Conservative Party of Canada Holds Annual Convention

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Sadly, with an estimated 60% of O'Tooles votes coming from the so-called social conservative side. I do not think his base will be as accepting or believing of his statements I see maybe when he says them

its a little like taking educational advice from Lynn Beyak. 

[Gnarcore]

52 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Define conversion therapy.  There's two view points regarding it but people like you only seems to call out one area.  

 

If we're talking about forcing an unwilling persons of any age to be involved in it, then the answer is no it's wrong, but very few people are on that side of it. 

Where as if we are talking about WILLING people who are giving consent over 18, then I see nothing wrong with that and that's what most politicians align with.  

 

This is one of those smear tactics the left love you use, play ignorant so that you can paint the other side as evil.  It leaves zero room for discussion on the matter which is.......intolerant....

Still abhorrent and of dubious effect. 

[Jester13]

I wonder if Peter will be so upset with this that he forms his own progressive party and the Conservative party splits back to what it was before they united? 

[JM_]

1 minute ago, Gnarcore said:

Still abhorrent and of dubious effect. 

hey here's an idea... what if we didn't demonize people to the point where they feel they are a walking sin? its so sad that people grow up hating themselves like that. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

11 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Sadly, with an estimated 60% of O'Tooles votes coming from the so-called social conservative side. I do not think his base will be as accepting or believing of his statements I see maybe when he says them

The stupid thing is, the base will still vote for him over the other options. 

 

So IMO they should just rip off the bandaid and drop those issues.  Sure it will piss off that base immediate and he will lose support but it will give him time to earn it back.  Talking from both sides of your mouth depending on which group you are talking to is what keeps costing the con's  Do it now, do it publicly so that it doesn't have to be a talking point till the next election.

Edited August 24, 2020 by ForsbergTheGreat

[JM_]

1 minute ago, Jester13 said:

I wonder if Peter will be so upset with this that he forms his own progressive party and the Conservative party splits back to what it was before they united? 

he's got a big enough ego to try. Nah, Judas will go back to his cushy gig in Nova Scotia.

 

Harper helped raise up the social con movement in Canada, pretty much assuring they won't see power again. 

[Jester13]

Just now, Robert Long said:

he's got a big enough ego to try. Nah, Judas will go back to his cushy gig in Nova Scotia.

 

Harper helped raise up the social con movement in Canada, pretty much assuring they won't see power again. 

He's got a big enough ego to want to get back into politics and lead the CPC, so don't underestimate the power of spite

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

He's got a big enough ego to want to get back into politics and lead the CPC, so don't underestimate the power of spite

for sure. I guess its possible he could try to form a more moderate version of the conservatives... they'd always be a minority party but might be big enough to hold swing vote power. The hard core social con's seem to be around 30ish percent of the party so it might work. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

5 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

he's got a big enough ego to try. Nah, Judas will go back to his cushy gig in Nova Scotia.

 

Harper helped raise up the social con movement in Canada, pretty much assuring they won't see power again. 

Yeah Peter has plenty of time sharpening the shiv he stuck in the back of Joe Clark.

[BoKnows]

17 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Sadly, with an estimated 60% of O'Tooles votes coming from the so-called social conservative side. I do not think his base will be as accepting or believing of his statements I see maybe when he says them

Can confirm.  My papa voted for him because abortion = bad.  He also hates democrats for that sole reason.

[JM_]

Just now, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Yeah Peter has plenty of time sharpening the shiv he stuck in the back of Joe Clark.

and every PC supporter at the time. He just flat out lied to us and handed the party over to the Harperites.  

[nuckin_futz]

JT trying so hard to be done with politics. This might be him this morning ............

 

 

Notice no one's talking about Bill Morneau anymore? What a self own.

 

Almost a shame Stromey couldn't be around for this.

[Jester13]

5 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

for sure. I guess its possible he could try to form a more moderate version of the conservatives... they'd always be a minority party but might be big enough to hold swing vote power. The hard core social con's seem to be around 30ish percent of the party so it might work. 

I could see it happening. The CPC is run by social conservatives now, and it's clear that that will not win a majority in Canada anymore. He could very well go back to forming his Progressive Conservative party and be leader like he once was to make a statement to the socons. I guess we'll see how much of an appetite for politics he still has, though, as he may not be ravenous enough to do so. Whether the CPC splits or not, they're done with O'Toole at the helm either way. He doesn't have the social policy or the look for leading the country, as sad as it is to still state how much looks has to do with it. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

14 minutes ago, Gnarcore said:

Still abhorrent and of dubious effect. 

