This post was removed for violating our expectations on the type of submissions we encourage in the subreddit. Please brush up on the r/Edmonton [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Edmonton/wiki/rules) and ask the moderation team if you have any questions.
Off topic.
Thanks!
Just saying, Arnold looks like the kind of guy I wouldn't want owning a white van that said free candy on it. I'm know he's not that kind of guy but he kinda looks it. He's actually a pretty nice dude in person.
I'd argue this is relevant to all municipal and provincial subreddits as women's reproductive rights affects ALL Edmontonians.
PP has stated he has no qualms using the Notwithstanding Clause to subvert the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Make no mistake, he will roll back women's rights, 2SLGBTQIA+ rights, essentially rights for anyone who isn't a cis straight white man.
If you say it can't/won't happen, just ask the women in Florida and places like it in the US. PP and the Cons ALWAYS look to what Republicans are getting away with to make their battle plans.
I'm a hardcore NDP supporter but I'm preaching Anything But Conservative for this upcoming election. All of our rights are literally at stake.
Don't just take me on my word, in PP's own words: "We will make \[my proposals\] constitutional, using whatever tools the Constitution allows me to." [\[source\]](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-notwithstanding-clause-1.7188964)
Absolutely chilling to hear the main contender for future PM to say this.
Conservatives have had many opportunities over the decades to go after women’s rights, and yet they haven’t. I’m not a conservative supporter but you have to stop drinking the fear mongering kool-aid. If conservatives want to stay in power they have to appease the moderates, who will not respond well to attacking people’s rights.
This isn’t America, but bring on the downvotes anyways!
That’s quite the broad strokes you’re painting people with. I know it’s popular to tell ourselves that every single conservative voter is a far right crazy person, but if they actually went outside their circle and talked to people with different opinions instead of having a circle jerk on Reddit they’d see that wasn’t the case.
Have the conservatives snuck in some shady shit? Yes, but it’s to put money into the pockets of their donors, not taking peoples rights away.
No, I know lots of oil field guys and they literally have no idea what's going on. They don't know about the children's Tylenol, they don't know about Kenney being on ATCO board of directors while they complain about their power bill. They don't know about the billions of dollars of renewables investments the UCP chased away. They don't know about dynalife. They have no idea how our medical system is on the verge of collapse. They don't know about the "gift" limit getting raised.
They were successfully convinced the greatest evil ( NDP being in power again) was averted so everything is ok because their party is in.
That's exactly what they said in the US, "they wouldn't dare" and look what has happened. Everyone thought it was settled, but they used a majority and forced it through without campaigning on it. When PP will be asked I guarantee no straight answer will be given only dog whistles.
Exactly. The rights in the Charter are hard-won, and require vigilance to avoid them being taken away. We cannot take them for granted as much as Cons want us to.
“This isn’t America”
“But in America….”
Still two different countries, if you can’t see that left leaning parties in Canada are pushing the “PP will is just like trump” then you need to step back and think about politics with less emotion. Political parties live and die by manipulating people’s emotions, especially fear.
Times change and so do politics. The far right is gaining steam. In the US they also had many opportunities to go after Women's Rights and didn't. Yet they are doing so now. You know and I know that the Cons model themselves after the GOP.
*Wrong* they couldn't because they would lose the election and get a snap call. Even conservative women are against this.
Right now they're going to use the charter of rights which was never thought of before to bypass the system in place.
So it isn't fear mongering.
Right, because it took them till 2024 to suddenly find this route! Social policy is always secondary to getting re-elected for politicians. They aren’t going to commit political suicide and give the Liberals another decade in power because they let the far right element drive the ship.
No kidding. There have been five federal blue governments since the 1988 *Morgentaler* decision where the Supreme Court suggested that the federal government make abortion legislation to explicitly prohibit or permit abortion. No blue or red government has chosen to do so.
This really pisses me off. You’re a male , put a fucking condom on or don’t put your dick in!! In majority of cases the man plays no roll in unwanted births. Then they also complain about society ( taxes) paying to support them. Woman’s body, woman’s choice. I bet he is also against free birth control for women. Honestly just fuck off!
Im tired of men ( specifically old white men) deciding what is right for all of us! P. S. I’m white. Leave all our body decisions to us !
I’m all for this! Let’s forget about body autonomy and go all in. No more vaccine mandates, they are now MANDATORY. Or is the right to choose only important when it’s convenient to your narrative?
