Canadian Politics Today

That's not what I said and you know that.  I said if the woman tells the man specifically not to ejaculate in her but he does anyways, that is ****.  Please stop misrepresenting my arguments to make them easier for you to argue, that's what a strawman is, you do it frequently.

You just said the same thing over again. And once again, if you are referring to Canada, **** is not a legal term. And if sex is consensual and the "withdrawl" method is an agreed to form of birth control but she gets pregnant anyway, you would have a pretty tough slog trying to prove "sexual assault" occurred. 

How about we force young people with raging hormones to learn how to use a condom properly, the pill properly, to not jizz inside a lady. 

The biggest problem of all is those who are anti-choice are often vehemently against having sex education and the accessibility of contraceptives.

This is absolutely true.  I don't agree with it at all.  For these people it's about religious values where you're not supposed to have sex until you're married, and then only for children.

No wonder they're sex obsessed!

It's just kind of odd that a thread about Andrew Scheer
ends up here.

He's got a new environmental platform now, too small to see with the naked eye, but hey! The guy's trying!

Oh look! It's the battle of the kilotonnes!
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/scheer-climate-environment-plan-election-von-scheel-1.5177187

A portion of Scheer's plan, obtained by CBC News, would compel facilities that produce 40 kilotonnes of emissions or more per year to invest in green tech. The Trudeau government's current rules impose emission caps on firms that emit more than 50 kilotonnes per year.

He's beating Trudeau!

Biggest polluters are oil/gas.  Will he make them pay significantly?  Not likely.  If he says they will, i don't believe him.

The trouble is there is no political space for people that agree that CO2 is an issue but think that CO2 emissions reduction targets are pointless virtue signalling. The only real plan to deal with emissions is a long term investment in low emission technology. While a revenue neutral carbon tax is theoretically the best way to do that it is a crude instrument because some important industries have limited ability to reduce emissions in the short term and would be forced to shut down in the face of a large carbon tax.

How do you continue to repeat the same bullshit. If you want to be a representative of the Liberal Party of Canada then you must follow their policy decisions. Nobody is forced to do anything against their will.

Why, it's almost like politicians can choose their party. 

it's a part of the attempt to rebrand Scheer before the election! To get an appreciation of how this symbolic action by Scheer is not going over well with "the base", peel on through the comments Scheer's tweet announcement of it received - wow, just wow!

I say symbolic as there will be but a few short weeks left in the Parliamentary session before adjournment - the real testament of a rebrandedScheer would have been Cooper's removal from the CPC caucus. Of course most Canadians were first introduced to the weasel Cooper (aka 'crypt-keeper') during his many over-the-top actions during the Judicial Committee review of, les affaire SNC-Lavalin!

weakAndy so profusely proclaimed bigots were not welcome in the CPC... only to subsequently give Cooper a pass... to allow him to stay within the CPC caucus - Cooper, the guy who came to the Justice Committee with the infamous manifesto at-the-ready, and actually read portions of it into the record!

There is absolutely no room in a peaceful and free country like Canada for intolerance, racism and extremism of any kind. And the Conservative Party of Canada will always make that absolutely clear.

I find the notion that one's race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation would make anyone in any way superior or inferior to anyone else absolutely repugnant. And if there's anyone who disagrees with that, there's the door. You are not welcome here.

MP Michael Cooper disparaged 'goat herder cultures'

Conservative MP Michael Cooper made comments deriding "goat herder cultures" during a discussion about Islam's compatibility with Canadian democracy when he was a law student at the University of Alberta a decade ago, according to two lawyers who have come forward to talk about the incident.

The lawyers allege the comments were made during a heated discussion in a seminar on multiculturalism and the minority rights section of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, with Cooper arguing that some cultures were incompatible with Canada's "Judeo-Christian values."

c'mon weakSauce... you figuratively showed Cooper the door... make it literal Andy... make it real!

it's a part of the attempt to rebrand Scheer before the election! To get an appreciation of how this symbolic action by Scheer is not going over well with "the base", peel on through the comments Scheer's tweet announcement of it received - wow, just wow!

I say symbolic as there will be but a few short weeks left in the Parliamentary session before adjournment - the real testament of a rebrandedScheer would have been Cooper's removal from the CPC caucus. Of course most Canadians were first introduced to the weasel Cooper (aka 'crypt-keeper') during his many over-the-top actions during the Judicial Committee review of, les affaire SNC-Lavalin!

