In a decision hailed widely by those who live a safe distance from The Trade, Canada’s Supreme Court reaffirms that Canadians pelvic freedoms shall not be infringed.
Just don’t yell “whore” in a firehouse.
In a decision hailed widely by those who live a safe distance from The Trade, Canada’s Supreme Court reaffirms that Canadians pelvic freedoms shall not be infringed.
Just don’t yell “whore” in a firehouse.
“The new rules will either be social liberalism or social libertarianism. Make your choice and shut up.” — LAS, December 20, 2013 2:42 PM
The cataclysmic collision of cacaphonous contradiction continues: too funny, really.
I’d only add this to your comments: I’m guessing, of course, but it seems doubtful to me that Parliament will act, at least without some kind of federal-provincial agreement, and then in only a very small way. The judgment seems to infer just that, both by its implied invitation not to act, and by the time limit for declaration.
This judgment offers a two-fer for Harper, right off the bat: it allows him to re-emphasize his connection with the libertarian/de-regulationist end of the outfit (aren’t we all that way, on same level?), while at the same time allowing for a diminution of the role of the federal state in matters for which it is ill-suited (the myth of the all-powerful federal state in Canada is a Trudeau, Sr. contrivance, with the occasional reminder whiff, from Jr., to which small c conservative correctly alludes). Quite apart from which, as we were discussing the other night, Harper’s agenda is much too large to get bogged down on something like this.
This decision follows on from the national securities regulator decision, from which Ottawa, Ontario and BC, so far, have started to move forward, by federal-provincial agreement in principle. The real revolution that needs to happen in this country is at the provincial level, particularly in Ontario and Quebec. To the extent to which this decision puts pressure on provincial governments to come with one or more regulatory regime(s) which protects property owners (either from wind turbines or brothels or over-zealous reporters, etc.), which The Phantom correctly advocates, so much the better.
” … just what it is that separates western civilization from Islamic extremist barbarism”
Does a society that slaughters millions of innocent unborn every year have the moral right to call another society barbaric?
“Legal businesses need licenses, inspections, regulations, insurance, can be sued and are subject to union organization.”
Yes, and so – irony of ironies – one of the unintended consequences of government-regulated legal prostitution is likely to be illegal prostitution.
Rizwan >
“Does a society that slaughters millions of innocent unborn every year have the moral right to call another society barbaric?”
True, but you can’t stereotype all of Western Society because of a few Liberal Extremists.
What about all of us moderates that speak out?
You actually hear from western moderates don’t you?
“It was established centuries ago as a general principle that government had no business enforcing moral values.”
Should public nudity, incestuous marriages and polyamory be legalized?
CGH >
“At least half of them think that it’s the business of government to enforce morality.”
Wrong, it’s not the enforcement of morality that drives many conservative/ Libertarian views; it’s about damage control and the fallout of Liberal self gratifications.
I have NO problem with legalized prostitution or legalizing drugs. My problem is with the fallout, and the Liberal contention that I have NO rights to protect myself and family from it.
You give conservatives the right to protect their homes and communities with Castle Laws, Concealed Carry, and Stand Your Ground, and I will guarantee you that you will have far more “right wing” support to go legally f*ck you brains out with crack whores and drug addicts.
David, I think your remarks are spot-on. Is this about growing the national economy? Hardly. It’s a liberal social issue. I agree with you; the chance of the PM going here with significant new legislation, particularly if it’s perceived or can be MADE to be perceived in any way repressive, is ZERO. It’s built for a let-the-provinces-and cities-decide matter. Totally blows the left out of the water for using this as a wedge issue, and dumps it in the laps of the provinces.
There is a precedent. Canada’s abortion laws were overthrown decades ago. No legislation of any kind replaced them. What was the result? Essentially no change except for an end to back-alley abortionists. The rate of abortion was unchanged.
Same thing will happen here. Streetwalking will diminish with the canning of the common bawdy house ban (it will never disappear entirely). Public health will be somewhat improved with better average working conditions, abuse might go down slightly, and government will have a new source of tax revenue.
Pretty much it’s wins all round except for the morally outraged.
How many of you are enjoying a government job or pension?
We cant afford to criminalize pot and prostitution any more.. Its a make work net loss of billions of dollars a year.. Turning that into a make work net gain of billions a year is necessary to keep the lights on..
Its all connected and cuts are cuts no matter how you look at it..
Look at the post office.. Its our damn right to get junk mail stuffed in our mail boxes for 10 million dollars a day we dont have.. Think of the jobs / tradition of it all.. Again and again we hit the wall with no cost saving solution in sight..
Just pass the knife along, thank you very much.. We are far to important to have to change with the times..
Cue the women and children and play a sad song..
So this non story boils down to can our prisons, courts and police manage a lighter case load? The answer is yes..
