O Canada!

“Worthwhile Canadian Initiative” once won a New Republic contest for the most boring conceivable headline for a New York Times editorial. With that in mind, here are some Canadian initiatives the Times would no doubt find worthwhile:

  • A New Brunswick human rights tribunal says that a 14-year-old girl who’s on a hockey team has to be able to use the same locker room as the boys on the team.
  • A Quebec tribunal says a homosexual man should get $1,000 because a used car salesman referred to him (out of earshot) as “fifi”. The salesman and his employer have also been ordered to pay interest and expenses.
  • So it’s not surprising that Prime Minister Martin has gone to Russia to discuss human rights with Putin. With such achievements to point to, I’m sure Putin will take him seriously.

8 thoughts on “O Canada!”

  1. As Paul Harvey says, “And now for the rest of the story…”
    The entry leaves out the rest of the story. As the witless liberals are forcing her and the teenage boys to disrobe together before and after each game, they’re simultaneously driving their fathers, marriage, and religion from her and the boys’ lives so they’ll have no moral compass of a religious, traditional, or mature masculine nature as a guide to how they should behave and the attitudes to have when in each others’ presence dressing and undressing. Hoping to counterbalance the effect which their war against marriage, dads, tradition, religion, and female teen sexual modesty and privacy will inevitably have on teenage unwed pregnancy rates, the liberals then take this 14-year-old and teach her, in the public schools no less, to perform fellatio on boys as a contraceptive measure. When she nevertheless gets pregnant by age 15 the liberals whine that the problem is that our society subjects women to the same pattern of discrimination as the Taliban and call for even more draconian liberal attacks on marriage, dads, tradition, and religion to fix the problem, pending which the liberals demand absolute abortion rights for teenage girls without parental notification lest dads, married moms, or clergymen—horror of horrors!—come into the picture as guides for confused male and female youth.

    (For the understandably incredulous, there’s documentation for every liberal position I cite above, which I don’t have time to hunt up and link just at the moment, since am rushing to get to the office. Rest assured, not a word of it is made up.)


    “If a tree falls and an expert doesn’t hear it, is there a sound?” Yes, the sweetest, most melodious sound in all creation: the sound of entropy being brought clanking, screeching, grinding to a halt.

      • Love and Truth take us toward Meaning, leftism takes us away
        In the 40s I think it was, Claude Shannon first showed that there’s a relationship between entropy and information: it turns out that something called information can be defined in thermodynamic terms. Now, one can go from there to the notion of an inverse relationship between thermodynamic entropy and what we call “meaning”: information intrinsically “means” something. As we all know, liberals and the left influence things toward the direction of meaninglessness. They accelerate entropy. When the so-called experts whom the left-liberal hypersecularist nitwits always trot out stop sticking their noses in where, first, it’s not appropriate, and second, they’re just flat-out wrong in almost everything they spout, the rush toward meaninglessness slows, affording additional breathing room to the side—normal people—which seeks meaning and rejects the leftist rush toward meaninglessness. We who are chained to space and time sense, we know in our hearts, brains, and souls that only God, and through Him such earthly things as love, truth, and right, can overcome meaninglessness. The left takes us in the opposite direction.

        “If a tree falls and an expert doesn’t hear it, is there a sound?” Yes, the sweetest, most melodious sound in all creation: the sound of entropy being brought clanking, screeching, grinding to a halt.

    • Well said….
      I particularly like the feminist-media totalitariansim with no thought of consequesnce:

      “It’s not a privilege to be there with the boys. It’s not a privilege to be treated equally—it’s their right. And that’s the way it has to be”

      That’s the way it HAS to be?

      I find it amazing that feminists subscribe to attitudes that they themselves find unconsciounable.

      ‘Has to be’
      (shaking my head)

      At the expense of who?
      And to what end?

      Like Fred has (only by a few important examples of consequence shown) – there are MAJOR repercussions that these type of non-sensicle rulings (by law no less) – will have for our future.

