Ontario - The San Fran of Canada?

[pat34lee]

Is all of Canada going crazy, or is Ontario an outlier?

First it was bill 28. Also mentioned on the video below.
Bill 28, All Families Are Equal Act (Parentage and Related Registrations Statute Law Amendment), 2016 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario | Bills & Lawmaking | Current Parliament

Now it is bill 89. Your child belongs to the state.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

are there a lot of gay people in Ontario?

 

[pat34lee]

are there a lot of gay people in Ontario?

Not likely. In most places it's about 1 or 2%. Maybe 4 or 5% in places that promote their lifestyle.

 

[Jimmy D]

Maybe 4 or 5% in places that promote their lifestyle.

TV adverts, recruiting drives and what not?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Looks like our neighbors to the north have succumbed to the same types of scare-media that we have here in the US.

Here's a little background on the network
The Rebel Media - Wikipedia

...appears to be the Canadian InfoWars (minus the loud sweaty guy trying to sell you vitamins)

 

[Armoured]

Looks like our neighbors to the north have succumbed to the same types of scare-media that we have here in the US.

Here's a little background on the network
The Rebel Media - Wikipedia

...appears to be the Canadian InfoWars (minus the loud sweaty guy trying to sell you vitamins)

Don't get facts in the whaargaarbl! You're harshing the demonising others buzz!

 

[pat34lee]

New bill in Ontario says if your little Johnny wants to be a girl and you oppose him, that is child abuse and they can take him away from you. After all, you aren't parents any more, just caregivers.

"The so-called Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act of 2017, or Bill 89, was approved by a vote of 63 to 23, according to The Christian Times.

It requires child protection, foster, adoption service providers, and judges to take into account and respect a child's "race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression."

"I would consider that a form of abuse, when a child identifies one way and a caregiver is saying no, you need to do this differently," Minister of Child and Family Services Michael Coteau, who introduced the bill, was quoted as saying. "If it's abuse, and if it's within the definition, a child can be removed from that environment and placed into protection where the abuse stops.""
Ontario Passes Law Allowing Gov't to Seize Children From Parents Who Oppose Gender Transition

 

[pat34lee]

Looks like our neighbors to the north have succumbed to the same types of scare-media that we have here in the US.

Here's a little background on the network
The Rebel Media - Wikipedia

...appears to be the Canadian InfoWars (minus the loud sweaty guy trying to sell you vitamins)

Instead of trying to demonize the source, try looking up the information for yourself.
You would embarrass yourself less in the long run.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Instead of trying to demonize the source, try looking up the information for yourself.
You would embarrass yourself less in the long run.

I did look up the source (and the information)...thus the reason I posted a link to info about that particular source in my post. The grossly exaggerated the story and made false assertions about the implications of the proposed legislation.

I stand by my original assessment, "The Rebel Media" is no more credible than Breitbart or InfoWars.

 

[pat34lee]

I did look up the source (and the information)...thus the reason I posted a link to info about that particular source in my post. The grossly exaggerated the story and made false assertions about the implications of the proposed legislation.

I stand by my original assessment, "The Rebel Media" is no more credible than Breitbart or InfoWars.

And you still have nothing to show but your opinion about both the source and the legislation.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

And you still have nothing to show but your opinion about both the source and the legislation.

Did you read the actual Bill?
Bill 89, Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario | Bills & Lawmaking | Current Parliament

Nothing in there would suggest "your children now belong to the state".

It's just an extension/amendment of a protection act that was already in place.
For example, some of the amendments
- It extends protection to 16 & 17 year olds (where the prior cutoff was 15)
- People in charge "detention custody" facilities can now conduct searches for certain types of contraband
- No more using mechanical restraints, now secure isolation rooms must be used
- There's now a two-stage process for adoption proceedings for children who aren't currently citizens of Canada.
...things of that nature.

All of the amendments are pretty benign and are just extensions of protection measures that were already in place. Nowhere in this bill is any language used that would suggest "your children now belong to the state".

Like I said before, "The Rebel Media" is using the same type of scare tactics that Breitbart likes to use when they grossly exaggerate things to report a "war on <insert institution here>".