Expecting government to bankrupt itself (and its employees) to uphold outdated unnecessary moral based laws so you can feel good about something you never think about anyway is, asking for the knife..
As a BONUS the hard core radical Muslims will choose to settle somewhere else.. Saving our precious western culture with all of our established political chess pieces still in play.. This can not be understated..
Its not a bad solution, its the only solution. With the stroke of a pen we can turn around a number of things and buy time for the future..
Stated simply, Jay, the best law in this case is no law at all. I can think of lots of better things to do with unnecessary vice squad cops. Like going after real thugs and criminals.
Its human trafficking, same as slavery.
“Everything I disapprove of is slavery” -typical SoContard.
Should public nudity, incestuous marriages and polyamory be legalized?
Sure why not.
“The rate of abortion was unchanged.”
Rate of abortion in Canada has significantly increased since 1988, from approx 70k per year to a little over 100k per year- an increase of about 50%. Legalization has lead to increased numbers of abortions, and in response to this some provinces have stopped tracking abortion numbers giving the illusion that the abortion rate has not increased.
LAS >
Should public nudity, incestuous marriages and polyamory be legalized?
“Sure why not”.
Should marrying children, beating wives, and hanging gays be legalized?
……….”Sure why not that’s why I defend pedophiles and Al Qaeda on every SDA thread I comment on.” – LAS
Please read my above posts I absolutely agree with you, I have given up on trying to keep this ship between the moral marker bouys, so now all I want is my own private health insurance (so I’m not paying for abortions,crack needles,and all of the other garbage that comes along with a no consequence society)
And the right to carry open or concealed to protect my life,property and family . It’s all I want ! And yes even as a Christian while even though morally I am against legal drugs prostitution Ect Ect. I won’t fight it anymore I just want to be able to vacate society asi see fit.
This is the adult’s table, tard. Go back to the short bus please.
@KNIGH99 lol you make me laugh,
It’s so true Las is so funny when it she tries to argue with the big boys.
Las would love polygamy,incest,hanging gays what ever it’s all good to Las. All the while asserting her intelligence and moral superiority only to put her ignorance on full display!!
That’s why I love the comedic ammunition LAS & Phil bring to SDA. Otherwise it’d just be a boring round table and our ideas wouldn’t get out there like they do!
They are useful idiots for everyone, not just the Left, so learn to use them like the dirty little whores (pardon the pun) they were already made into for our own purposes.
I wouldn’t be surprised if LAS supports legalizing child porn. Why can’t a 16 yo consent to being in showbiz if a heroin addicted 19 year old can consent to working out of a pimp’s garage? “Everything I disapprove of is slavery” dontchaknow.
They (Las,Phil) remind me of that little dog that has a hump toy doll , you know when the dog gets excited it either humps the dolls head or just thrashes the doll about. Yeah Las and Phil are the doll , it’s orifices have been penetrated and violated and it has been physically beaten more that the hookers we’re are all arguing about . Not to mention they are more stained that Michael moores glitch after a chilli eating contest!!
I have to recycle this line from The Chopping Blog on the Canadian Landowner Alliance site:
“I hope the first whorehouse in Ottawa opens beside the Supreme Court. Oh, wait a minute, I guess its already there.”
You’re ignoring the increase in Canadian population from 26 million to 33 million over the same period. This makes the per capita rate much less than you imply. My source is StatsCan, what’s yours?
“This judgment offers a two-fer for Harper…”
I’d go a step further. PM Harper should just walk away from the whole thing. Let the provinces and – more importantly – the municipalities worry about this mess.
It’s a local, not a national (i.e., federal) problem.
Agreed, JJM. As for the municipalities, that’s why zoning laws exist. Such establishments would be a commercial enterprise, not residential.
Abortion per capita is a meaningless statistic when you consider that the majority of the population is physically incapable of getting pregnant. What is significant is number of abortions per birth, which measures how many women got pregnant and chose to have an abortion instead of giving birth.
1988 births: 376,755
1988 abortions: 72,693
Rate: 0.193
2000 births: 327,882
2000 abortions: 105,454
Rate: 0.322
So around a 66% increase in the rate of abortion.
Stats Can, Canadian Institute for Health Information
And that’s using low numbers for abortion, given that only abortions in hospitals are reported, and that some provinces either underreport or don’t report at all.
You know why so many prostitutes are drug addicts? It’s not because prostitution is illegal, it’s because drug addicts make better slaves than employees. Because of their addiction, drug addicts are unreliable, dishonest, and not very hard working, which prevents them from obtaining otherwise legitimate employment. But at the same time they will suffer any kind of abuse in order to feed their habit. That’s why sex work will always connected to crime and drugs, and why this repeal have no impact on the actual victims of prostitution. The women who want to sell sex from their homes because they have daddy issues aren’t the problem, it’s the people who use them as an example of sex work and how prostitution isn’t really such a bad thing and how we should all just get over it.