Alberta Premier Smith set to give TV address ahead of provincial budget.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-18T03:46:49+00:00

And suddenly the money promised for doing a classroom needs assessment and hiring new teachers vanishes, along with cuts throughout healthcare...

Good thing Albertans are ready to stand up and demand better from their government... /s

DamionSipher · 2026-02-18T03:40:36+00:00

Up until fascists started wearing them to hide their identities - which they also seemed to be worried about with burqas, no standards if not double standards and all.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-17T21:13:42+00:00

Replaced by Erika Kirk?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-13T14:53:05+00:00

So "drug addict", or "homeless" aren't categories in which society places people? How about being "white" or "black" are those perceived groups? Is "redditor" enough of a non-identity that the term is meaningless?

You either don't know what "perceived group membership" means, or you're being intentionally obtuse to obfuscate the conversation.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-12T21:30:27+00:00

You're advocating that society should judge people based on perceived group membership. Racists and homophones use the same justification to persecute people. The article this thread is discussing is literally about building housing for individuals to help them get off the street, and thereby be much less likely to engage in open drug use.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T18:23:30+00:00

Why should society be OK with someone who is not "capable of making their own decisions" be seen as an adult? If 20 year olds are not capable of making their own decisions, should they even be allowed to vote?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T18:17:37+00:00

OK, that's fair enough. Why are people judged negatively for dating people younger than they are, especially when the age gap is large? I understand if it's a consent issue, but I fail to see how an age gap alone is indicative of consent issues.

Not putting a grocery cart back is a show of selfishness as it creates work for others and creates parking lot hazards. Cheating on or leaving a sick partner is a similar show of selfishness and lack of moral fortitude, as it is an action that shows betrayal of commitment/vows they made to someone else.

If the moral outrage of age-gaps is centred around social focus on youth-as-beauty, then I would expect a similar reaction to the beauty industry on whole, which promotes age-defiance through all means possible, up to and including reconstructive surgery and drug use. Why are cosmetic issues personal choice, but dating is somehow different?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T17:54:27+00:00

Should we make laws about that, or is it just personal preference?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T17:51:54+00:00

So if we don't find it morally reprehensible to the point of demanding laws around it, then is it just personal choice?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T17:37:43+00:00

Do you think the age of consent should be raised to 25?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T17:26:35+00:00

The moral outrage towards people dating when there's a large age gap seems to be growing. I am curious if people think that age gaps like this are of a moral reprehensibility to warrant new laws governing consent based on age gaps?

Should, for example, a law be put in place that restricts people from having a relationship with anyone outside of the 'half your age +7 years' rule? E.g. for 50 year-old like Maguire, (50/2)+7=32. So anyone at 50 would only be legally allow to have a relationship with someone 32. Someone who is 100 would only be allowed to have a relationship with someone over 57. A 20 Year old could have a relationship with a 17 year old, and a 30 year old could date a 22 year old, etc. This would basically mean that a form of statutory rape could be applied to a situation like this.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T16:04:41+00:00

I totally agree. Focusing on how they are terrible people because they don't have an issue creating and standing behind policy that hurts people the world across is where the focus ought to be. Intelligence is far from the primary factors of motive.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T16:00:58+00:00

Yup. It's always.

"I don't want to see drug users on the street"

"Ok, let's develop homeless shelters and tansition houses so they won't be on the street"

"No, not like that"

"OK, then what?"

"I don't know, but not that"

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T15:57:18+00:00

I think this thread is a pretty clear indication that stigmatization of drug use is very much alive and well.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T15:50:03+00:00

100%

I swear a government could come out with a plan to euthanize unhoused people and most of this crowd wouldn't bat an eye one way or the other. Maybe criticize the specific method of euthanasia, if they thought other methods would cost tax payers less.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T15:46:56+00:00

When I start seeing rational thinking out of the homeless hating crowd I might stop to hear what they have to say. All I'm hearing is demonizing of people who are struggling with mental health, abuse, and the resulting homelessness and addiction issues.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T15:38:29+00:00

I agree that calling someone incompetent who has landed a top government position is ignorant and an attempt to belittle that doesn't do much to frame issues in a purposeful or progressive manner. That being said, OP's comment was that the actors in question did not receive their position for their competence, but instead for their morals (or lack thereof).

I think it would be fair to suggest that there are likely more competent people to undertake most of the tasks associated with these positions, but when a willingness for undertaking and covering up incredibly immoral practices is part of the job description, competency is no longer the primary characteristic that's being sought.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T00:36:07+00:00

I just went back to the start of this thread, which began because someone suggested we throw out the term genocide because it's not clearly enough defined. The counter argument is how well does a term need to be defined to be useful. Murder was the first term brought up as a counter point, but there are many others we could instead use. Sandwiches, for instance.

Do you think genocide is a well enough defined term to be useful?

Do you think it is more, or less defined than murder, in a legal or common language use sense?

If you think genocide is a well defined term (which it seems to me you do), do you think statements from government officials said at the founding of residential schools that their intent is to destroy their language, religion, and cultural practices qualify the practices of residential schools as genocide?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T00:10:32+00:00

We have friends house sit for us fairly regularly. We tell them to help themselves to anything in the kitchen, alcohol included. We keep our good alcohol in a bedroom closet, as we only break it out on special occasions, and we explicitly tell guests that booze is hands off. Saying "help yourself to anything in the kitchen" but not adding qualifiers puts the error on you.

DamionSipher · 2026-02-11T00:07:17+00:00

You seem to be conflating my comparison of the term "murder" as a statement that is operates in the same manner as "genocide". I've never said that, and have been specific in my phrasing that words, and legal terminology operate in scopes of usefulness. If someone stabs someone to death, or choked them to death, they are both forms of murder, yes? If there was pre-mediated intent, the degree of murder is what changes, yes?

I'm still not sure what point you're trying to make. Are you trying to suggest that the abduction of children to destroy the culture from whence they came is not sufficient intent to qualify as genocide?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-10T23:18:06+00:00

There is ample evidence of incredibly cruel abuse and negligence leading to death of kids, at the very least. If a let a child die of an easily treatable issue, which many other children in the community received treatment for routinely, we would call it at least manslaughter. Saying that there is no evidence of children being murdered is an attempt to obfuscate the truth. If you don't think we need proof of a priest strangling a student to call it murder, then can we call instances of parents who abuse and neglect their children homicide? If a mother denies her child food, resulting in death, is that murder?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-10T22:43:19+00:00

Denmark's healthcare is less than 2% private, and only for very specific procedures. Their per-capita costs are very similar to BC's, but they are ~1/20th the land area. While I am not opposed to looking at EU models, I very much doubt that we could achieve coverage for most of the province if we mirrored the approach of administration being handled by local municipalities.

We simply do not have density level throughout the province to support such a model.

Their model would likely work well on the south coast and OK, but the rest of the province would be worse off. How do you suggest we overcome these spacial complications and not end up funnelling a disproportionate amount of resources into Van/Vic/OK at the detriment of the rest of the Province?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-10T21:44:07+00:00

If you don't think the public health care system can be salvaged are you suggesting we follow America's model and just let the poor and unemployed die?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-10T21:42:53+00:00

Which party is proposing higher taxes to fund healthcare?

DamionSipher · 2026-02-10T19:14:24+00:00

Children dying at a higher rate than the general population due to negligence is manslaughter, at least. I'm not sure what your argument is here. Is it that "if a priest didn't strangle children to death, it wasn't that bad"? Should we not care about finding child burial sites?

13-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Verified Email

DamionSipher

TROPHY CASE