and not to take meaningful action to bring down this despotic regime  with every legal means at our disposal?  Instead we make the choice every day to quietly go along with what our elected officials say we must do, even though the evidence proves that they lie about everything and are motivated solely by profit and personal political gain?  I do not know how, or why we as people have allowed ourselves to become blind, deaf and mute to all that is happening around us, but I will say that we Canadians deserve everything that we are getting from this strong, stable, majority, conservative government. What is up Canada? When you look in the mirror, is it the face of an ass that you see string back at you?

Have The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual And Transgender (LGBT) Community Now Become The Aggressive Bully?

The greatest fear that heterosexual people have is that their way of life and their personal beliefs and choices will somehow be taken away from them, or ignored with the rush of the government to prove that it is not homophobic and is accepting of the LGBT community.

The greatest fear that heterosexual people have is that their way of life and their personal beliefs and choices will somehow be taken away from them, or ignored with the rush of the government to prove that it is not homophobic and is accepting of the LGBT community.


I believe in the right of all people to exist freely and openly according to their choices, but that means all people no matter what language they speak, what the color of their skin is, what religion they practice, or their sexual preference, be they heterosexuals, or gay, as long as the choices they make do not harm another person, or interfere with another person’s right to live in peaceful co-existence  and allow for the freedom of choice for others. I thought what some members of the LGBT community when they decided that they would go to the Ford Fest Day Picnic for the sole purpose of disrupting an event that really had nothing to do with their cause, be it pro or negative, is yet another indication that co-existence is no longer the goal of some of the LGBT community. I think those 6 members of the LGBT community are proving that there is a growing  intolerance within the LGBT community towards any opinion, or criticism of their cause.  This of course is very immature and shows  a darker side of some members of the LGBT community’s motives pertaining to co-existence with others. Failure of the greater membership of the LGBT community to publicly denounce the actions of the 6, or so members for their actions at the Ford Fest Day to me says that they are without leadership , or that they approve of such actions. I think that if the members of the LGBT community believe as I do in  freedom of choice for all, then they should practice what they preach and extend that right to others even if their beliefs are contrary to that of their own.

I decided to write about this subject after reading that the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community recently were angered by Mayor Ford’s refusal to rise and applaud while city council gave a standing ovation to organizers of Toronto’s World Pride festival, causing 6 or so members of their community to voice their anger on Friday, protesting what they called Ford’s homophobia, by going to Thomson Memorial Park in Scarborough, holding signs that called for the mayor’s departure from office, antagonizing Ford’s supporters and disrupting the Ford Fest Picnic.  Poe Liberado said, “He needs to be held accountable.” “His buffoonery is dangerous, his positions are dangerous and he needs to be taken seriously.”  The mayor has since apologised for the actions of his supporters although he was not physically present in the area where and when the opposing sides clashed. I thought this demonstrated his disapproval publicly of such behavior and in so doing was taking a leader’s implied responsibility for those claiming to represent and support him. Having said that, there has been no apology coming from the LGBT community, leaving me to believe that they agree with and support the actions of the 6 protestors involved in the clash.

Is it the belief, or the position of the LGBT community that everyone in politics and on the planet should stand up and clap for them at every ceremony and march in their parades, or show solidarity with their cause and personal choices all of the time, or be harassed and forever be labelled homophobic?  Does the LGBT community believe, or is it their position that they and they alone should be able to hold an event like a parade, or fundraiser, or even picnic without being harassed by those who do not believe, or make the same life choices as them?  If the answer is no to those 2 questions, then why did they not do onto Mayor Ford and his supporters as they would have others do onto them and just not attend the Ford Fest?  The picnic was in no way a demonstration of the mayors approval or disapproval of the LGBT community, so why did they not extend to him and the people who wished to spend a day with Mayor Rob Ford the right to do so in peace?

