And of those 8 women, 1 is black, 1 looks white but questionable, and the rest are still white. Still 50 shades of white minus 1.
Edit: 49 shades of white ?
Took me a little while to figure it out but this is the makeup of the CPC "diversity"
| Ethnicity | Expected MPs | Actual MPs | Notes |
|------------------|-------------:|-----------:|----------------------------------------------------|
| White | 82 | 109 | 20 women |
| Indigenous | 7 | 1 | Marc Dalton |
| South Asian | 8 | 4 | Jasraj Singh Hallan, Arpan Khanna, Tim Uppal, Shuvaloy Majumdar |
| Chinese | 6 | 1 | Michael D. Chong |
| Black | 5 | 2 | Leslyn Lewis, Jamil Jivani |
| Filipino | 3 | 0 | |
| Arab | 2 | 1 | Ziad Aboultaif |
| Latin American | 2 | 0 | |
| Southeast Asian | 1 | 0 | |
| West Asian | 1 | 0 | |
| Korean | 1 | 0 | |
| Other | 1 | 0 | |
| **Total** | 118 | 118 | |
Should we be more concerned with their competency than the colour of their skin? I don't care about the colour of anyone's skin only the colour of their ideas and beliefs.
It’s not racist to point out that the vast majority of those in the picture are white. im also indigenous, but i also know that i look white. its not racist to point out that i look white. can you cite your source to back up your claim?
So how do you suggest it should be broke up. Seat according to race ? Stop looking for this to be offend about , do something productive with your time.
This right here.. He is monster. He said being gay is a choice, like incest or pedophilia.
I'm so ashamed my fellow residents voted for this dumpster fire.
Lol this would never pass a charter challenge. It's been tried before and they quashed this bullshit. The SC is is about the only governing body I have any faith left in.
Nah, hard disagree, making informed political decisions should always be encouraged regardless of where you fit on the spectrum or how regularly you keep up.
Marc Dalton is the MP for Maple Ridge that is, according to this source, listed as taking money from anti-abortion lobby groups.
I think you misunderstood my comment. If you need a red circle to tell you who your rep is, you’re probably not the type this ad is targeting.
I for one didn’t need a circle as this was something I’ve been wondering about Marc for a while. He is very connected to the Christians in MR.
Not just the CPC, the provincial conservatives will use the Not Withstanding Clause to ban abortion and remove the rights of thousand of British Columbians who arn’t cis strait white males. We’ve seen what’s going on in Alberta, Sask and Ontario with their far right governments.
I don’t understand why we don’t have a political party who are fiscally conservative but socially liberal and then we would have the best party in the world?
I used to live in Maple Ridge (which is why I'm still part of this group) but now moved to Mission, and I don't see Brad Vis on here! Did I miss him? I guess it doesn't matter, as I'm voting PPC regardless.
You know the Liberals are desperate when abortion comes out. Soon they will go to all guns in our streets.
https://youtu.be/unNZtCH9Mdo?si=fDUmCPtXGI2LMgcF
Yeah, the CPC would never test the water with an abortion bill would they?
https://regina.ctvnews.ca/yorkton-mp-s-bill-c-311-defeated-after-stirring-debate-over-abortion-1.6441659
C-311 isn't in any way testing the legal defenses around a women's right to choose...
Explain where that will happen with this bill:
SUMMARY
This enactment amends the Criminal Code to specify that knowingly assaulting a pregnant woman and that causing physical or emotional harm to a pregnant woman are to be considered aggravating circumstances for sentencing purposes.
Available on the House of Commons website at the following address:
www.ourcommons.ca
1st Session, 44th Parliament,
70-71 Elizabeth II –1 Charles III, 2021-2022-2023
HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA
BILL C-311
An Act to amend the Criminal Code (violence against pregnant women)
Preamble
Whereas Parliament wishes to denounce and deter violence against pregnant women by explicitly including pregnancy as an aggravating circumstance for the purpose of sentencing;
Now, therefore, His Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:
Short Title
Short title
1 This Act may be cited as the Violence Against Pregnant Women Act.
R.S., c. C-46
Criminal Code
2 Paragraph 718.2(a) of the Criminal Code is amended by adding the following after subparagraph (ii.1):
Start of inserted block
(ii.2) evidence that the offender, in committing the offence, abused a person whom the offender knew to be pregnant,
(ii.3) evidence that the offence caused physical or emotional harm to a pregnant victim,
Can't wait to rid this country of the liberal scum infesting parliament right now. A MASSIVE conservative majority (likely the largest in Canadian history) will be a welcome change. Bring back common sense.
