December 16, 2016

Patrick Brown declares war on social conservatives

Faith GoldyArchive

In a year end interview with Andrew Lawton on London’s AM 9-80, Ontario Progressive Conservative leader Patrick Brown was asked whether so-cons have a place in the party, and whether MPPs in his caucus would be allowed to vote freely on matters of conscience.

What he said might shock you — I'll play you the clip.

Speaking as one myself, so-cons in Ontario care about two major issues in this province, and it has nothing to do with same sex unions or religion.

What we care about is the government teaching values (as opposed to science and facts) in our classrooms; and funding abortion which, in this country, is legal during all nine months of pregnancy for any reason.

And, for the record, none of our arguments require a religious creed to be justified, let alone explained.

Look, I get it:

Patrick Brown doesn’t want the provincial election to centre on social issues. Frankly, I don’t either.

But here’s the thing: it’s because of him — his flip flops, and now his censorship of his own caucus — that the social issues continue to get play in the media.

If he wants to appear neutral, I’ve got some advice on how he can do that...

(And if you want Patrick Brown to start acting like a conservative, visit PickASide.ca and make your voice heard.)
 

PS: Check out my weekly show "On the Hunt?", only available to Premium Members of TheRebel.media.

You also get access to programs by Ezra Levant, Lauren Southern, Gavin McInnes and Tiffany Gabbay.

We've got THREE different membership levels, too. Sign up HERE!

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-12-19 22:34:02 -0500
Jimmy, you are a hoot and a half, but not even half as bright as you think you are, your posts prove this time and again. Do keep it up though, you are much more amusing and entertaining than the sitcoms on the telly.
commented 2016-12-19 22:23:51 -0500
Patrick Brown has also forgotten that he was second choice for many people.
Many, many were planning to vote for Monte McNaughton before he withdrew from the race.
I wonder now why he withdrew. Was he pressured, same way Brown has pressured the MPPs?
commented 2016-12-19 22:21:37 -0500
Andrew Stephenson 2 days ago said:
re: 3 gene parents “They’re not “genetically modified”. They are merely legalizing the status of the egg donor and/or surrogate”
Andrew: that’s my phrase ‘genetically modified’, because that is basically the scientific goal.
The recent bill changing mother and father to parents is strictly to accommodate the LGBT political agenda, not adoptive parents. Patrick Brown is playing into this agenda.
commented 2016-12-19 22:15:57 -0500
Out of curiosity is there a lower age limit at or below which you consider the explanation of any of this to be inappropriate?
commented 2016-12-19 22:09:20 -0500
The basics of where babies come from using anatomically accurate terms to grade one students.

So you’d be ok with a teacher describing an erection and where an erect penis goes (as well as how and/ or why a penis becomes erect as a child will probably ask) and what it and the vagina must do (rub back and forth on each other to further arouse) in order to cause an orgasm (I guess that’s important to explain as well as some child will probably ask) in a man and woman which respectively causes ejaculation of semen from the testicles and semen uptake into the uterus which leads to fertilization? To a 6 or 7 year old? Really?

You haven’t answered how and why this would be done at this age. Would a teacher use diagrams or photographs of naked children to learn body parts? Would a teacher use a video to show the basics of where babies come from?
commented 2016-12-19 21:31:44 -0500
Nnaumbua Farrell,

Yes, I think a 6 or 7 year old can lean the basics of where babies came from if they don’t already know.

Kids these days – even at that young of age, are pretty intelligent and much more advanced than kids were in many decades past. Unless of course you are overprotective and sheltered them in a way that is unhealthy.
commented 2016-12-19 21:25:00 -0500
Hyacinth,

Yes – 7 people is negligible compared to the vast majority. I am not avoiding anything – it’s just not worth even talking about.

Why do you think Stephen Harper avoided abortion? Could it be because he knows it’s an election loser and that the vast majority of Canadians are pro-life?