What did Cooper do wrong in the committee?  Nothing, from what I see:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/michael-cooper-goat-herder-cultures-1.5179039

Cooper took issue with how Suri, president of the Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council, described the online history of Alexandre Bissonnette, the man sentenced to life in prison in February for shooting six people dead in a Quebec City mosque in January, 2017.

"The evidence from Bissonette's computer showed he repeatedly sought content about anti-immigrant, alt-right and conservative commentators, mass murderers, U.S. President Donald Trump, and about Muslims, immigrants living in Quebec," Suri said.

Suri went on to say that people like Robert Bowers — who is alleged to have killed 11 people in a synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh in October — and the man accused of shooting and killing 51 people at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand in March, were similarly influenced by online hate coming from "alt-right online networks."

When it was his turn to ask Suri and other witnesses questions, Cooper laid into the Alberta anti-racism activist, accusing him of suggesting a link between "conservatism" and violent extremism.

The Conservative MP then read into the record a passage from the Christchurch killer's 74-page manifesto — which has been banned in New Zealand. In the passage, the alleged killer is quoted as saying the social and political values of China are close to his own and that he rejects "conservatism."

"I certainly wouldn't attempt to link Bernie Sanders to the individual who shot up Republican members of Congress and nearly fatally killed congressman [Stephen] Scalise," Cooper said. "So you should be ashamed."

The comments he read from the manifesto were offensive, most likely disingenuous, and used simply as bad faith trolling to attempt to lure people into divisive arguments. The committee voted unanimously to remove his nonsense from the transcript, and even Scheer had the good sense to at least remove him from the committee.

Again, here's what the CBC summarized from the quote i linked above:

The Conservative MP then read into the record a passage from the Christchurch killer's 74-page manifesto — which has been banned in New Zealand. In the passage, the alleged killer is quoted as saying the social and political values of China are close to his own and that he rejects "conservatism."

The CBC stated that a Canadian Muslim leader was testifying before the committee and said that there was a link between "conservative commentators" and the Christchurch shooter's motives, and he lumped "conservative commentators" in with commentators who were alt-right, mass murderers, anti-immigrant etc.  As per above, the conservative MP was offended by this inaccurate statement & so read a passage from the shooter's manifesto that said he rejects "conservatism".

What is offensive about that?  Was it simply the fact that the MP mentioned the name of the shooter and read anything from the manifesto, especially in front of a Muslim witness?  That's what it seems like:

A controversial statement by Conservative MP Michael Cooper before the Commons justice committee — in which he named the New Zealand mosque shooter and recited passages from his manifesto — will be officially struck from the record.

New Zealand's government banned distribution of that 74-page manifesto, arguing the document "promotes murder and terrorism."

NDP MP Tracey Ramsay said today the committee had an obligation to remove the references.  "That should never have been read into the record. It was completely inappropriate," she said.

Liberal MP Iqra Khalid insisted this is not a political or partisan issue, but rather a question of correcting a wrong and ensuring that witnesses feel safe when appearing before a Commons committee.

"Striking this from the record will ensure that the safety of this space has been restored," she said.

Conservative MPs argued the Liberals are trying to score political points and said it's wrong to change an official record.

Several historians also have criticized the decision to sanitize the official record, saying it undermines the integrity of Parliament and the goal of holding MPs to account for egregious conduct.  The Canadian Historical Association said the unusual move will impede future historians' ability to fully understand and analyze this incident and its context.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cooper-justice-committee-nz-attacker-1.5174186

The committee voted unanimously to remove his nonsense from the transcript,

Not quite: 

After a testy exchange, MPs on the Commons justice committee voted 6-0 today in favour of the unusual move to purge Hansard, the official parliamentary record.  Three Conservative members abstained from the vote. One Conservative MP, Michael Barrett, called the Liberal-led manoeuvre a "stunt."

I wonder if the "good sense" though wasn't more like an awareness of the bad PR this could bring to the party.

It all looks like a PR stunt to me: CPC MP claims the witness was trying to lump the shooter with conservatism, Liberal/NDP MP's claim CPC MP is a bigot to smear CPC MP & vote to remove his comments from the record. Other CPC MP's abstain from vote so they don't look like bigots.  Scheer then bows to bad PR & removes CPC MP from committee. It's all theatre.