I believe that one’s personal choices are simply that one’s personal choices and no one has the right through coercion to alter the beliefs of another and try to force acceptance of their choice of lifestyle on another human being.  Is this a case of the oppressed becoming the oppressor, the harassed becoming the harassers,  or does the LGBT really think that Mayor Rob Ford is truly a serious threat to their existence? I do not go to the gay pride parade in my community, because I feel that for the most part it has become taken over by those only interested in promoting public nudity purely for the shock value of the onlookers and bragging rights among their peers for being the most obscenely outrageously dressed, or undressed that day.  I find that the gay pride parade has become in most cases  a disgusting spectacle of male genitalia being flaunted about  that I would not like my grandchildren to witness, or my children to participate in  and so I do not lend my support to the parade by virtue of attending it; does that make me homophobic, should I be harassed at the annual picnic I hold? Is this what the gay pride parade and day, week, month is all about and can someone enlighten me as to what foreskin power is and why such banners are in the gay pride parade?

One of the greatest fears that heterosexual people have is that their way of life and their personal beliefs and choices will somehow be taken away from them, or ignored with the rush of the government to prove that it is not homophobic and is accepting of the LGBT community.  I believe that the members of the LGBT community have a right to do all of the things any other Canadian can do and be subject to the same rules and laws that all Canadians live under, but I think that all of this comes with a responsibility to do onto others as you would have done onto you.  Unfortunately what some heterosexual people have feared has come to pass and it is getting harder and harder to preserve heterosexual institutions, such as religious beliefs and religious law the way they have been forever without being labeled homophobic and discriminatory. The fact is that to be a heterosexual and voicing ones heterosexual beliefs, or refusing to see gay marriages as okay in the Christian faith and as an acceptable practice blessed by God is now seen as being homophobic and discriminatory so much so that the tenets of the Christian church concerning marriage and sex and their main purpose according to  the very word of their God, is being altered to accommodate the LGBT community.

The Christian church and its followers are being pressured to change and rewrite the bible and its teachings to accommodate the LGBT community and that is a practice that if I were a Christian I would not find fair and refuse to be allowed to be altered.  If a person’s life choices puts that person at odds with a religion is it right to expect or demand that said religion remake itself to accommodate them? Is any religion worth anything of value if what it teaches can be changed to suit the person rather than the person changing and becoming worthy of being an accepted member of the religions community through a shared faith and a shared set of values?  I believe that religion becomes meaningless if what it teaches can become what man wills it to be rather than what the God of that faith declared it to be.  In this way the Christian faith has been forever altered at its core and divided in its faith.

Christians believe that God provided a way for all things to reproduce themselves in one way or another. Unless Christians are willing to say that their God made a mistake and is not perfect and all-knowing, how is it possible that God foresaw during creation the need to give certain creatures both sets of  sexual apparatus making the joining of any 2 an act of reproduction, but this capability was not given to humans, God’s most cherished in all of creation?  Is it fair for heterosexuals to have to change their faith, or be labelled homophobic, or is this nothing more than the LGBT community forcing its lifestyle on the Christian community, like they are doing to Mayor Ford, because he failed to believe as they do and support their way of thinking, or in this case his daring not to stand and clap for them when all others did?

We will have to decide soon whether or not Mayor Ford, or anyone else has the freedom of choice to clap or not clap, to stand or not stand, believe or not believe according to how he, or we feel anymore. Is it appropriate behaviour  for members of  the LGBT community to follow Mayor Ford, or anyone else around with the sole purpose of harassing him/them in public for choosing not to support the LGBT community? I would suggest that the LGBT community was once a passive, harassed and bullied group of unorganised victims, who were seeking  to have a peaceful coexistence with the rest of Canadians, but that today this is no longer the case in Canada. Today in Canada the LGBT has become a powerful and organised group and with that power they have chosen to become an aggressive, harassing, pushy bully, no longer content with coexistence, but now trying to force  all Canadians and the rest of the world to believe as it does and do as it says, or be labelled the dreaded, “homophobic”.  They are no longer victims in Canada, but like all groups once oppressed, the LGBT community knows how to keep playing the, “I am so abused card,” to gain political points and influence public opinion and keep their cause in the media.