I have way more credibility than you. You are the one mindlessly drinking the hyperbole, fear mongering and conspiracy theories served to you on The Rebel every day. You can’t think for yourself – you need to be told what to think, because no rational person would say the things that you say all the time.
commented 2016-12-19 17:52:43 -0500
“Yes, I think a child should know his own body parts. His arm, his nose and his penis where pee comes out of. It’s the human body for fuck sake.”

How would a Grade one child learn this Michael… I mean “Jimmy” ? But the function of the penis isn’t just for urination. Should grade one students learn about it’s other function too?
commented 2016-12-19 16:32:40 -0500
Sure Jimmy, “it’s almost negligible” lol, you are truly gifted at denying reality. You still purposely avoid “Seven former Liberal MPs are calling on Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau to reverse his “dictatorial” stand on abortion and allow his caucus to speak and vote freely on the issue”, but I expected as much.

As I mentioned you have no credibility, you do remind me of the young man that called Milo a white supremacist – doesn’t matter if you are older or younger, the attitude is the same. To be honest? That is most definitely select terminology you best keep from for your postings continually show the opposite, but have at it if that is what floats your boat, it is a free country … more or less. Oh, and by the way thank you, you gave me a great chuckle with “I have no bias at all”.

“Let’s be honest here – someone who is extreme, isn’t going to want to admit that. They either deny it or fool themselves into thinking that their positions are reasonable.” You described yourself there to a T, you really need to read some of your past postings on this site.

.
commented 2016-12-19 15:38:36 -0500
Hyacinth,

Nothing you posted here applies to me at all. I neither deflected or obscured the facts either. You are trying to get me to fit into you box of labels like groupthink dogma.

I have always had the views that I have now – that’s over 40 years. I have not joined some new liberal revolution.

I didn’t gloss/skip over anything. There are exceptions to everything, but pro-life ONLY liberals are such a small percentage in Canada compared to pro-choice liberals – it’s almost negligible.

I have no bias at all – you only need to read what people say on here to back up everything that I have said. Not to mention, the many reasonable conservatives that left this place a while back, because even they couldn’t stand the extreme right here that The Rebel clearly caters to.

Let’s be honest here – someone who is extreme, isn’t going to want to admit that. They either deny it or fool themselves into thinking that their positions are reasonable. If you don’t think The Rebel community is extreme right, what would classify as extreme right? Calling gay people faggots who do “evil things” is reasonable to you?
commented 2016-12-19 14:07:37 -0500
Jimmy,
Deception is an art form perfected by the Libs, we see you have mastered it along with the groupthink dogma. Good for you, you aren’t such a dim bulb that you appear to be. You deflect and obscure facts and postings, another Lib tactic that you have learned well, again, good for you for it shows you have an IQ higher than that of most of the Liberal young sheeple who are at a loss in a debate or conversation. However, you show that you do not think nor speak (write) outside of the set Liberal dogma parameters, that detracts from your intelligence and makes you appear to be a dim bulb on the tree of life, especially when you berate others for the exact thing that you are guilty of.

Interesting that you intentionally gloss over and skip the fact “Seven former Liberal MPs are calling on Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau to reverse his “dictatorial” stand on abortion and allow his caucus to speak and vote freely on the issue”. There are many Libs that are anti-abortion, some just as if not more than virulent in their stance than those in the conservative party, yet you claim it is only conservatives that feel this way (using your terminology “reasonable conservatives” versus “the extreme right like you get on The Rebel”).

Your bias is more strongly apparent than that of those whom you call “the extreme right like you get on The Rebel”. You have no credibility, you remind me of the young man that called Milo a white supremacist.
commented 2016-12-19 12:30:00 -0500
Drew Wakariuk,

It’s hilarious that you think Sharia Law is ever going to be enforced in Canada. It also shows how fucking stupid you are that you actually believe in such hyperbole and fear mongering. It’s obvious that you are easily led.
commented 2016-12-19 12:26:15 -0500
Nnaumbua Farrell,

Yes, I think a child should know his own body parts. His arm, his nose and his penis where pee comes out of. It’s the human body for fuck sake.
commented 2016-12-19 12:20:55 -0500
Hyacinth,

No – because there are conservatives who are fine with gay marriage and while they may have a problem with abortion, they still feel that it has to be pro-choice.

