There are 200 women behind the 2.4-metre-high barbed-wire fences at the Grand Valley Institute.Most are the products of shattered and abusive homes, violent relationships, drugs and bad choices.Unloved and looking for redemption.Heather Mason was one of t
sounds like the articles says that the female inmates are there because they were a victim - but what about the crime that put them there?? If the presences of an x-male prisoner is putting them in a position of dealing with interlopers - are they saying the females maybe should be released - kinda what I am hearing - just sayin
"cobrass" said If the presences of an x-male prisoner is putting them in a position of dealing with interlopers - are they saying the females maybe should be released - kinda what I am hearing - just sayin
No. It does not seem they are saying that but if I was the King Of Kanata, I would seriously consider releasing them all as a preferrable strategy to dealing with this madness.
Sounds entirely like something a social and ideological liberal would put into place as policy simply to adhere to dogma. Just like social and ideological conservatives there's never been a SL who's ever given a damn about the consequences others end up paying for their insane ideas.
From now on I'll be calling myself a social libertarian instead. It has better connotations for personal liberty, with an emphasis on live-and-let-live, and has nothing to do with bad government ideas that spring from the liberal brain. Except for insanest of the socially insane I can't think of anyone who'd support a recklessly stupid idea like housing vulnerable women in confined quarters with dangerous non-op trannies who are obviously playing some kind of a game with the system to keep them out of the male prisons. A libertarian wouldn't allow this. But a modern Canadian liberal certainly would allow this, no matter who gets hurt by it. Turns out the logo of the party next to the name you vote for actually has some negatives attached to it, eh?
"Thanos" said Sounds entirely like something a social and ideological liberal would put into place as policy simply to adhere to dogma. Just like social and ideological conservatives there's never been a SL who's ever given a damn about the consequences others end up paying for their insane ideas.
From now on I'll be calling myself a social libertarian instead. It has better connotations for personal liberty, with an emphasis on live-and-let-live, and has nothing to do with bad government ideas that spring from the liberal brain. Except for insanest of the socially insane I can't think of anyone who'd support a recklessly stupid idea like housing vulnerable women in confined quarters with dangerous non-op trannies who are obviously playing some kind of a game with the system to keep them out of the male prisons. A libertarian wouldn't allow this. But a modern Canadian liberal certainly would allow this, no matter who gets hurt by it. Turns out the logo of the party next to the name you vote for actually has some negatives attached to it, eh?
(So, that'll never happen)
If the presences of an x-male prisoner is putting them in a position of dealing with interlopers - are they saying the females maybe should be released - kinda what I am hearing - just sayin
From now on I'll be calling myself a social libertarian instead. It has better connotations for personal liberty, with an emphasis on live-and-let-live, and has nothing to do with bad government ideas that spring from the liberal brain. Except for insanest of the socially insane I can't think of anyone who'd support a recklessly stupid idea like housing vulnerable women in confined quarters with dangerous non-op trannies who are obviously playing some kind of a game with the system to keep them out of the male prisons. A libertarian wouldn't allow this. But a modern Canadian liberal certainly would allow this, no matter who gets hurt by it. Turns out the logo of the party next to the name you vote for actually has some negatives attached to it, eh?
Sounds entirely like something a social and ideological liberal would put into place as policy simply to adhere to dogma. Just like social and ideological conservatives there's never been a SL who's ever given a damn about the consequences others end up paying for their insane ideas.
From now on I'll be calling myself a social libertarian instead. It has better connotations for personal liberty, with an emphasis on live-and-let-live, and has nothing to do with bad government ideas that spring from the liberal brain. Except for insanest of the socially insane I can't think of anyone who'd support a recklessly stupid idea like housing vulnerable women in confined quarters with dangerous non-op trannies who are obviously playing some kind of a game with the system to keep them out of the male prisons. A libertarian wouldn't allow this. But a modern Canadian liberal certainly would allow this, no matter who gets hurt by it. Turns out the logo of the party next to the name you vote for actually has some negatives attached to it, eh?
Agreed.