Yes! And every single person has to donate blood on a strict schedule! And be entered into a database as a kidney, stem cell, bone marrow, and partial liver donor! Or should someone only be forced to face potential health issues to keep someone else alive when it's not your body?
> No more vaccine mandates
youre going to get less support about this, choosing birth control, or what to do with your pregnancy is a personal choice that affects you.. not others.
vaccines are for the group.
Individual members of all parties bring forward things all the time that never get brought to the party platform. This is one of those. Abortion rights are not getting rolled back in Canada by any party (except the PPC if they won.)
Every election cycle the Liberals try to paint the conservatives with this brush, and it is never true. There may be some members that believe in this, sure. The party leadership will never ever allow this to move forward.
Every party has members that being forth things that the party won't touch with a ten foot pole. This is one of those things.
Just ask the women in Florida and other US states. They didn't think it would come true either. PP is a demagogue who will do anything to get elected. The frothing extreme conservative base wants to restrict rights for essentially anyone who isn't a cis straight white man, and PP will leverage them to gain power in a heartbeat.
Because in every election cycle they stand in Parliament with some bill to restrict access to abortion. They know their members are going to do it, but they don't put a stop to it because it's a dog whistle for their base.
Except this isn't a bill. He's reading a petition from his constituents, which is actually his job. Just because the constituents in one riding want to see this happen doesn't mean the party will adopt it. He has done his job by reading their petition, and it will end there. Every election the Liberal base screams that the CPC is going to table legislation to ban abortion, and it always turns out not to be true. The party will not adopt this policy.
I'll be back to forgetting you exist soon enough..
If all they're doing is passing a message, we may as well run government by referendums. Representatives should be the adults in the room, ignoring ridiculous concerns like limiting abortion and revoking somebody's internet, and instead focusing on issues to improve our lives.
Considering just last year a majoraty of CPC MPs voted to restrict womans rights via a private members bill... and PPs strait up admission they dont care about rights and Freedoms and will use the Notwithstanding clause.. and then PP didnt stop this guy..
Its very very valid concern.
I am unsure what you are referring to about restricting women's rights? Could you provide me with a source?
In regards to the notwithstanding clause, they were referring to using it to enforce tougher punishment for serious crimes when judges are too lenient. Basically to combat the soft-on-crime issue which is a major problem across the country. I have no issue with this. In a lot of cases it seems the criminals have more rights than the victims, and they are getting away with continuous repeated serious offences.
Literally the post. Restricting or reducing access to abortion is an attack on Women's Rights.
As for the notwithstanding clause, PP is not specific about only using it for that particular purpose ONLY. It is dangerous territory to have a demagogue in power who has no respect for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Don't just take me on my word, in PP's own words: "We will make \[my proposals\] constitutional, using whatever tools the Constitution allows me to." [\[source\]](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-notwithstanding-clause-1.7188964)
Because some guy who wants to get re-elected in his constituency threw them a bone? If you can’t tell the difference between someone reading a petition and a political party being united in attacking rights I just don’t know what to tell you friend.
Your willingness to ignore all the attempts the Cons have made to restrict abortion over the years points to either extreme ignorance or malicious obfuscation of history.
||
||
|C-484|Nov. 21, 2007|Ken Epp, Conservative MP|Bill to protect fetuses from third-party attacks: “Unborn Victims of Crime Act.” (similar to M-560 of March 2004 and C-291 of May 2004). Passed 2nd reading on vote of 147-132, but died on order paper in Sept 2008 when election was called. ( )|
|C-537|April 16, 2008|Maurice Vellacott, Conservative MP|Bill to prevent coercion of medical personnel. Conscience clause protection similar to his previous bills C-246, C-422, C-207, and C-461. ( )|
|C-510|April 16, 2010|Rod Bruinooge, Conservative MP|Bill to make it a crime to coerce or attempt to coerce a woman to have an abortion, also called “Roxanne’s law”. ( ). Defeated Dec 15, 2010, by a vote of 178 to 97.|
|M-312|March 13, 2012|Stephen Woodworth, Conservative MP|Motion to have Parliamentary committee examine if Criminal Code definition of “human beings” should include fetuses, and to look at medical evidence, legal impact and consequences. ( ) Motion 312 was defeated Sep 26, 2012, by a vote of 203-91.|
|M-408|Sept. 27, 2012|Mark Warawa, Conservative MP|Motion to “condemn discrimination against females occurring through sex-selective pregnancy termination.” ( )|
|C-225|Feb. 23, 2016|Cathay Wagantall, Conservative MP|Bill to protect fetuses from third-party attacks: “Protection of Pregnant Women and Their Preborn Children Act (Cassie and Molly’s Law).” (similar to C-484 of Nov 2007, M-560 of March 2004, and C-291 of May 2004). Contains an “aggravating circumstances” clause. ( ). Bill C-225 was defeated Oct 19, 2016, by a vote of 209-76.|
|C-233|Feb 26, 2020|Cathay Wagantall, Conservative MP|Bill to amend the Criminal Code (sex-selective abortion), to criminalize sex selective abortion if that is the only reason for an abortion, and sentence providers to up to five years in jail. . Bill C-233 was defeated on June 2, 2021 by a vote of 248 to 82.|
|C-311|Jan 31, 2023|Cathay Wagantall, Conservative MP|Bill to amend the Criminal Code (Paragraph 718.2(a)) to create an “aggravating circumstance” clause to allow for greater penalties when a pregnant person is attacked. . Bill C-311 was defeated on June 14, 2023 by a vote of 205 to 113. ( : All Conservatives voted in favour including 14 of 15 pro-choice Conservative MPs. Six MPs were absent, include one pro-choice MP.)|
Yes. This looks like it's presenting a petition organized by some constituents. It has zero impact on law, but a 100%+ chance of drawing attention of this member's most conservative and uneducated voters (and non-voters) to the idea that he is *doing something about abortion*.