That’s a reasonable conservative.

While they may not personally endorse something, they are not trying to get laws changed or call it evil. The realize that the debate has been settled, which is why the Conservative Party in Canada has taken gay marriage off the table. Why? Because they are being reasonable conservatives.

Of course, there are also people who vote conservative for fiscal reasons, but are socially liberal. Again, not the extreme right like you get on The Rebel.
commented 2016-12-19 10:06:53 -0500
Jimmy Reece commented 7 hours ago
“I think if one is still going on about how gay marriage and abortion are evil and you are desperately clinging to a 1950’s mentality or way of life when it’s 2016 – then congrats, you ARE among the extreme right.”

Jimmy just proved that conservatives will always appear “far right” to them because they shifted so far left.

Jimmy is spewing “the groupthink” dogma proving the Libs have shifted even more left with Junior leading the party. The Lib party IS NOT the Lib Party of Pierre Trudeau, it is much further left.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/09/18/trudeau-open-letter-abortion_n_5842562.html
Seven former Liberal MPs are calling on Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau to reverse his “dictatorial” stand on abortion and allow his caucus to speak and vote freely on the issue
In an interview with the Huffington Post Canada, signatory Pat O’Brien said the Liberals under Trudeau’s father, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, had been a big-tent party of many divergent views. Strong anti-abortion caucus members sat side-by-side with colleagues who supported abortion rights, he said. “They co-existed because they all had a right to have their own opinion within that party,” O’Brien said. “That door has now been slammed by Mr. Trudeau. He wants groupthink, and only groupthink.”

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/no-anti-abortion-candidates-allowed-to-run-for-ndp-mulcair-1.1812400
Alissa Golob, the youth co-ordinator of the Campaign Life Coalition who was in Ottawa Thursday for the annual March for Life rally, told CTV’s Power Play she’s not surprised by Mulcair’s statement because the NDP “have always been the enemy of the pro-life movement.”
But Golob said it’s “shocking” to her that Trudeau is “forcing his caucus to completely ignore logic and science and abide by the gospel according to Justin.
“He says on one hand that he welcomes voices of all different points of view, but on the other hand he says: ‘except half the country who disagrees with abortion.’”"
commented 2016-12-19 03:32:38 -0500
Jimmy Reece it is going to be hilarious when sharia is enforced and patrols take out abortion clinics, i wonder what the left will say then? Oh yeah they will be so subjugated they will not speak up for abortion all of a sudden, it will be quite comical.
commented 2016-12-19 03:30:59 -0500
Jimmy Reece go witness a late term abortion and tell me it is not evil. The baby is alive outside of the womans body , so why is it still her choice? And demonizing men is not progress.
commented 2016-12-19 03:28:45 -0500
Jimmy Reece abortion is evil, and many people want gay unions to be called something else and modern society is a pathetic joke, you think this is progress? Sorry but not everything a progressive likes is some sort of advancement for society. Or were German bestiality brothels a step forward?
commented 2016-12-19 02:27:04 -0500
I think if one is still going on about how gay marriage and abortion are evil and you are desperately clinging to a 1950’s mentality or way of life when it’s 2016 – then congrats, you ARE among the extreme right.
commented 2016-12-19 00:51:46 -0500
“…Canada is a centrist country, ….”

For the most part Canada is left of center and has been for many years. Since Pierre Trudeau there has been a gradual slide left, gaining momentum over the decades. Pierre Trudeau ensured this, this also included the CBC (posted links in a previous article). All levels of governmental bureaucracy are top heavy with Libs and Dippers.