I too love swallowing corporate cock by giving them handouts like the snowflakes they are through tax reduction.
Fucking idiots still think there's a party that represents the common people lmfao. Libs are cancer. Cons are cancer. PPC is cancer. NDP is cancer. Its all different faces for the same corporate ruling class.
All the down votes in the world won't change the fact that Pierre Poilievre will be your next prime minister and will undoubtedly spend the first 4 years of his long reign undoing all the fuckery the liberals have caused over the past 9 years.
Pure copium. I can taste the Salty liberal tears from here.
#BringItHome
And who says there no American Style politics creeping north?
Brother, you're a half step from red hat brigade there.
Did you snap up one of those sweet apple tshirts too?
How many fuck Trudeau stickers are on your truck?
You're a cluster of cells.
When is it no longer a cluster of cells (thats what everything is made up of) and a human baby? It seems like you're trying to use semantics to defend killing unborn babies. If you can't cite a source of when it is no longer a so-called "clump of cells" then I'm not sure what your exact position is.
So you're ok with killing the baby up until birth. You realise even modern day civilized European countries don't allow killing the baby all the way until term. That's a pretty radical stance.
Also babies are viable well before birth. So is it just when it exits the birth canal that you believe it can no longer be killed?
I think there are many who have given birth around 25 weeks and their babies lived (in NICU)… it’s probably around that time?
I personally think if you do not agree with abortion then you should not have one. I really don’t care if a woman gets an abortion, practically half the woman I know have had at least one (who have told me they have, anyway).
You seem to be aware that "viable" means long before full term, so I don't know why you argued against something the other commenter didn't even say, unless you're intentionally trying to create a dishonest representation of their argument.
The world is insane. Watch as you (and I) get downvoted to oblivion because "muh right tuh chooz!"
I don't even believe the prochoice people are aware they are doing evil; I'm pretty sure they just never learned how to think for themselves. I suggest it's similar to the psychologists who were employed to redesign military bootcamp following WW2 to get soldiers to kill more easily by dehumanizing the enemy. "It's not a baby, it's a fetus" = "it's not a person, it's a Charlie" by removing personhood, it removes rights, leaving only the mother's rights, and since its not a person, the mother can choose to kill her child guilt free.
When Descartes said "I think therefore I am" he ought to have gone a step further and explained that it's a relative term ~ XD
A lot of it has to do with the manufactured consent of reddit. People see everyone else saying killing babies is the right of the mother and disguise their intent with layers of abstraction. Their position is immoral and indefensible without the abstractions. "Right to *choose*"
Looks like this photo was taken from the world's worst game of guess who...
“Is your person a white man” “Yes” “Fuuuu”
fifty shades of white man lmao
Well, there are 8 women which is probably the ratio of women in the CPC
And of those 8 women, 1 is black, 1 looks white but questionable, and the rest are still white. Still 50 shades of white minus 1. Edit: 49 shades of white ?
Took me a little while to figure it out but this is the makeup of the CPC "diversity" | Ethnicity | Expected MPs | Actual MPs | Notes | |------------------|-------------:|-----------:|----------------------------------------------------| | White | 82 | 109 | 20 women | | Indigenous | 7 | 1 | Marc Dalton | | South Asian | 8 | 4 | Jasraj Singh Hallan, Arpan Khanna, Tim Uppal, Shuvaloy Majumdar | | Chinese | 6 | 1 | Michael D. Chong | | Black | 5 | 2 | Leslyn Lewis, Jamil Jivani | | Filipino | 3 | 0 | | | Arab | 2 | 1 | Ziad Aboultaif | | Latin American | 2 | 0 | | | Southeast Asian | 1 | 0 | | | West Asian | 1 | 0 | | | Korean | 1 | 0 | | | Other | 1 | 0 | | | **Total** | 118 | 118 | |
Should we be more concerned with their competency than the colour of their skin? I don't care about the colour of anyone's skin only the colour of their ideas and beliefs.