Again who are you to tell someone what they believe is right or wrong.  What happened to this idea that we should just let people live their lives.  As long as no one is forced into something and they are willing and seeking help themselves why are we taking that away?

 

It's not the govt's job to tell people they can or can't be gay.  They should not be in that discussion, period.

Forcing people to accept it, is just as bad as forcing people that it's wrong.  It's just the other side of the coin, i'm surprise some of you are struggling to see that, not surprised with jimmy, he's not the sharpest toole.  

 

I'm on the side of, do what ever the heck you want with your life, as long as we are protecting peoples freedoms, it's none of my business.

 

 

 

 

[stawns]

22 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

he's got a big enough ego to try. Nah, Judas will go back to his cushy gig in Nova Scotia.

 

Harper helped raise up the social con movement in Canada, pretty much assuring they won't see power again. 

I've said many times the only thing the social conservative movement has done is relegate the Conservative party to a regional protest party, same as the Bloc.

[Warhippy]

23 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

The stupid thing is, the base will still vote for him over the other options. 

 

So IMO they should just rip off the bandaid and drop those issues.  Sure it will piss off that base immediate and he will lose support but it will give him time to earn it back.  Talking from both sides of your mouth depending on which group you are talking to is what keeps costing the con's  Do it now, do it publicly so that it doesn't have to be a talking point till the next election.

But that just plays in to the same issue of is he or isnt he a leader.

 

He'll still pull the base.  But unless he gets really cool about a few things really fast.  He'll chase people off as well

[stawns]

Just now, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Again who are you to tell someone what they believe is right or wrong.  What happened to this idea that we should just let people live their lives.  As long as no one is forced into something and they are willing and seeking help themselves why are we taking that away?

 

It's not the govt's job to tell people they can or can't be gay.  They should not be in that discussion, period.

Forcing people to accept it, is just as bad as forcing people that it's wrong.  It's just the other side of the coin, i'm surprise some of you are struggling to see that, not surprised with jimmy, he's not the sharpest toole.  

 

I'm on the side of, do what ever the heck you want with your life, as long as we are protecting peoples freedoms, it's none of my business.

 

 

 

 

Forcing people to accept it?  Can you elaborate on that because I know you're pretty even keeled and that can be taken as pretty divisive.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Just now, stawns said:

Forcing people to accept it?  Can you elaborate on that because I know you're pretty even keeled and that can be taken as pretty divisive.

Many religions believe acts of homosexuality is wrong and considered a sin.   If someone practicing said religion is seeking help in regards to that sin, who am i, who are you, to take away that help.  Taking away that option is forcing your beliefs on another.  Regardless of my opinion, it's not my role, nor the govt's to tell them what they need to believe. 

 

 

[King Heffy]

4 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Again who are you to tell someone what they believe is right or wrong.  What happened to this idea that we should just let people live their lives.  As long as no one is forced into something and they are willing and seeking help themselves why are we taking that away?

 

It's not the govt's job to tell people they can or can't be gay.  They should not be in that discussion, period.

Forcing people to accept it, is just as bad as forcing people that it's wrong.  It's just the other side of the coin, i'm surprise some of you are struggling to see that, not surprised with jimmy, he's not the sharpest toole.  

 

I'm on the side of, do what ever the heck you want with your life, as long as we are protecting peoples freedoms, it's none of my business.

 

 

 

 

Instead, why not focus on making Canada a more tolerant, inclusive country so fewer people feel the need to attempt to repress who they are.

 

My personal belief is that it doesn't work and is likely to cause a lot of grief for both the people who get the "treatment", as well as their future partners.

 

I would, however, be willing to compromise or voluntary conversion therapy recipients had to go through hoops similar to the ones set up for those seeking a sex change.

[VanIsleNuckFan]

On 1/14/2020 at 11:12 AM, Bure_Pavel said:

Picking a leader based on being a minority or for the sake of diversity is not a good strategy, the best candidate should get the go ahead.  

Agreed, we also call that affirmative action, or the old term, racism!

 

Effing kids these days apparently didn't get enough slip and slide time so they think it better to create cultural and political "slippery slopes"

 

Its easy to critique something you didn't fight for.