What we do have as human beings is free will which empowers us to choose what works for us. What free choice does not grant us however is the right to force the change by any means necessary a historically established religion’s tenets simply to accommodate  our personal  needs. Instead what is require of one choosing to avail one’s self of services offered by a church like being married in it with the blessing of the church is to follow the laws of the church community you wish to join, be you gay or heterosexual. To change a religion’s laws and thereby the word of that church’s God to conform to the will of man I believe is to render any faith-based religion worthless and open to the whims of any man. If the LGBT community is still seeking a coexistence with heterosexuals they need to promote that and stop their members from aggressively attacking heterosexual’s right to exist. Reverse discrimination never resolves, or makes for a peaceful coexistence.

There was a time to be seen as part of the LGBT community meant that you were beat up in the street, did not have the right to marry and so were not guaranteed spousal rights, or permitted to adopt children, but all of that has changed under Canadian law to give the LGBT community the same rights and freedoms guaranteed every other Canadian under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms  as it should be, so why can those who choose to believe in something else do so in peace and not stand and clap if they so choose without being harassed? I believe in the right of all people to exist freely and openly according to their choices, but that means all people no matter what language they speak, what the color of their skin is, what religion they practice, or their sexual preference, be they heterosexuals, or gay, as long as the choices they make do not harm another person, or interfere with another person’s right to live in peaceful co-existence  and allow for the freedom of choice for others.






Supreme Court Of Canada Abandons Those Forced Into Prostitution

Terri-Jean Bedford, left, and Valerie Scott,  and a third woman, launched the constitutional challenge of Canada's anti-prostitution laws.

Terri-Jean Bedford, left, and Valerie Scott, and a third woman, launched the constitutional challenge of Canada’s anti-prostitution laws.

What is up Canada and what was the supreme court of Canada thinking when it rendered its decision, making most of Canada’s anti prostitution laws invalid in one years time?  The harm for this decision will be felt for years to come by those that are not in it of their own choosing.  This throwing out of most of the laws prohibiting the selling of sex for money and the living off of the avails of it will serve to embolden pimps, gangs and organized crime and will hurt runaway children caught up by pimps and terrorized into prostitution they are often sent to madams where they will be off of the street and out of the eyes of police walking the beat.  Pimps will open up whore houses, because they are a legal way for them to do business and who will be going around to check all of the locations that will be springing up as soon as the laws go down and at what cost and to whom?

“The high court struck down all three prostitution-related prohibitions — against keeping a brothel, living on the avails of prostitution and street soliciting — as violations of the constitutional guarantee to life, liberty and security of the person,” wrote Mike Blanchfield, in The Canadian Press.

The police are already overwhelmed in this country and are facing cuts to their budgets be they city police, provincial or the RCMP so where is the money going to come from to enforce any rules and regulations the government will have to impose on every bawdy house if it is to try to ensure that  the now legal bawdy houses provide a safe environment for their workers and a healthy, disease free staff for their clients to choose from?  I guess the government will want its end of the earnings so I am guessing that these whore houses will be taxed as any other legitimate business is and the government will make money selling the necessary permits to anyone wanting to open a bawdy house and I would guess that the workers will be registered and will be required to pay taxes as well which should raise some pretty interesting questions like are these tax paying sex trade workers eligible for unemployment insurance, welfare and will they be governed by the same laws as any other Canadian worker and entitled to all of labor rights found in the Canadian Constitution?

What of those Canadians who have been imprisoned for living off of the avails of prostitution although we now know that it is not a crime in Canada and has never been a crime in Canada according to the supreme court of Canada will they be made whole for the loss of life they were put behind bars illegally and their criminal record erased and expunged?  Will the possessions of all sex workers that were taken from them be returned to them? (The money, the houses, the jewelry etc.) Does the decision of the supreme court of Canada that strikes down this countries anti-prostitution laws on the grounds that they are unconstitutional open the government up to a class action suit from all of the sex trade workers throughout Canadian history who have had their constitutional rights violated willfully and knowingly by the police and the courts? I am not being a wise guy here, but raising a question, because if the court says that Canada has no right and never did to treat selling sex as a crime because it is not illegal to sell sex for money in Canada, than the police, the courts and the country has wronged a group of innocent people for a very long time intentionally and there is nothing in the decision that would stop sex workers from seeking damages from the government, the police, or the courts.

