Pierre Poilievre said that female spaces should be used “exclusively for females.”*
That’s a radical thing to say.
But it’s not radical because it’s insane; it’s radical because the leaders in our society are insane. Poilievre’s statement – a statement all of us believe – is outrageous, simply because the government he sits in is outrageous.
For example, Mr. Justin Trudeau said “shame” in response to Poilievre’s remark, but that’s only because Mr. Trudeau is such a shameful individual.**
“From where,” Trudeau might ask, “do you get the idea that women’s washrooms should only be used for women?” The answer is very simple: In the name “women’s washroom.” After all, if the washroom was for males and females, it wouldn’t be called a “woman’s” washroom.
Then again, the Liberals and other leftists are pursuing the abolition of gender. They’re doing so because they’re anti-human, and want to turn humans into aliens without humanity.
Thus, as far as we’re concerned, the Conservative party can, and should, adopt a stronger social conservativism stance. Mr. Maxime Bernier and his PPC exercise the most principled values of all the parties, but they’re currently removed from power. I’m not endorsing the Conservative party of Canada, or any party; I am saying we have to play the hand we’re dealt, and whether we like it or not, the Conservatives are His Majesty’s official opposition.
But over these last years, the Federal Conservative Party has lost its right to be called “conservative.”
Mr. Erin O’toole and Mr. Andrew Sheer were weak leaders with weaker constitutions. Their adoption of social progressivism betrayed them, and rightfully so. There’s nothing worse than “lite” products. Lite foods are disappointing compared to their full-fat counterparts, and lite parties are cheap knockoffs of their opposition. The Conservatives neutered themselves, and turned into a “liberal-lite” party without morality or law.
However, there exists a difference today compared to even five years ago, and it’s not our politicians. Instead, the difference lies in the fact that we’re more involved in politics than ever before, and that’s a good thing.
Mr. Poilievre, like all politicians, needs a constant “push” from his base to adopt and defend social conservatism. If Canadians fail to maintain such pressure, the Conservatives will inevitably trend deeper into progressivism.
Economic reform is welcome. Lower taxes, smaller government, and more capitalism, are necessary. But all of these changes are meaningless without real moral reform. If we have economic reform, while still allowing men to creep in women’s washrooms, and children to be mutilated by modern eugenicists, who cares whether we pay $200 less to the government per year, or not?
It certainly won’t appease the Lord Jesus Christ. It might be that the conservatives cut taxes by 10%, but what will their defence be at The Judgement when Almighty God asks, “What did you do to protect innocents in washrooms they thought were safe?”
But let us take the log out of our own eye before examining the eyes of others. Forget about the Conservatives for a moment. They’ll have to answer for their actions, just like every man. What will our defence be if we do nothing while Mr. Trudeau enables perverts to prey on those the Lord Jesus says inherit the Kingdom of Heaven? *https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/poilievre-says-female-spaces-should-be-exclusively-for-females-not-for-biological-males **https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTQYiRCotqk
Mr. POILIEVRE Has again proved himself a deceitful man. Well he says he wants women to be safe in a ladies room at the same time he supports the murder of a female in what should be the worlds safest room ! The WOMB!
Poilievre has voted in favour of woke agenda in the past. I think people need to heed what Poilievres own father said when PP changed his mind on same sex marriage. At the time his own dad who is gay stated “ there is not a bar low enough that Pierre would not crawl under to earn a vote” Pierre does not mention that his dad is gay and that is fine but after elected that…