Canadian breaking news and politics and hats and general sexiness

[EnderD_503]

Awesome support for Occupy Toronto faced with eviction! Mohawk elders sent word after the eviction notice that they support Occupy TO remaining on St. James' Park land, and apparently more people will becoming down to the city to support. The Cathedral, who owns 25% of the land, reaffirmed that they support the movement. The Ontario Federation of Labour called for its member to go down to the park in support of the movement tonight. City council has moved to block Ford's eviction notice since he did not consult city council on the eviction notice. 12 city councilors so far have signed a letter to Rob Ford telling him to postpone eviction to the next city council meeting at the end of the month, at the very earliest, so that councilors can discuss the issue.

The eviction notice says people need to be out of the park between 12:01am and 5:01am, Occupy TO asks that all supporters who aren't camping at the park be down at 11pm to peacefully resist eviction if necessary.

Hopefully Ford will soon realise that he's making a huge mistake.

[EnderD_503]

Well, Occupy TO was safe tonight Earlier this afternoon a judge ruled that Ford couldn't evict protestors tonight, and that no action could be taken until the conclusion of court proceedings Friday afternoon. So tonight's call to defend the park turned more into a celebratory gathering, lol. I think at least all this did show that a lot more people are supporting this than Ford thinks.

Also heard something about how the close proximity of NYC and Toronto evictions were actually planned that way by cooperation between the mayors. Considering Ford didn't manage to evict Occupy TO and NYC occupiers are back in the park (or so I hear?), I guess their attempt to dislodge occupiers in a single stroke didn't quite work out. But the fact that this kind coordinated attack between mayors across North America is happening is a bit disturbing, and a bit too blatantly "the people vs. local government."

[Cin]

He cracks me up.

[Soon]

B.C. court upholds anti-polygamy law as constitutional

[Greyson]

Honestly, I have mixed feelings and thoughts about this non-binding ruling. I do understand how this judge was concerned about the well being of women and children. I am somewhat familiar with the American "Bountiful" sect of the LDS. Most of the information I know of Bountiful is via the American and Canadian media.

Just last week I was watching a Lisa Ling piece done for her show on the OWN channel about the women members of the American Bountiful LDS sect. Apparently these women are content with their way of life and believe their way is also healthy and good for their children. I found it very ironic that a Lesbian with advocacy experience and skills is now working with these women to state their case in the media and courts.

I know there are judges, senators, members of congress, zealots and others who believe that Queer parents and families are unfit and will harm the well being of children. If "the majority" had their way we would be stripped of any legal recognition and/or protection. This could be a slippery slope. I am undecided on this one. Thanks for posting the link.

[EnderD_503]

While I disagree with anti-polygamy laws in principle, I agree with this ruling as far as it relates to religious sects and the trend in relationship dynamics of those pushing for polygamous marriage. If polygamous marriage were legalised in Canada, very likely over 90% of those entering into such marriages would be heterosexual men marrying numerous heterosexual women and more than likely would involve those from fundamentalist Christian and Muslim sects.

The fact that such marriages would overwhelmingly involve one man marrying several women, really is what worries me. Although theoretically one woman could marry multiple men, one man multiple men or one woman multiple women and so on, that likely wouldn't be the case. I think that such a law would only largely be used to continue the oppression of women, and the propagation of the idea of women as either sexual play things or as baby making machines, or both (in the case of these sects). As such, I do think that such a law would be a danger to Canadian women, until society reaches such a point at which we no longer see polygamous marriage as one heterosexual man with multiple wives.

Whether those women feel "happy" in those relationships or not, isn't the issue for me. I do believe that Canadian law has the duty to promote women's rights and to protect Canadian women at large from practices which restrict or harm their rights. A woman can claim to be "happy" in these marriages, but it means very little. Very often people in oppressive situations do not speak up, especially when religion comes into play. Instead of supporting antiquated religious beliefs, Canada should be promoting education that informs women of their equal footing with men, of their ability to exist as an entity separate from men, to ultimately detach "being a woman" from relating with men. Still, too many Canadian women define themselves in relation to men/boyfriends/husbands/fathers. Religious freedom should only be allowed to go so far, but should not extend to threaten the rights of women or any other marginalized group.

