Tag Archives: Ontario

News

Ottawa-Carleton District School Board wants to know children’s sexual orientation

2 Comments

From Mercator Net. (H/T Ruth Blog)

Excerpt:

A former Canadian Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau, once famously quipped: “The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.”

Unless, it would seem, the “nation” means schoolchildren ages 12-17, and the “state” is local school board bureaucrats and/or the provincial Ministry of Education. The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board (Ontario, Canada) plans to issue a survey which asks, among other things, for children to disclose their gender (four choices) and sexual orientation (nine choices). Proponents claim the survey is voluntary, but rather than requiring parental permission for the survey to be administered, the onus is on parents to opt out in writing (by Nov. 19), if they do not wish their child to participate.

[…]Although the survey is touted as being anonymous, each form is tagged with a code that can be traced back to the individual child, and, by extension, his or her family. Critics wonder what kind of inferences will be drawn, and who will have access to information that involves the cultural, religious, financial, and educational status of students’ parents.

Now why do you suppose they want to know about the religion of the parents and about whether the child is gay? Hmmmn. And how will the parents’ decision to opt out affect the children’s test scores? Hmmmn.

News

Left-wing fascists at Carleton University ban pro-life club

1 Comment
Armed policeman arrests peaceful pro-life student
Armed policeman arrests peaceful pro-life student

Here’s the story from the National Post.

Excerpt:

Carleton University’s official student association has banned the Ottawa institution’s anti-abortion club, offering it just one way to get back into good graces: support abortion rights.

On Monday, the Carleton University Student Association (CUSA), decertified Carleton Lifeline for its anti-abortion views. It told the club that being against abortion violated CUSA’s anti-discrimination policy…

[…]Ruth Lobo, the president of Carleton Lifeline, said CUSA assumes all students are “pro-choice,” which is not necessarily the case. Its policy, she said, smacked of hypocrisy.

“It’s very ironic that they have a discrimination policy that allows them to discriminate against pro-life groups,” she said. “CUSA claims to be representative of all students. As a pro-life student I am not represented by an organization I am forced to pay dues to in my tuition. Either they should create a policy in which students can opt out of fees or get rid of the discrimination policy,” Ms. Lobo said.

“Pro-choice should also mean that a woman has the right to not have an abortion, so I think CUSA is being anti-choice by not allowing people to hear the other side.”

CUSA did not return phone calls on Tuesday.

[…]Carleton Lifeline can no longer promote its views on campus or lobby in any way that would oppose [the pro-abortion] position. It can no longer book space for advocacy or events, nor is it eligible for funding.

[…]On Oct. 4, Ms. Lobo and four other students were arrested on campus by Ottawa police for attempting to display graphic anti-abortion posters. The police were called in by the school administration and the students were charged with trespassing.

Here are some questions to ask about Carleton University:

  • Is Carleton University a fascist organization that criminalizes dissent from Liberal Party policies?
  • Can Canadian taxpayers attend Carleton University without being a member of the Liberal Party?
  • Is Carleton University committed to respect for diversity of opinion?
  • Is Carleton University respectful of open debate and dialog?
  • Is freedom of speech permitted at Carleton University?
  • Is freedom of association permitted at Carleton University?
  • Is Carleton University more or less free than fascist Iran or fascist North Korea?
  • Is Carleton University more or less like the theocratic Taliban?
  • Is there more of less freedom in Canada when compared to the United States?

And keep in mind that it receives funding from pro-life Canadian taxpayers. The money of pro-life taxpayers is good enough for Carleton University, but you don’t have the same rights as pro-abortion taxpayers at Carleton University.

Be careful when traveling in Canada about expressing opinions in public. Canada is not like the United States where free speech is a right. If they don’t like what you say, they may arrest you and put you in prison. Canada is more like North Korea or Iran with respect to free speech.

Take action!

If you do not approve of fascism on Canadian university campuses, please click here to send a message to the fascist university administrators at Carleton University. Notice how the Chancellor is connected to the left-wing Liberal party, which is responsible for the Human Rights Commissions which censor the free speech of Canadians like Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn. The Liberal party is basically similar to the Democrat party in the United States.