The political makeup of the parties have undergone many changes in the last few decades. Conservatives can be considered the centrists now because they too shifted left (all about getting the popular vote now). Not much difference anymore between a Dipper and a Lib, Wynne and Notley for example could be twins, their policies and agendas are very similar. The far left corner is still held by the Green Party. The Libs will continue to adamantly call conservatives “far right” because it appears that way to them since they slid so far left.
commented 2016-12-18 18:34:26 -0500
Hey guys, could somebody tell me if paining black stripes on a white pony creates a zebra? I mean, that’s totally scientific right?
commented 2016-12-18 18:14:14 -0500
For Grade 6 Students:

Teacher prompt:
“Things like wet dreams or vaginal lubrication are normal and happen
as a result of physical changes with puberty. Exploring one’s body by touching or mastur
-bating is something that many people do and find pleasurable. It is common and is not
harmful and is one way of learning about your body.
"

175 of the Health and Physical Education Curriculum of Ontario
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/health1to8.pdf

Hm. Is this a violation of Section 152 of the Criminal Code?
commented 2016-12-18 17:52:27 -0500
Sexual interference

151 Every person who, for a sexual purpose, touches, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, any part of the body of a person under the age of 16 years (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 14 years and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of one year; or (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years less a day and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of 90 days. R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 151; R.S., 1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.), s. 1; 2005, c. 32, s. 3; 2008, c. 6, s. 54; 2012, c. 1, s. 11; 2015, c. 23, s. 2.

Invitation to sexual touching

152 Every person who, for a sexual purpose, invites, counsels or incites a person under the age of 16 years to touch, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, the body of any person, including the body of the person who so invites, counsels or incites and the body of the person under the age of 16 years, (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 14 years and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of one year; or (b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years less a day and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of 90 days. R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 152; R.S., 1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.), s. 1; 2005, c. 32, s. 3; 2008, c. 6, s. 54; 2012, c. 1, s. 12; 2015, c. 23, s. 3.

Canadian Criminal Code
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-33.html#h-57
commented 2016-12-18 17:31:29 -0500
Andrews said:

“I think the whole Levin thing to be somewhat of a strawman argument. If you have a problem with the curriculum, then your problem lies with the curriculum, address that directly. If it’s so bad, it should be easy to do… but nobody does. "

Interesting Andrews. I suppose being a convicted child pornographer doesn’t necessarily make everything you’ve created harmful but I find it hard to believe that even you wouldn’t at the very least think of examining what that person has created just in case.

If you found out a trusted babysitter whom you’ve hired turns out to be a convicted child pornographer, wouldn’t you ask your children if anything strange or uncomfortable happened while you were away just in case?
commented 2016-12-18 17:15:22 -0500
Andrews said:

“By grade 9 it’s too late, some of them are already sexually active. That’s kind of the problem with these protests – they don’t reflect the reality of the modern world. Pubertys’ getting earlier and kids as young as 12 or 13 – which is grade 6 or 7 – are already starting to experiment in sex. The “presumed innocence” is deeply flawed.”

Interesting argument Andrews. Am I correct to say that your premise is that children should be taught about sex at the age at which some of them are engaging in it and/or at the age at which some of them are entering into puberty? Yes I do have a horrifying example of extreme underage sexual intercourse.by some children.

Also, do you think that the ages found in sexual interference offences in the Criminal Code should be amended?

In addition, sheltering the kids from things like sexual diversity is ultimately counterproductive. They will have to live and function in a world with varying gender and sexual expressions – despite the protestations of conservatives, that’s far more likely to continue expanding into the mainstream than go away – and keeping them in the dark will not help them do so."