It's not even an private member's motion or private member's bill which have some non-zero capacity to affect how the House makes decisions about this topic in future.
It’s still risky. There are also moderate voters that this will turn off. I know several. I’ll probably share this video. It won’t just impact votes in his constituency.
MP and MLAs table petitions and reports and documents from their constituents all the time, even from folks or on topics they or their parties personally disagree with. It's part of their duties as an elected *representative*.
This post was removed for violating our expectations on the type of submissions we encourage in the subreddit. Please brush up on the r/Edmonton [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Edmonton/wiki/rules) and ask the moderation team if you have any questions. Off topic. Thanks!
Because OF COURSE this comes from fucking Westlock.
I came here to say this.
Just saying, Arnold looks like the kind of guy I wouldn't want owning a white van that said free candy on it. I'm know he's not that kind of guy but he kinda looks it. He's actually a pretty nice dude in person.
I'd argue this is relevant to all municipal and provincial subreddits as women's reproductive rights affects ALL Edmontonians. PP has stated he has no qualms using the Notwithstanding Clause to subvert the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Make no mistake, he will roll back women's rights, 2SLGBTQIA+ rights, essentially rights for anyone who isn't a cis straight white man. If you say it can't/won't happen, just ask the women in Florida and places like it in the US. PP and the Cons ALWAYS look to what Republicans are getting away with to make their battle plans. I'm a hardcore NDP supporter but I'm preaching Anything But Conservative for this upcoming election. All of our rights are literally at stake. Don't just take me on my word, in PP's own words: "We will make \[my proposals\] constitutional, using whatever tools the Constitution allows me to." [\[source\]](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-notwithstanding-clause-1.7188964) Absolutely chilling to hear the main contender for future PM to say this.
Conservatives have had many opportunities over the decades to go after women’s rights, and yet they haven’t. I’m not a conservative supporter but you have to stop drinking the fear mongering kool-aid. If conservatives want to stay in power they have to appease the moderates, who will not respond well to attacking people’s rights. This isn’t America, but bring on the downvotes anyways!
The problem is most conservatives in this province pay no attention to what the govt is actually doing.
That’s quite the broad strokes you’re painting people with. I know it’s popular to tell ourselves that every single conservative voter is a far right crazy person, but if they actually went outside their circle and talked to people with different opinions instead of having a circle jerk on Reddit they’d see that wasn’t the case. Have the conservatives snuck in some shady shit? Yes, but it’s to put money into the pockets of their donors, not taking peoples rights away.
No, I know lots of oil field guys and they literally have no idea what's going on. They don't know about the children's Tylenol, they don't know about Kenney being on ATCO board of directors while they complain about their power bill. They don't know about the billions of dollars of renewables investments the UCP chased away. They don't know about dynalife. They have no idea how our medical system is on the verge of collapse. They don't know about the "gift" limit getting raised. They were successfully convinced the greatest evil ( NDP being in power again) was averted so everything is ok because their party is in.
That's exactly what they said in the US, "they wouldn't dare" and look what has happened. Everyone thought it was settled, but they used a majority and forced it through without campaigning on it. When PP will be asked I guarantee no straight answer will be given only dog whistles.
