Team Empathy and Inclusion are attempting to destroy people’s lives when they won’t bend the knee to their ideological bullshit.
“Although the Northern Ontario municipal leader vowed not to honour a $5,000 fine the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) levied against him for comments surrounding town council not approving a motion to approve Pride month, he wasn’t given a choice.
In fact, the winner of the judgement that McQuaker called “extortion” has boasted it has already gone into his bank account to collect the money.“Sure, sex is great, but have you ever garnished your mayor’s bank account after he publicly refused to comply with a Tribunal’s order to pay damages?” states a Borderland Pride post on Facebook.
It seems like they are enjoying this.Council may not have let them raise a rainbow flag for Pride month but they are planting a flag in the ground to show Emo is their town.
“Mayor McQuaker’s comments in the Toronto Sun and other media were very clear that he did not respect nor intend to comply with the Tribunal’s orders,” Borderland Pride said in an email. “Consequently, it was apparent he would not voluntarily make payment of the damages ordered. We took immediate action to garnish his bank account.”
What McQuaker told the Sun was, “I utterly refuse to pay the $5,000 because that’s extortion” and also said he would not partake in an Ontario Human Rights Commission re-education course.
On ensuring he did pay, Borderland Pride said, “The garnishment was issued by the court and delivered to the CIBC in Emo, which is the only bank in that community” and ”there is no hearing or application to issue a notice of garnishment – it is a service provided at the court counter or online once a person has an order for the payment of money.”Borderland Pride also wrote, “Orders of the Tribunal can be enforced in the same manner as any civil judgment for the payment of money. We intend to ensure the Tribunal’s orders are complied with.”
Turns out Mayor McQuaker is not in charge there – Borderland Pride is.
Cancel culture is cancelling this mayor and digging into his personal savings too. On a weak premise that there is discrimination of LGBT people there, the enforcement is harsher than most violent criminals receive. It seems like a heavy-handed, undemocratic move, not to mention a violation of personal finances, and cruel and unusual punishment.”
“There is no decision so far on the status of the $10,000 fine HRTO slapped on the Township of Emo for the 2020 decision by town council to vote three to two against granting a request for there to be a Pride month in the village of just 1,400 people. And Borderland Pride said they have so far not garnished the township as they await that decision.”
“I will not be commenting until next Wednesday (council’s next meeting) when we will make a statement,” McQuaker said Friday, adding his “knuckles have been rapped” this week.”
I’m tired of the activist bullshit. But using the state to penalize a village for a decision made democratically is just beyond the pale.
This isn’t my Canada – where rule of law and democracy take a backseat to the fucking hurt feelings of LGBTQ+ activists. This is overreach and must be reversed at once.
Soon or later your false arguments and assumptions will hit the wall known as reality. It has been too long a time coming in the case of the ideological transgender social contagion that has plagued our society. When your positions are risible bullshit – which the transgender ones are – the truth will be hard to take, as it will take you and your worldview crashing back down to the plane of reality we all share.
A ideological captured female lawyer at ACLU is living the return to reality right now.
“The Supreme Court has been hearing a case over a law in Tennessee that restricts puberty blockers for children. Judging by the early reports, it doesn’t seem to have turned out quite as the trans extremists had intended. Bringing these cases to court – and allowing the public to hear the crazy arguments made in favour of irreversible and risky medical treatments for children – is surely one of the most effective ways to collapse the entire gender ideology house of cards. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and its trans-identified lawyer, Chase Strangio, have sought to argue that it is discriminatory under the constitution for Tennessee to impose the ban. Their case hinges on the idea that it violates the 14th amendment, which bars discrimination based on sex. It is surely not sex under scrutiny in this case, however, but gender identity. And a single question during Wednesday’s hearings blew up the ACLU’s whole argument – as well as exposing the lunacy of gender ideology more generally.
Conservative justice Samuel Alito asked Strangio whether transgender status is immutable. In other words, is it something that cannot be changed? “I think that the record shows that the discordance between a person’s birth sex and gender identity has a strong biological basis and would satisfy an immutability test,” replied Strangio. But how can that be? Isn’t the trans cabal’s entire belief system built on the idea that gender identity is “fluid” – that an individual’s feelings should be promoted above the facts of their biology, even to the extent that people can legitimately identify as a different gender on different days of the week? And how does Strangio explain the growing numbers of detransitioners? Does he think that they are now in denial about the “discordance” between their “birth sex and gender identity”? Or would he prefer that they just kept quiet?
The writer Ben Appel was part of the anti-gender ideology crowd gathered outside the court on Wednesday. He grew up in a Christian fundamentalist community and suffered extreme anti-gay prejudice. He eventually escaped and ended up in a cult at the progressive university he attended. “For years, the valid concerns and heart-wrenching testimonies of detransitioners, parents, paediatricians, therapists and whistleblowers have gone largely ignored by medical associations and the activist organisations they bankroll,” he said. “And clinicians continue to mislead parents and subject their children to this profound medical harm.”
In an interview with CNN, Strangio asserted that removing parents’ right to put their children on an irreversible medical pathway was “sex discrimination” despite the fact that transgender-identified people rely on gender identity. “Our argument is that it treats people differently because of their sex. And therefore, the court has to treat it like all other forms of sex discrimination. And that’s why it’s unconstitutional,” said Strangio.
When asked whether, if their case won, it would have a knock-on effect in allowing men who identify as women to claim constitutionally-based access to women’s bathrooms, locker rooms and sports, Strangio not only denied that this would happen but said: “I obviously disagree with that premise that allowing transgender women into women’s sports or bathrooms is a threat to women.” And there we have it. The safety of women and girls is less important than the feelings of men. The World Professional Association for Transgender Health commissioned Johns Hopkins University to perform a systematic evidence review on the use of so-called gender medicine for children, which it suppressed publication of when it concluded the treatment was harmful.
Justice Alito added that the Cass Report found no evidence that gender medicine prevents suicide, to which Strangio replied: “Completed suicide is thankfully and admittedly rare.” Strangio just told the world what was already known. A movement which threatens suicide if it fails to get what it wants is a cult. Courts of justice are currently the only places where gender ideologues are obliged to answer questions, and as a consequence, the public can hear the madness and danger it entails. I hope that, if the ACLU loses, the next step will be criminal charges against those medics and parents that cause children irreversible harm.”
“James Lindsay presented a compelling critique of critical social justice and its ideological foundation in critical theory. He argued that this worldview fundamentally rejects objective truth, reason, and evidence-based methods, which are essential for genuine progress. According to Lindsay, critical theorists prioritize “strategic” theories over true or false ones, seeking to advance political agendas rather than to understand reality.
Drawing on examples from feminist and social justice literature, Lindsay illustrated how critical theory undermines fields like engineering, climate science, and education by prioritizing social power over truth. He contended that while these disciplines traditionally rely on rigorous methods to solve problems, critical theory disregards such rigor, treating knowledge as a mere tool for enforcing power dynamics. For Lindsay, this ideological shift threatens progress, as it ignores that “reality is the thing you run into when your beliefs are false.”
Ultimately, Lindsay called for a return to evidence-based inquiry and the liberal systems that have historically driven human advancement. By defending reason, scientific method, and open discourse, he argued, society can continue to make meaningful progress rather than regress into a cynicism that treats truth as a mere strategy for political ends.
Viewers will find this talk interesting not just for its contents but also for the glimpse back in time by five years, which allows them to see how the views expressed have matured and developed over the intervening time.”
What is ad block? It is an application that, at your discretion blocks out advertising so you can browse the internet for content as opposed to ads. If you do not have it, get it here so you can enjoy my blog without the insidious advertising.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…