Please define sexual diversity, varying gender and sexual expressions Andrews.
commented 2016-12-18 17:00:27 -0500
“Schools and school boards can play a role by coordinating efforts with community partners.
Partnerships for the promotion of health and well-being in schools can be arranged with
organizations such as a Community Health Centre (CHC) or Aboriginal Health Access
Centre (AHAC). Such centres address spiritual well-being in addition to physical and mental
health for Aboriginal peoples.
"

Page 18 of the Health and Physical Education Curriculum of Ontario
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/health1to8.pdf

Here’s a job application from one Community Health Centre:

Traditional Healing Community Outreach Worker (part-time, contract – up to 1 year)
Application Deadline: 08/19/2016
Posting Date: 08/10/2016
Organization: Chatham-Kent Community Health Centres

CORE COMPETENCIES (Includes all the related knowledge, skills, abilities and attributes for the position) and QUALIFICATIONS

Traditional knowledge acquired through at least 3-5 years education and/or work experience with Elders/Healers/Medicine People, traditional communities, societies or community driven cultural-based education programs.

Association of Ontario Health Centres
https://www.aohc.org/job-posting/Traditional-Healing-Community-Outreach-Worker-part-time-contract-1-year-0

I take it that John we should abolish the coal industry and destroy thousands of lives Siciliano, Michael Mann… I mean “Jimmy Reece”, non-lying Jay Kelly, and consensual incest supporting either very deceitful or unintelligent Andrews support all of this.

Say, while your at it guys, can someone explain exactly how you teach a Grade one student to identify their penises, testicles, vaginas, vulvas? What is there a photograph or diagram of a naked child? Is there a homework assignment? How and why?

“Human Development and Sexual Health

C1.3

identify body parts, including genitalia (e.g., penis, testicles, vagina, vulva), using correct
terminology [PS]

Teacher prompt: “We talk about all body parts with respect. Why is it important to know
about your own body, and use correct names for the parts of your body?”

Student: “All parts of my body are a part of me, and I need to know how to take care of
and talk about my own body. If I’m hurt or need help, and I know the right words, other
people will know what I’m talking about.”

93 of the Health and Physical Education Curriculum of Ontario
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/elementary/health1to8.pdf
commented 2016-12-18 16:23:50 -0500
Social conservatism is dead in Canada because they do not have a foothold in abortion, gay marriage, culture, and quite frankly the only area they seem to have a foothold if you can count it as that is just law and order issues.
commented 2016-12-18 16:13:27 -0500
The problem with social conservatives is that they foolishly think that social conservatism is a huge demographic in Canada, when it is among the smallest demographic that mainly resides in Alberta.
commented 2016-12-18 16:07:07 -0500
Actually it is much simpler than that. Canada is a centrist country, and all parties have to move towards a communitarian centre which means keeping social programs, keeping safety nets, investing when necessary, and having small businesses and corporations be invested for jobs. The fact is Ontario just like Canada when Harper was PM made those corporate tax cuts, and no investment has made it into Ontario, so right wing economics does not work because we even saw during the Bush years how from 2003 to 2005 was the slowest time for economic growth and that time led to the Great Recession.

The point is the centre and the progressive centre has to be catered to because in Canada that is how parties win elections nowadays. In the 1990’s that was different because people were so sick of government and the cuts could be made and there was enough room to make the cuts because of lower debts and deficits. Of course, we saw how those cuts did not bring down the debts. As a proponent of Social Credit and the Bank of Canada, we should use public money creation to bring down Canada’s debt at all three levels. It is simply unsustainable, and yes the Bank of Canada can pay for vital infrastructure and services and maintaining our health care and education systems.

People have to realize that the three parties in Ontario are corporatist and not for Social Credit and investment. People seem to confuse Keynesianism with Social Credit, when Social Credit is what allowed Canada’s national debt to remain 22 billion from 1938 to 1974.

John Turmel speaks about this all the time in his videos on Youtube.

In summation, Ontario needs a strong fourth party to advocate for these things. I frankly believe that the only parties that can save Ontario are minor parties or the None of the Above Party through either left wing populism or Social Credit or direct democracy!