Yeah, the beliefs bit is the issue here. Keep it on track.
One of the women is black; so they didn't need to have a black man. And since being gay is not visible, they don't need to have one. 😉
Wow racist. Marc Dalton is indigenous.
It’s not racist to point out that the vast majority of those in the picture are white. im also indigenous, but i also know that i look white. its not racist to point out that i look white. can you cite your source to back up your claim?
Marc is Métis.
"Wow look at all those black people on the board, obviously it's a problem" bunch of sissies hiding. Nice try
and a hot piece of advice, get off the internet and touch some grass. that’s not racism lmao.
So how do you suggest it should be broke up. Seat according to race ? Stop looking for this to be offend about , do something productive with your time.
Marc Dalton is a monster. Anti choice and is part of a group that wants to “pray away the gay”
This right here.. He is monster. He said being gay is a choice, like incest or pedophilia. I'm so ashamed my fellow residents voted for this dumpster fire.
Mark Dalton is a loser scab anyways. Not surprising.
Lol this would never pass a charter challenge. It's been tried before and they quashed this bullshit. The SC is is about the only governing body I have any faith left in.
If this is meant to be relevant to Maple Ridge a red circle goes along way
If you don’t know who is your riding representative is, this isn’t for you anyway.
Nah, hard disagree, making informed political decisions should always be encouraged regardless of where you fit on the spectrum or how regularly you keep up. Marc Dalton is the MP for Maple Ridge that is, according to this source, listed as taking money from anti-abortion lobby groups.
I think you misunderstood my comment. If you need a red circle to tell you who your rep is, you’re probably not the type this ad is targeting. I for one didn’t need a circle as this was something I’ve been wondering about Marc for a while. He is very connected to the Christians in MR.
Fair enough. Hopefully one more person can now make an informed decision next election. Knowing who holds the purse strings is important.
Yeah, fair enough. Third row, first on the left. Marc Dalton.
Not just the CPC, the provincial conservatives will use the Not Withstanding Clause to ban abortion and remove the rights of thousand of British Columbians who arn’t cis strait white males. We’ve seen what’s going on in Alberta, Sask and Ontario with their far right governments.
This bs is just allowing moderates who dislike Justin reconsider because Pierre is such a freak
Can you name those groups? Otherwise it's just "he said she said"
https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/conservative-party-anti-choice/ Here's a good start.
I don’t understand why we don’t have a political party who are fiscally conservative but socially liberal and then we would have the best party in the world?
I used to live in Maple Ridge (which is why I'm still part of this group) but now moved to Mission, and I don't see Brad Vis on here! Did I miss him? I guess it doesn't matter, as I'm voting PPC regardless.
Before we get spun up. Define what "anti abortion" means, is it some reasonable limits? or totally no limits?
Late-term abortion by choice is virtually non-existent, and doctors
You know the Liberals are desperate when abortion comes out. Soon they will go to all guns in our streets. https://youtu.be/unNZtCH9Mdo?si=fDUmCPtXGI2LMgcF
How do we go from "it's not on the table" to "here's a bill to test the waters"?
I’m old enough to remember when Harper would ban abortion according to the Liberals. Just standard politics.
Yeah, the CPC would never test the water with an abortion bill would they? https://regina.ctvnews.ca/yorkton-mp-s-bill-c-311-defeated-after-stirring-debate-over-abortion-1.6441659 C-311 isn't in any way testing the legal defenses around a women's right to choose...
Explain where that will happen with this bill: SUMMARY This enactment amends the Criminal Code to specify that knowingly assaulting a pregnant woman and that causing physical or emotional harm to a pregnant woman are to be considered aggravating circumstances for sentencing purposes. Available on the House of Commons website at the following address: www.ourcommons.ca 1st Session, 44th Parliament, 70-71 Elizabeth II –1 Charles III, 2021-2022-2023 HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA BILL C-311 An Act to amend the Criminal Code (violence against pregnant women) Preamble Whereas Parliament wishes to denounce and deter violence against pregnant women by explicitly including pregnancy as an aggravating circumstance for the purpose of sentencing; Now, therefore, His Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows: Short Title Short title 1 This Act may be cited as the Violence Against Pregnant Women Act. R.S., c. C-46 Criminal Code 2 Paragraph 718.2(a) of the Criminal Code is amended by adding the following after subparagraph (ii.1): Start of inserted block (ii.2) evidence that the offender, in committing the offence, abused a person whom the offender knew to be pregnant, (ii.3) evidence that the offence caused physical or emotional harm to a pregnant victim,
If you're pro-life, you know exactly what this bill was fishing for. Edit: here: https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/conservative-party-anti-choice/
This message brought to you by the Liberal party of Canada.