How do we protect the people who are being forced to into selling themselves for money, by pimps and organized crime? Am I to understand that a man or woman will be able to legally buy the sexual services of a child depending on the age requirement in every province for consensual sex legally a year from now, without fear of being arrested by the police and the courts sending him/her to jail? (In Quebec the age for consensual sex is 14 years old)  All that would be needed to have is a signed contract or consent form or perhaps a video taped interview and the pimp and the madam would be able to claim consent and who would be able to prove if the signature was coerced or given freely?

Finally what does this say about Canada as a country and Canadians as a people?  What does it say about us morally, about our values and our ability to see right from wrong, if we say that it is okay to prostitute oneself for money?  Why stop the drug addict from taking dope by making taking dope a crime and the selling of that dope illegal and what is the difference? Why is it legal to intervene in anything that a consenting adult choose to engage in or make a living doing as long as there is informed mutual consent on all sides of the equation?  Does society not have an obligation to protect the weak and more fragile from those who would prey on them and feed off of them, or are we now like the beast in the wild?  Can a society flourish in an atmosphere of anything goes, where there is no moral compass, no value system, no right and wrong and where only constitutional rights count.

What of the rights of those of the majority of Canadians who do not think that prostitution should be legal and do not want a whore house on every block, the majority of Canadians for whom the anti-prostitution laws were put into place for in the first place?  These laws were not arbitrarily put into place at the whim of some politician.  The anti-prostitution laws were hard-fought for and enacted because Canadians thought that:

  • It was immoral to buy sex from a human being whether they wanted to sell themselves or not.
  • It was necessary to protect those who were being forced into selling sex for money by another person or other persons.
  • It was necessary to stop the spreading of sexually transmitted diseases.

If the highest court in the land thought that it was doing the right thing and making it safer for sex trade workers by striking down the anti-prostitution laws all I have to say is that I think they were very wrong; now where there used to be consequences and some means of deterrent and protection under the law in a year there will be none. I have to ask again, “What is up Canada?”

Interesting Stories In Canadian Politics # 3

Story #1: Headline in the Yahoo News/Canada Politics, posted by Andy Radia on, November 29, 2013 at 3:12 PM  reads, Harper government tracks ‘missing’ $3.1 billion” and goes on to say, “Conservative MPs finally has a good news story to take home to their constituencies this weekend.  You’ll recall, in May, the Tory brand took a hit when the Auditor General slammed the government for losing track of $3.1 billion earmarked for national security. The media and the opposition parties somehow turned ‘losing track of $3.1 billion”, into ‘losing $3.1 billion.’ Nevertheless, that money has now been tracked.  According to the National Post, the problem was due to mis-categorizations between departments.

Well there you have it Canadians have nothing to worry about now (smile) according to the press; our government did not steal the money they are just incapable of keeping track of it and since they eventually found it, no real harm done. The story does not stop there though it goes on to imply that there is a vast difference between the Harper Government standing up in the house of commons and saying that we somehow lost track of the money and the opposition parties saying that they lost the Harper government lost the money.  In other words this government did not bother to do the paper work which caused them to look like they could not find$3.1 billion dollars.  The story fascinates me, because it seems to be saying that we as Canadians should be happy and see it as good news that we have a government that has been proven to not be a crooked in this instance, but has rather been proven to just be careless and incompetent when it dealing with large sums of money and doing the appropriate paper work when transferring large sums of money from one department to another.  This story also makes the claim that this government should somehow feel good about telling its supporters that they are incompetent, sloppy, careless, but they are not crooks.

Story #2: Headline in CBC News, posted by Blair Rhodes on Nov 07, 2013 at 7:50 AM, reads “Condom piercer’s sex crime appeal goes to Supreme Court” with the slightly less bold sub title reading, “Craig Jaret Hutchinson convicted in December 2011 and sentenced to 18 months in prison”  I guess I found the whole debate fascinating, because of the implications of the defense of this guys decision and what the impact the final outcome will have on a woman’s ability to rely on an agreement between herself and her mate to only engage in safe sex. How will this impact the ability of a woman to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies to poke holes in a condom and what happens to the unborn child of this deception?

