Alberta 2019 Provincial Election

[blitz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We have laws against beating kids up. That's a criminal issue.

Great, so instead of letting these kids lay low and have a support network, we're going to:

1. Out them to their parents.
2. Let them be abused.
3. Wait for CFS to get involved.
4. Put them into foster care.
5. Possibly repeat.

[killramos]

We should just take kids away from their parents at birth and send them away to schools where the state knows what’s best for them and will educate them on what the state thinks is important. Problem solved.

WCGW

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Great, so instead of letting these kids lay low and have a support network, we're going to:

1. Out them to their parents.
2. Let them be abused.
3. Wait for CFS to get involved.
4. Put them into foster care.
5. Possibly repeat.

You're removing a parental right that is beneficial in the vast majority of situations.

We have to be very careful a society about removing people's rights in order to prevent potential criminal activity from occurring.

[blitz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You're removing a parental right that is beneficial in the vast majority of situations.

We have to be very careful a society about removing people's rights in order to prevent potential criminal activity from occurring.

I would argue informing parents about their kids being in a GSA would be detrimental in the vast majority of situations.

There are no rights being removed, if anything the teenagers rights are being upheld.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I would argue informing parents about their kids being in a GSA would be detrimental in the vast majority of situations.

There are no rights being removed, if anything the teenagers rights are being upheld.

If a school/bureaucracy/state is allowed to be the arbiter on what you can know about your child, you are sure as shit having your rights removed. The VAST majority of parents use this type of "power" over their kids in beneficial ways all of the time. Also: minors don't have the same rights as adults - nor should they.

[Brent.ff]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You are talking about a non-issue. This affects less than 2% of school children, and you make the assumption that every one of those kids parents hate them. What a world you live in.

We're talking making voting decisions based on a situation that affects 0.01% of school children. MAYBE. There is zero evidence that a kid has been abused or punished for being gay or in one of these groups. Its the ultimate non-issue boogeyman, and you lefties lap it up

If it's a non-issue, then the UCP could easily follow the NDP on this and not lose votes over it, no? If its a non-issue, they wouldn't care. Doesn't really matter to me if its 0.01 or 10%, its just very telling of the UCP social vision..

[ExtraSlow]

If the UCP really cares about this, they should shut the fuck up until after the election.

[Brent.ff]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If the UCP really cares about this, they should shut the fuck up until after the election.

ding ding ding.. a really stupid idea to even talk about it.

[Buster]

conservative Alberta Provincial politicians are some of the dumbest politicians around....been that way for ages.

[ExtraSlow]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

conservative Alberta Provincial politicians are some of the dumbest politicians around....been that way for ages.

And that's a pretty dismal group to begin with.

[blitz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If a school/bureaucracy/state is allowed to be the arbiter on what you can know about your child, you are sure as shit having your rights removed. The VAST majority of parents use this type of "power" over their kids in beneficial ways all of the time. Also: minors don't have the same rights as adults - nor should they.

It must be nice to live in a world where everything is so simple and straightforward.

[mr2mike]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Haha, you do know that restaurants exist, right? And they'll do exactly that!

Lol. I'm talking good, healthy home cooked meals. No pressure to tip or buy drinks.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If a school/bureaucracy/state is allowed to be the arbiter on what you can know about your child, you are sure as shit having your rights removed. The VAST majority of parents use this type of "power" over their kids in beneficial ways all of the time. Also: minors don't have the same rights as adults - nor should they.

The school/bureaucracy/state wouldn’t be the arbiter Of what you can know about your child. The student would be.

If your first thought when seeing such legislation is “how dare the school not inform me about my child’s association with a GSA!” and not “how can I make sure my child feels comfortable telling me themselves” you might need to work on your relationship with your child.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The school/bureaucracy/state wouldn’t be the arbiter Of what you can know about your child. The student would be.