Now that I've explained myself, I feel it fair to point out that the one of the core principles of debating is that the burden of proof is on the affirmative position. That means that if you're going to assert that this bill means "your children now belong to the state", the onus is on you to provide the specific reasoning for that, and not on everyone else to disprove it. If that rule isn't adhered to, then you basically end up with Flying Spaghetti Monster logic.

 

[pat34lee]

Did you read the actual Bill?
Bill 89, Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017 | Legislative Assembly of Ontario | Bills & Lawmaking | Current Parliament

Nothing in there would suggest "your children now belong to the state".

Here is the pertinent change.
You can search the bill for the phrase, which is in there 8 times:

"sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression;"

 

[David Brider]

Here is the pertinent change.
You can search the bill for the phrase, which is in there 8 times:

"sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression;"

How exactly does that phrase equate to "your children now belong to the state"?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Here is the pertinent change.
You can search the bill for the phrase, which is in there 8 times:

"sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression;"

...and how does that mean your children belong to the state?

 

[Desk trauma]

...and how does that mean your children belong to the state?

Because if I can't beat little Billy until he no longer likes little Bobby or stops dressing like little Susie... muh rights!

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Because if I can't beat little Billy until he no longer likes little Bobby or stops dressing like little Susie... muh rights!

I think the beating aspect was already covered...but I think this would extend certain protections like using damaging "treatments" against children.

Much like children could be taken away if parents are doing something stupid like this:
Toddler died of meningitis 'after his parents tried to treat him with fruit'

...I think these extensions would also now include parents trying to send their gay kids to "gay-to-straight therapy" or "conversion therapy" (which has been linked to higher rates of suicide and depression).

The American Psychological Association did a report and gay kids who are subjected to this disproved and discredited treatment are 8 times more likely to attempt suicide, and 3 times more likely to end up on meds for depression than gay kids who aren't subjected to it.

 

[pat34lee]

...and how does that mean your children belong to the state?

If your young son says that he wants to be a girl or homosexual, and you don't let him, that is considered child abuse under this bill, and they can take him away.

 

[pat34lee]

The American Psychological Association did a report and gay kids who are subjected to this disproved and discredited treatment are 8 times more likely to attempt suicide, and 3 times more likely to end up on meds for depression than gay kids who aren't subjected to it.

When they are already at a 40% rate of suicide, anything is worth trying.
And I don't believe those numbers. The APA is not a place to treat mental
disorders any more. It is a political association working to normalize
deviant behavior by any means.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

When they are already at a 40% rate of suicide, anything is worth trying.
And I don't believe those numbers. The APA is not a place to treat mental
disorders any more. It is a political association working to normalize
deviant behavior by any means.

Doesn't matter whether you believe numbers or not...they have science and peer-reviewed statistics on their side, all you're providing is a religiously-influenced theory based on what your definition of "deviant" behavior is.

Depression and suicide rates among teens in that situation are directly influenced by how their treated and accepted (or not accepted)...it's not that being gay somehow inherently makes you more depressed.

Suicide attempt rate by region among LGBT youth:

If it were truly a matter of "being LGBT inherently makes you depressed", then you wouldn't see a regional disparity. It's no coincidence that an LGBT youth in South Carolina is almost twice as likely to attempt it as an LGBT youth in Maine or Vermont.

The rates of suicide directly correlate to how much family and societal backlash the child is getting. When a child feels like their parents don't accept them and society treats them as if they're evil, it's no wonder that outcome happens.


It's also very telling in regards to which "sins" seem to get the most attention from southern evangelicals. They seem to want to put the most focus on sins that they personally find it easy to abstain from. Gluttony is also a "sin" according to their faith, yet...southern evangelicals don't seem to be nearly as bothered by that. Gee...wonder why that is.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

If your young son says that he wants to be a girl or homosexual, and you don't let him, that is considered child abuse under this bill, and they can take him away.

What do you mean "you don't let him"?...you don't "let" or "not let" anyone be gay or straight...they either are or they aren't.