      It’s not simply (as feminists would put it) – ‘old-fashioned’, thus passe… but proven historical standards of cultures that sustain int’s foundations.

      These ‘modern’ ways of ‘being’ (notice i didn’t say ‘thinking’) are just rediculous.



  2. The problem is not with the separate locker rooms…
    … but that she’s allowed on the boys’ team, in the first place. Understandably, as a member of the team, she would feel excluded being in a separate change room from the rest of the team. Which is why she ought not to have been let on the boys’ team in the first place!

    And naturally, she bitches about it, and one of our Inhuman Wrongs commissions takes her side, poor, poor girl…

    As for the Quebecois used car salesman, he should have said he was talking about his French poodle, Fifi… 😉

  3. EU the to-be-minister rejected for his male chauvinistic speech
    The committee for Public Liberties, Justice and Interior affairs of the European Parliament refused to approve Mr. Rocco Buttiglione as commisaire (minister) of Justice of the EU thanks to the votes of socialists, liberals (a rather right wing party in Europe), ecologists, and communists. The reason is that Mr. Buttiglione had recently declared that:
    – He opposes the homosexual marriage.
    – In a family, women must have sons, and their husbands must protect them.
    – The rights of homosexuals should be defended on the same standards as the rights of any other citizens. If there were specific problems, parallel ways could be considered, but he does not think that homosexuals are a category apart from the other citizens, and that the protection of their rights should not be any different from the protection of other citizen’s rights.
    – “It worries me that so few children are being born in Europe. I think that we have to think on the life conditions of many women, those that we love so much but for which we do so little” – he is in favor of a specific and differentiated legislative treatment for women.
    – Homosexuality is, not only a sin, but an evidence of “moral disorder”.

    Obviously Mr. Buttiglione was found guilty in spite of his last and defensive statement:

    “I may think that homosexuality is a sin, but it does not have to have political consequences. Because, as the German philosopher Kant said, many things can be considered immoral but they are not forbidden”. Too little and too late for the fierce ‘vigilantes’ of the political correction.

    • This looks like a major historical struggle we’re involved in
      I hadn’t yet seen this excellent comment by Myst. Str. when I posted my own reply a few minutes ago to Will S.’s submission of this affair as a new Forum topic. The additional details furnished above only exacerbate the sense of nausea one feels in regard to what’s happening over there.

      Truly we are in some sort of epic struggle now—this is not just some blip on history’s radar screen. Just as we look back on turbulent revolutionary events of the past and at how those people dealt with them, so people in future centuries will look back on what we do and say here today.

      “If a tree falls and an expert doesn’t hear it, is there a sound?” Yes, the sweetest, most melodious sound in all creation: the sound of entropy being brought clanking, screeching, grinding to a halt.

  4. Liberals are not “neutral,” all their camouflage notwithstanding
    Mark Richardson points out that the imposition of co-ed teen locker rooms on our society by liberal judges isn’t, as the liberals claim, charting a neutral course but is the arbitrary imposition of one particular point of view:

    “Note that liberalism is not being morally neutral in this case. It is using the public authority of a Human Rights Commission to enforce its own moral understanding against a traditional moral understanding. It is ruling against the traditional morality that there should be a degree of sexual modesty existing between boys and girls.”

    Liberals favor these radically unnatural things partly because they lack certain brain circuits, the circuits that equip us to tell right from wrong, normal from degenerate, and so on. The understanding that something along these lines accounts for liberal behavior doesn’t change the fundamental fact that there’s a war on: these are not disinterested, fair people merely arbitrating between opposing sides but totalitarians brazenly imposing their own highly aberrant, revolting views. The battle standards are raised.


    “If a tree falls and an expert doesn’t hear it, is there a sound?” Yes, the sweetest, most melodious sound in all creation: the sound of entropy being brought clanking, screeching, grinding to a halt.


Leave a Comment