Related posts

News

Feminist Melanie McDonagh says that paternity should not be checked

17 Comments

Check out this unbelievable article from the UK Spectator that ECM sent me. It’s written by a feminist. She is complaining about paternity tests. She thinks that women should be able to sleep with a lot of men and then arbitrarily name the richest one as the father to get the highest child support payments, and no fancy DNA test should be able to contradict her.  Oh, and it goes without saying that women should not be punished for committing paternity fraud. That would be mean.

Excerpt:

The subject has resurfaced lately, courtesy of a story in the Daily Mail, about a married television presenter who for years had been paying for the support of a child conceived, as he thought, as a result of his relationship with a writer. It seems that after meeting the child for the first time, he asked for a DNA test; it duly turned out that he was not, after all, the father. Poor child.

[…]Now I can see that some men might rather welcome an end to the old-fashioned scenario whereby they find themselves held to account for the paternity of children born to girls with whom they just happen to have had sex. The actor Jude Law recently found himself in just this position, and unhesitatingly and ungallantly demanded a DNA test.

By contrast, the old situation, in which women presented men with a child, and the man either did the decent thing and offered support, or made a run for it, allowed women a certain leeway. The courtesan in Balzac who, on becoming pregnant, unhesitatingly sought, and got, maintenance from two of her men friends, can’t have been the only one. Uncertainty allows mothers to select for their children the father who would be best for them.

The point is that paternity was ambiguous and it was effectively up to the mother to name her child’s father, or not. (That eminently sensible Jewish custom, whereby Jewishness is passed through the mother, was based on the fact that we only really knew who our mothers are.) Many men have, of course, ended up raising children who were not genetically their own, but really, does it matter?

Hmmmn. I wonder how anyone could even prove that the woman actually slept with her victim? Maybe a woman can just pick out a man arbitrarily on the street, based on his nice suit or fancy car, and name him as the (involuntary) sperm-donor. He wouldn’t have any parental rights or authority, you understand.

Anyway, this shouldn’t affect me. I’m chaste. But maybe I could still be forced to pay single mothers that I haven’t even slept with just because I can afford to? Oh wait – that already happens. It’s called progressive taxation. Oh well. It’s not like I needed the money I earn for my own future wife and children…

Save us, Barbara Kay!

Here’s another article about child support from Barbara Kay about the child support bureaucracy in Ontario, Canada.

Excerpt:

Ontario’s Family Responsibility Office, which is responsible for ensuring that custodial parents don’t get stiffed for child support payments by the non-custodial parent, has a lot of power.

Starting Dec. 1, someone (read “father”) in arrears on their support payments can have their car impounded. That’s about the stupidest punishment for non-payment one can imagine, since most people need their cars in order to work.

[…]If you’re going for irrational responses to non-payment, why not just throw the guy in jail –– but oh wait, they already do that. They throw guys in jail for non-support all the time, and when they do, the guys serve the whole 30, 60 or 90-day sentence (the term keeps lengthening), even though cocaine dealers routinely get out of jail after serving half their time.

[…]Let’s look at the bigger picture, though. What is the guy paying child support for? Yeah yeah, to support his children. But that means they are, you know, sort of hischildren, right? Not necessarily. The custodial parent, almost always the ex-wife, although supposed to grant agreed-upon access rights to the children’s father, can arbitrarily decide she doesn’t want to allow access, and for any old reason — oh sorry, little Jimmy has a play date, oh sorry little Emma has too much homework, oh sorry, I just don’t want to — can deny the father access. And does she pay for that? No. Oh, she might get a scolding from the judge, but there is no downside for her. No custodial mom has ever spent a night in jail or had her licence suspended for refusing her children’s father legal access to them.

There’s more in the article. Sigh. At least Barbara Kay likes men enough to speak out to defend us. Sometimes I think that women who care that men are treated fairly are the only ones who should be able to get married. If only men weren’t so stupid that they judge women solely based on appearance. I guess we’ll have to learn the hard way!