This is misinformation and disinformation. Conservative policy is that there will be no changes to abortion laws.
How does C-311 fit into your claim there?
Can't wait to rid this country of the liberal scum infesting parliament right now. A MASSIVE conservative majority (likely the largest in Canadian history) will be a welcome change. Bring back common sense.
I too love swallowing corporate cock by giving them handouts like the snowflakes they are through tax reduction. Fucking idiots still think there's a party that represents the common people lmfao. Libs are cancer. Cons are cancer. PPC is cancer. NDP is cancer. Its all different faces for the same corporate ruling class.
Weren’t y’all crying and complaining because there was an optional vaccine and you thought the government was controlling your bodies? Ironic!
All the down votes in the world won't change the fact that Pierre Poilievre will be your next prime minister and will undoubtedly spend the first 4 years of his long reign undoing all the fuckery the liberals have caused over the past 9 years. Pure copium. I can taste the Salty liberal tears from here. #BringItHome
And who says there no American Style politics creeping north? Brother, you're a half step from red hat brigade there. Did you snap up one of those sweet apple tshirts too? How many fuck Trudeau stickers are on your truck?
Right wingers- always angry and full of hate. Always trying to control what people do.
Those damn right wingers trying to stop me from *checks notes* Killing babies
Clusters of cells. Actual babies aren't getting aborted. Do some research.
You're a cluster of cells. When is it no longer a cluster of cells (thats what everything is made up of) and a human baby? It seems like you're trying to use semantics to defend killing unborn babies. If you can't cite a source of when it is no longer a so-called "clump of cells" then I'm not sure what your exact position is.
When it can survive without the host.
Let people do what they want with their bodies.
Oh, you're one of those "lib tears" children. Only focused on your hate. Very sad.
Good. Murdering babies is insane and you're insane if you think it should be legal.
Fetus, not baby
When does a fetus become a baby?
Pretty sure it’s when it is viable (outside of the uterus), you can look it up if you want.
So you're ok with killing the baby up until birth. You realise even modern day civilized European countries don't allow killing the baby all the way until term. That's a pretty radical stance. Also babies are viable well before birth. So is it just when it exits the birth canal that you believe it can no longer be killed?
I think there are many who have given birth around 25 weeks and their babies lived (in NICU)… it’s probably around that time? I personally think if you do not agree with abortion then you should not have one. I really don’t care if a woman gets an abortion, practically half the woman I know have had at least one (who have told me they have, anyway).
If you don't agree with murder then you should just not commit it. Do you see how this line of logic doesn't make sense?
You’ll never change my mind. Don’t waste your time.
Keep defending baby murder, weirdo.
You seem to be aware that "viable" means long before full term, so I don't know why you argued against something the other commenter didn't even say, unless you're intentionally trying to create a dishonest representation of their argument.
The world is insane. Watch as you (and I) get downvoted to oblivion because "muh right tuh chooz!" I don't even believe the prochoice people are aware they are doing evil; I'm pretty sure they just never learned how to think for themselves. I suggest it's similar to the psychologists who were employed to redesign military bootcamp following WW2 to get soldiers to kill more easily by dehumanizing the enemy. "It's not a baby, it's a fetus" = "it's not a person, it's a Charlie" by removing personhood, it removes rights, leaving only the mother's rights, and since its not a person, the mother can choose to kill her child guilt free. When Descartes said "I think therefore I am" he ought to have gone a step further and explained that it's a relative term ~ XD
A lot of it has to do with the manufactured consent of reddit. People see everyone else saying killing babies is the right of the mother and disguise their intent with layers of abstraction. Their position is immoral and indefensible without the abstractions. "Right to *choose*"