If your first thought when seeing such legislation is “how dare the school not inform me about my child’s association with a GSA!” and not “how can I make sure my child feels comfortable telling me themselves” you might need to work on your relationship with your child.

My comments are not limited to GSAs. My comments are in regards to anything and everything. When we're talking about removing people's parental rights, we had better have a better reason than "your kid should be comfortable talking to you. Watch more Oprah."

Also: kids are minors, and in the responsibility of their parents. There are many things about which they do not get to be the arbiter.

[HiTempguy1]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If it's a non-issue, then the UCP could easily follow the NDP on this and not lose votes over it, no? If its a non-issue, they wouldn't care. Doesn't really matter to me if its 0.01 or 10%, its just very telling of the UCP social vision..

Haha, I like that. "Well, its a non-issue, so we should do it anyways"

So much for critical thinking being taught in the education system.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

My comments are not limited to GSAs. My comments are in regards to anything and everything. When we're talking about removing people's parental rights, we had better have a better reason than "your kid should be comfortable talking to you. Watch more Oprah."

Also: kids are minors, and in the responsibility of their parents. There are many things about which they do not get to be the arbiter.

Except you want the school to be the arbiter by having the ability to decide what information they share about your child. That’s what supporting the UCP policy is. All the NDPs policy does is transfer that right from the ‘bureaucracy’ to the student. Who deserves that right more? It doesn’t take anything away from the parents.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Except you want the school to be the arbiter by having the ability to decide what information they share about your child. That’s what supporting the UCP policy is. All the NDPs policy does is transfer that right from the ‘bureaucracy’ to the student. Who deserves that right more? It doesn’t take anything away from the parents.

The school should have no arbiter role whatsoever. Their books should be entirely open to a parent for review or discussion at any time - so they are deciding on nothing. What the NDP is suggesting is that the parentals decisions and rights should be transferred to minors, and then create a gatekeeper bureaucracy between those two parties in the school system. This is a rather sweeping and massive change to how we view parental rights. In most cases this would simply stand in the way of the non-criminal parents doing the best job they can. Making good parents less able to be good parents sounds like another stupid policy from a party that trades almost exclusively in stupid policies (perhaps stupidity is how they best connect with their voter base).

[msommers]

Not being purposely obtuse here and given I'm not a parent I should ask the folks that actually are parents. What do people ask the school about that enables them to be good parents? I'm honestly trying to understand various scenarios of what that would look like and I'm drawing a blank.

It's perhaps something I am not nor ever have been aware of, but I can't think of a time my parents asked the school about what I was doing that they didn't ask me first.

Well unless it was one of the many times I was called to the Principle's Office. School definitely told them before I did

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The school should have no arbiter role whatsoever. Their books should be entirely open to a parent for review or discussion at any time - so they are deciding on nothing.

Isn’t what’s being proposed, so completely irrelevant.

What the NDP is suggesting is that the parentals decisions and rights should be transferred to minors, and then create a gatekeeper bureaucracy between those two parties in the school system.

Again, this isn’t what the NDP policy is. It takes the choice away from the school and gives it to the student. What you’re talking about doesn’t exist and isn’t what’s being proposed.

This is a rather sweeping and massive change to how we view parental rights.

I mean you aren’t allowed to hit your own child anymore without being called a criminal, is there anything parents can do with their property, I mean children, anymore?!

In most cases this would simply stand in the way of the non-criminal parents doing the best job they can.

And in other cases, helps protect vulnerable students from potentially abusive parents (be it physically or emotionally).

You’d rather protect kids after the fact...by having the state come in and take parental rights away :but:

Making good parents less able to be good parents sounds like another stupid policy from a party that trades almost exclusively in stupid policies (perhaps stupidity is how they best connect with their voter base).

If you’re concerned your child isn’t comfortable sharing this kind of thing with you, then you probably aren’t as good a parent as you think you are.

[Buster]

Sorry, I don't read or respond to multi-quotes. Too annoying.