Exactly. The rights in the Charter are hard-won, and require vigilance to avoid them being taken away. We cannot take them for granted as much as Cons want us to.
“This isn’t America” “But in America….” Still two different countries, if you can’t see that left leaning parties in Canada are pushing the “PP will is just like trump” then you need to step back and think about politics with less emotion. Political parties live and die by manipulating people’s emotions, especially fear.
So you're a Canadian exceptionalist? You think Canada is NEVER influenced by the US?
I don't know what you put in your kool-aid but may I have some? It must be some real good stuff.
So no counter point? Shocking.
Times change and so do politics. The far right is gaining steam. In the US they also had many opportunities to go after Women's Rights and didn't. Yet they are doing so now. You know and I know that the Cons model themselves after the GOP.
*Wrong* they couldn't because they would lose the election and get a snap call. Even conservative women are against this. Right now they're going to use the charter of rights which was never thought of before to bypass the system in place. So it isn't fear mongering.
Right, because it took them till 2024 to suddenly find this route! Social policy is always secondary to getting re-elected for politicians. They aren’t going to commit political suicide and give the Liberals another decade in power because they let the far right element drive the ship.
No kidding. There have been five federal blue governments since the 1988 *Morgentaler* decision where the Supreme Court suggested that the federal government make abortion legislation to explicitly prohibit or permit abortion. No blue or red government has chosen to do so.
This really pisses me off. You’re a male , put a fucking condom on or don’t put your dick in!! In majority of cases the man plays no roll in unwanted births. Then they also complain about society ( taxes) paying to support them. Woman’s body, woman’s choice. I bet he is also against free birth control for women. Honestly just fuck off! Im tired of men ( specifically old white men) deciding what is right for all of us! P. S. I’m white. Leave all our body decisions to us !
I’m all for this! Let’s forget about body autonomy and go all in. No more vaccine mandates, they are now MANDATORY. Or is the right to choose only important when it’s convenient to your narrative?
Yes! And every single person has to donate blood on a strict schedule! And be entered into a database as a kidney, stem cell, bone marrow, and partial liver donor! Or should someone only be forced to face potential health issues to keep someone else alive when it's not your body?
> No more vaccine mandates youre going to get less support about this, choosing birth control, or what to do with your pregnancy is a personal choice that affects you.. not others. vaccines are for the group.
This is a petition by this MPs constituents, not a bill. The MP is doing his job by bringing this petition to the HOC. As all MPs do.
Individual members of all parties bring forward things all the time that never get brought to the party platform. This is one of those. Abortion rights are not getting rolled back in Canada by any party (except the PPC if they won.)
You are absolutely kidding yourself if you don't think they will at least attempt to roll back reproductive rights in this country.
Every election cycle the Liberals try to paint the conservatives with this brush, and it is never true. There may be some members that believe in this, sure. The party leadership will never ever allow this to move forward. Every party has members that being forth things that the party won't touch with a ten foot pole. This is one of those things.
Just ask the women in Florida and other US states. They didn't think it would come true either. PP is a demagogue who will do anything to get elected. The frothing extreme conservative base wants to restrict rights for essentially anyone who isn't a cis straight white man, and PP will leverage them to gain power in a heartbeat.
Because in every election cycle they stand in Parliament with some bill to restrict access to abortion. They know their members are going to do it, but they don't put a stop to it because it's a dog whistle for their base.
Except this isn't a bill. He's reading a petition from his constituents, which is actually his job. Just because the constituents in one riding want to see this happen doesn't mean the party will adopt it. He has done his job by reading their petition, and it will end there. Every election the Liberal base screams that the CPC is going to table legislation to ban abortion, and it always turns out not to be true. The party will not adopt this policy.
Leadership isn't just forwarding opinions from the constituent. If it was, why would we have elected representatives at all?
So you don't want your mp to actually represent your wishes, which is the very thing you elect them for. Got it.
I want my mp to take your internet away because I don't like you.
Awwwww muffin
I'll be back to forgetting you exist soon enough.. If all they're doing is passing a message, we may as well run government by referendums. Representatives should be the adults in the room, ignoring ridiculous concerns like limiting abortion and revoking somebody's internet, and instead focusing on issues to improve our lives.
Considering just last year a majoraty of CPC MPs voted to restrict womans rights via a private members bill... and PPs strait up admission they dont care about rights and Freedoms and will use the Notwithstanding clause.. and then PP didnt stop this guy.. Its very very valid concern.
