Last Post Thread

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Franklin Graham can just stay where he is and leave us the hell alone. He is the LAST person we should be taking advice from.
 
Graeme Decarie said:
How could it be otherwise?
Click to expand...

I think maybe you are confusing the window for a portrait someone painted of you.

e7462537cc5852dd74f9cf51d56917b7.jpg
 
Jae said:
How so?
Click to expand...

Holographic universe. Every part of it contains the image of the whole. A (rather controversial but not entirely improbable) scientific theory that explains the idea of us being in God's image rather neatly (at least for certain values of the variable "God").
 
Mendalla said:
Franklin Graham can just stay where he is and leave us the hell alone. He is the LAST person we should be taking advice from.
Click to expand...

One thing I didn't know is that the government can now take kids away from their parents if Mom and Dad don't allow the kids to have surgeries.
 
A driver is arranged for tomorrow and the plan is to do the deliveries in one day...the elastic cord is in and I can pick it up tomorrow...a friend is going into Red Deer this afternoon and will pick up some books I ordered from a health store.
 
Jae said:
One thing I didn't know is that the government can now take kids away from their parents if Mom and Dad don't allow the kids to have surgeries.
Click to expand...

Actually, I didn't realize they would even do the surgeries early enough for it to be an issue. Hormone blockers, sure, but not the actual surgery. Then again, I'm hardly the expert (@RitaTG has that honour here). I had always assumed you'd have to be physically fairly mature so would be old enough to consent yourself.
 
Jae said:
There should be an age of consent. Surely they're not planning to take young children away from their parents.
Click to expand...

There is one. If you're old enough to consent to other medical treatments, you're old enough to consent to this one. However, in Ontario, there is no fixed age of consent for any treatment right now. The physician has to decide if you have the capacity to consent no matter what your age and if they believe you do, they must get your consent rather than your parents. Which could, of course, work both ways in this case. A child could give consent against their parents' wishes and the physician would have to accept that if they determined the child had "capacity to consent", but if the parents wanted them to be treated and the child refused, the child's refusal could also trump the parents' consent. So taking the kids away may be a matter of protecting their right to consent to medical treatment here and could apply to other medical procedures as well.

| Consent to Treatment | Policy | Policies & Publications | College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

Many other jurisdictions use 16 which seems reasonable to me if there is to be a fixed age.
 
Last is the end of a cycle that shall begin again at first. Thus last is first and first is last and ... oh crap, I'm confused. But I'm also LAST!

Or is that first??
 
Jae said:
One thing I didn't know is that the government can now take kids away from their parents if Mom and Dad don't allow the kids to have surgeries.
Click to expand...

I suspect that there is more to an apprehension by the Crown than that.

You are no doubt aware that the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies has had jurisdiction to remove children from parental custody if situation warrants it right? Be it for reasons of abuse or neglect, Children may be seized and placed in protective custody until such time as the parents satsify the apprehending agency that there was no reason and/or the reason no longer exists/has been corrected.

Warrants for apprehension need to be signed off on by a Justice of the Peace at minimum. Which means that the Children's Aid Society has presented a Justice of the Peace with sufficient cause to sign the warrant.

The primary rationale, which does not need to be proven aforehand, is the protection of the child and warrants are typically not released until a representative of the Children's Aid Society has submitted a sworn affidavit to the Justice of the Peace who will ultimately issue the warrant.

There are actually limits on who the CAS can apprehend. Children 16 year of age and lower may be seized when CAS believes that they are in danger. Children 17 and 18 years of age may be seized (with that child's consent but not without it).

DSM V discusses Gender Reassignment Surgery as one possible solution to Gender Identity Disorder. Bear in mind that DSM V suggests no surgical solution be availed upon prior to the individual completing Puberty.

This makes an apprehension by the CAS for the sole reason that a family will not permit their child to undergo Gender Reassignment Surgery very unlikely for a number of reasons. Not the least of which is that access to the surgery is not considered a matter of life or death.and individuals who qualify for Gender Reassignment Surgery tend to be older than the age at which CAS can remove them from parental care with or without consent of the child.

I suspect that this claim is not supported by the legislation.

I've read the CBN article and find it very dismal journalism. Claims made about the legislation without references to the actual legislation proving the claims are warranted. Dr. Mark Yarhouse is quoted but not to support the claim made by Graham. Yarhouse's quote simply provides a brief summary of the incidence of Gender Dysphoria in general population.

The other "expert" interviewed is Tanya Granic Allen who is President of Ontario's Parents as First Educators. A trip to PAFE's website shows that they are part of the opposition to the revamped Ontario Health curriculum. That they include links to Breitbart and LifeSite.News. I suspect that they share much ideology with the Campaign Life Coalition (both are ostensibly Roman Catholic advocacy groups) hopefully PAFE is not as truth aversive as the Campaign Life Coalition has proven to be.

At any rate I believe Mr. Graham is bearing false witness with his allegations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top