The other thing that fascinates me is the assertion by the defense that this guy did nothing illegal and although what he did could be considered reprehensible that it was no way assault, because he had permission for the act. We are to ignore that he only had permission to engage in sex with her providing it was safe sex, (with a condom on). No condom equals, no permission; no permission means to engage is sexual assault.  You engage in sexual assault you will be punished.  We are being asked to forget that because this guy poked holes in the condom and impregnated hos girlfriend who said she did not wish to be pregnant that he caused the death of an unborn child. We are being asked by the defense that because of his actions the young woman was put through stress, hardship, physical and mental anguish.  What if he had a sexual transmittable disease that he was not aware of and because of his action he gave it to her?  Should she have had to carry the baby and  given it to the guy? I find it incredible that this idiot did not just do his time and be glad he was not charged with the murder of that unborn child.

Story #2: Headline in, published  by Jordon Press on December 6, 2013, 4:26 pm reads: “Conservative Sen. Jean-Guy Dagenais accused of unleashing ‘personal attack’ on NDP MP Charmaine Borg”  What I found so interesting in this story is the reasoning of Conservative Senator Jean Guy Dagenais in writing this letter to NDP MP Charmaine Borg. Everyone in Canada, and around the world knows that this Senate is embroiled in scandal when it comes to the misuse of travel expenses and household allowance expenses.  The fact that the Conservatives have a majority in the Senate and that they also seem to be in the majority of the scandals in both chambers and even in the PMO’s office does nothing to improve how Canadians feel about this non elected body of government.  This government is an embarrassment to Canadians and the flyer was an attempt to rid Canadians of an ineffective, embarrassing body of the government that has gotten worse since Steven Harper added his patronage appointments to the senate,   so again I ask why the personal attack on NDP MNA Charmaine Borg for stating the obvious.

Story #3: Headline in, reads: Jason Kenney‘s Rob Ford comment sparked profane rebuke from Jim Flaherty.  That they argued is one thing, but to do it right out there on the floor of the house of Commons is not what the conservative government of Canada and Steven Harper  need at this point in time.  That it is happening because of Rob Ford I find amazing. that 2 senior members of the conservative party of Canada and high-ranking cabinet ministers would use profanity and almost come to blows I find almost Liberal and anything but conservative.  It appears that the prime minister is losing control his party as continuous scandals and inner conflict seem to be tearing his party apart from within. The Conservative Party of Canada is going to great lengths to paint the Liberal Party of Canada as protecting the conservative  senators who have broken the law and at the same time  their finance minister almost gets in a fist fight with Jason Kenney over Jason Kenney calling for Rob Fords to step down; talk about contradictions. I am guessing that Jim Flaherty wants Rob Ford covered under the same, “It wasn’t me ” Tori operating procedure as the prime minister and the rest of the prominent Tories are. At best they looked like a bunch of children and their use of profane language showed a complete lack of respect for where they were (the House of Commons) and their colleagues, of whom a large number were women.  This party can ill afford this type of public display especially over a self-confessed liar and crack smoker.  What were they thinking?

Interesting Stories In Canadian Politics #2

Conservative Senator declares war on Capital Hill

Conservative Senator declares war on Capital Hill

Headline in, published  by Jordon Press on December 6, 2013, 4:26 pm reads: “Conservative Sen. Jean-Guy Dagenais accused of unleashing ‘personal attack’ on NDP MP Charmaine Borg”  What I found so interesting in this story is the reasoning of Conservative Senator Jean Guy Dagenais in writing this letter to NDP MP Charmaine Borg. Everyone in Canada, and around the world knows that this Senate is embroiled in scandal when it comes to the misuse of travel expenses and household allowance expenses.  The fact that the Conservatives have a majority in the Senate and that they also seem to be in the majority of the scandals in both chambers and even in the PMO‘s office does nothing to improve how Canadians feel about this non elected body of government.  This government is an embarrassment to Canadians and the flyer was an attempt to rid Canadians of an ineffective, embarrassing body of the government that has gotten worse since Steven Harper added his patronage appointments to the senate,   so again I ask why the personal attack on NDP MP Charmaine Borg for stating the obvious.  Let’s compare the two individuals by the facts as they are only with no hypothetical analysis.