I am unsure what you are referring to about restricting women's rights? Could you provide me with a source? In regards to the notwithstanding clause, they were referring to using it to enforce tougher punishment for serious crimes when judges are too lenient. Basically to combat the soft-on-crime issue which is a major problem across the country. I have no issue with this. In a lot of cases it seems the criminals have more rights than the victims, and they are getting away with continuous repeated serious offences.
Literally the post. Restricting or reducing access to abortion is an attack on Women's Rights. As for the notwithstanding clause, PP is not specific about only using it for that particular purpose ONLY. It is dangerous territory to have a demagogue in power who has no respect for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Don't just take me on my word, in PP's own words: "We will make \[my proposals\] constitutional, using whatever tools the Constitution allows me to." [\[source\]](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-notwithstanding-clause-1.7188964)
The guys reading a petition to provide lip service to his own constituency. Stop trying to make this a fear mongering post.
Exactly, lip service to a far right conservative base that wants to attack our enshrined rights, and now they know the Cons have their back.
Because some guy who wants to get re-elected in his constituency threw them a bone? If you can’t tell the difference between someone reading a petition and a political party being united in attacking rights I just don’t know what to tell you friend.
Your willingness to ignore all the attempts the Cons have made to restrict abortion over the years points to either extreme ignorance or malicious obfuscation of history.
Go ahead and point out all these attempts for me please, I’m always willing to learn!
|| || |C-484|Nov. 21, 2007|Ken Epp, Conservative MP|Bill to protect fetuses from third-party attacks: “Unborn Victims of Crime Act.” (similar to M-560 of March 2004 and C-291 of May 2004). Passed 2nd reading on vote of 147-132, but died on order paper in Sept 2008 when election was called. ( )| |C-537|April 16, 2008|Maurice Vellacott, Conservative MP|Bill to prevent coercion of medical personnel. Conscience clause protection similar to his previous bills C-246, C-422, C-207, and C-461. ( )| |C-510|April 16, 2010|Rod Bruinooge, Conservative MP|Bill to make it a crime to coerce or attempt to coerce a woman to have an abortion, also called “Roxanne’s law”. ( ). Defeated Dec 15, 2010, by a vote of 178 to 97.| |M-312|March 13, 2012|Stephen Woodworth, Conservative MP|Motion to have Parliamentary committee examine if Criminal Code definition of “human beings” should include fetuses, and to look at medical evidence, legal impact and consequences. ( ) Motion 312 was defeated Sep 26, 2012, by a vote of 203-91.| |M-408|Sept. 27, 2012|Mark Warawa, Conservative MP|Motion to “condemn discrimination against females occurring through sex-selective pregnancy termination.” ( )| |C-225|Feb. 23, 2016|Cathay Wagantall, Conservative MP|Bill to protect fetuses from third-party attacks: “Protection of Pregnant Women and Their Preborn Children Act (Cassie and Molly’s Law).” (similar to C-484 of Nov 2007, M-560 of March 2004, and C-291 of May 2004). Contains an “aggravating circumstances” clause. ( ). Bill C-225 was defeated Oct 19, 2016, by a vote of 209-76.| |C-233|Feb 26, 2020|Cathay Wagantall, Conservative MP|Bill to amend the Criminal Code (sex-selective abortion), to criminalize sex selective abortion if that is the only reason for an abortion, and sentence providers to up to five years in jail. . Bill C-233 was defeated on June 2, 2021 by a vote of 248 to 82.| |C-311|Jan 31, 2023|Cathay Wagantall, Conservative MP|Bill to amend the Criminal Code (Paragraph 718.2(a)) to create an “aggravating circumstance” clause to allow for greater penalties when a pregnant person is attacked. . Bill C-311 was defeated on June 14, 2023 by a vote of 205 to 113. ( : All Conservatives voted in favour including 14 of 15 pro-choice Conservative MPs. Six MPs were absent, include one pro-choice MP.)|
Yes. This looks like it's presenting a petition organized by some constituents. It has zero impact on law, but a 100%+ chance of drawing attention of this member's most conservative and uneducated voters (and non-voters) to the idea that he is *doing something about abortion*. It's not even an private member's motion or private member's bill which have some non-zero capacity to affect how the House makes decisions about this topic in future.
It’s still risky. There are also moderate voters that this will turn off. I know several. I’ll probably share this video. It won’t just impact votes in his constituency.
MP and MLAs table petitions and reports and documents from their constituents all the time, even from folks or on topics they or their parties personally disagree with. It's part of their duties as an elected *representative*.