[Soon]

[betenoire]

The first "it gets better" ever:

[betenoire]

Also:

[EnderD_503]

Originally Posted by HowSoonIsNow

It took the Liberal gov't long enough to act on it, but finally it seems they are starting to take some kind of responsibility in making it better for lgbtq students in Ontario Catholic schools. Unfortunately, some of their comments on upholding the potential new legislature seems a bit wishy-washy. Catholic schools are still claiming that the portion of the legislature that says "gay-straight alliance or other names" means that they can force students to use another names. Then they have the nerve to come back and say that they don't have a ban on queer langauge. The Liberals really need to be sure to put their foot down on this one and make it explicitly clear in the legislature that no Ontario school can ban or discourage the use of terms like "gay" or "queer" in student clubs. This would be a good time for the Ontario government to put an end to this bullshit.

[Soon]

Just turned on the tv to The Fifth Estate -- an investigation into the RCMP and sexual harassment.

Thought some of you others might want to catch it.

[Truly Scrumptious]

The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women is going to conduct an inquiry into the murders and disappearances of Aboriginal women and girls across Canada.

It's about time. Sad though that this is coming from an external source . . . just another example of the shameful treatment of First Nations people in Canada.

http://www.nwac.ca/media/release/13-12-11

[Linus]

Speaking of Canadian sexiness, if you haven't read [ame="http://www.amazon.com/How-Be-Canadian-Will-Ferguson/dp/1550548913/ref=tmm_pap_title_1"]How to be a Canadian[/ame] by the Ferguson brothers you should! OMG! It's funny! I picked it up on my recent weekend trip to Montreal.

[Truly Scrumptious]

From Leadnow.ca:
Painful as it is to read this kind of searing critique in a foreign paper, we're glad the Guardian has been doing such a good job of holding our government accountable. Quote: "The response of the Canadian government to the emergency in Attawapiskat shows why indigenous communities are in trouble."

Full article here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...=FBCNETTXT9038

(Let’s not forget that in 2004, Harper sent a letter to an Ontario native organization congratulating them on Republic Day, which is actually celebrated in India to mark the date when their constitution took effect.
He wrote: "On the occasion of India's national day, I salute the Indian community for long-standing contributions to the economic and cultural vitality of our wonderful country”.)

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Truly Scrumptious

"The response of the Canadian government to the emergency in Attawapiskat shows why indigenous communities are in trouble."


(Let’s not forget that in 2004, Harper sent a letter to an Ontario native organization congratulating them on Republic Day, which is actually celebrated in India to mark the date when their constitution took effect.
He wrote: "On the occasion of India's national day, I salute the Indian community for long-standing contributions to the economic and cultural vitality of our wonderful country”.)

LOL. Yes, perhaps Harper is still confused about the difference between the people of India and First Nations. That would explain his failure to act. He sent money to the Indians. More likely it is reflective of how he actually feels about Canada's Aboriginal Peoples in general. Hard to believe such a limited, unfeeling, pompous ass became Prime Minister of Canada.

[Truly Scrumptious]

[Cid]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

LOL. Yes, perhaps Harper is still confused about the difference between the people of India and First Nations. That would explain his failure to act. He sent money to the Indians. More likely it is reflective of how he actually feels about Canada's Aboriginal Peoples in general. Hard to believe such a limited, unfeeling, pompous ass became Prime Minister of Canada.

Seems to be the common denominator of politicians, don't you think?

[Truly Scrumptious]

[Truly Scrumptious]

Some of the highlights:

He did his best to avoid journalists at the summit, subjected them to security searches, and then held a teleconference call that required Canadian journalists in South Africa to phone an Ottawa call centre to ask him questions.

http://www.canada.com/Environment+mi...433/story.html

[Truly Scrumptious]

If there were two things that defined 2011, they were the Arab Spring uprisings that threw the Middle East into turmoil and the Occupy Wall Street protests in North America and Europe. But Canadian Senator Romeo Dallaire, the former U.N. general lionized for leading the besieged peacekeepers during the Rwandan Genocide, says a third revolution connects the two movements — the communications revolution.

“We are in an era of conflict with a certain world disorder, a time of revolutions, with the communications revolution being one,” Dallaire tells Huffington Post Canada.

Dallaire begs to differ with author Malcolm Gladwell's argument in his essay “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not be Tweeted," that technology and social media play no real role in high-risk activism,

“It's starting. We are entering an era where the revolution in communications is empowering the under-25s and they're able to start realizing that they can coalesce in real-time around the world. They’re also getting more information about what's going on around them, whether they want it or not, because it's all being punched out every minute,” he says, adding that their power extends beyond protests.



Full article here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/12...n_1172570.html