  • NDP MP Charmaine Borg ran in a federal election and won it and earned the right to represent the citizens her riding.  Conservative Sen. Jean-Guy Dagenais ran in a federal election and lost, but thanks to a patronage appointment by Steven Harper gets to sit in the senate and without the consent of the people represent them.
  • NDP MP Charmaine Borg spoke out about the corruption in the senate and voiced her opinion that the senate as a political entity was useless and that certain documented crooks were giving the senate a bad name. In a politically motivated flyer which she had mailed to everyone in her riding she suggested to the people who elected her to represent them in such matters that she thought that the senate should be abolished.  Conservative Sen. Jean-Guy Dagenais on the other hand has taken to defending the very same senate that he campaigned to rid Canada of when he ran in a federal election as a Harper, Conservative MP and lost.  At that time he was agreeing with his party and it would seem NDP MP Charmaine Borg that there was no place in Canadian politics for a corrupt, useless and non elected senate.
  • NDP MP Charmaine Borg spoke of ridding the people of Canada of a corrupt unelected body of politicians that are totally controlled by the PMO, by virtue of  the fact that they are chosen for their jobs by the Prime Minister of the day.  Charmaine Borg also knows enough about how the senate operates to know that whatever equalizing force the senate was intended to be, has been corrupted. The senate  (the place of sober 2nd thought) is no longer a senate where people of  all political stripes with allegiances to no political party, come together in a non-partisan undertaking and ensure that the people of Canada were best being served by the politicians they entrusted to represent their needs. (The sole purpose of senators never having to be worried about being fired was to ensure that they could look upon proposed legislation in non partisan way),   Conservative Sen. Jean-Guy Dagenais spoke of  the senate of years gone by, the need for NDP Charmaine Borg to go to the library and understand what the senate purpose is and its intended purpose was.  Conservative Senator Jean-Guy Dagenais decided that the best way to protect his now beloved senate was to mount a personal attack, instead of speaking to the senates good work for example and what purpose  the senate has in Canadian politics today in reality and not in terms of the ideology of past politicians, before the corruption hit.
  • NDP MP Charmaine Borg offered her opinion to her constituents and the people of Canada concerning the Canadian Senate as an elected MP which is her right as is every Canadian, politician or not.  NDP MP Charmaine Borg dared to say that she feels that the senate needs to be abolished and replaced with an elected senate, so they to can be held accountable by the citizens of Canada for their actions on election day, even though her political party desire is to reform the senate rather than abolish it.    Conservative Sen. Jean-Guy Dagenais offered his opinion to her in a personal letter suggesting that she is too young to understand the value to Canadians in such patronage appointments, that she is a whiny female and that she did not deserve to be elected disregarding the fact that when they both ran, he lost and she won / she is an elected official and he is not.
  • NDP MP Charmaine Borg has declared war on a corrupt senate that has lost its significance and is no longer doing the job it was intended to do in the non-partisan manner it was intended to utilise, making it just an unelected advantage to the party governing at any given time.  She states correctly, if the senate is to be an arm of the government of the day then it should be elected.  Conservative Sen. Jean-Guy Dagenais  has declared war on everyone and anyone who dares to speak ill of the senate, or call for its end, especially politicians not in his conservative party.  This senator insists that there is no corruption and that attacks or mention of the obvious fundamental flaws, or the never-ending scandals plaguing todays senate is declaring war personally against him and will be met with hostility and swift action of the sort he displayed against NDP MP Charmaine Borg.

Until his letter I as a citizen of Canada thought that there was an outside chance that the senate could just be reformed and I have written so, but back then I thought the senate got it, knew they were acting wrongly and needed to change their ways and would support changes that got them back on the course where they are representing Canadians the way it was intended when the idea of a Canadian senate was conceived and return to a chamber of sober 2nd thought. Instead of apologies for their wrong doing we get attacks and threats of war being declared against officials we have elected to represent us, who would dare to speak out and call for the corruption to end.  It would appear that all the senators of which there are only Liberals and Conservatives think that they are being unfairly criticised and persecuted in and out of the House of Commons, or at least their leaders in the Senate do and if you think that you are innocent then you think that you have no need to change what you are doing.  Since I read the letter and the comments that followed out of the senate I say, “Scrap it and start over”.