Edmonton mother and soldier charged with arson and attempted murder of her three children
Chantal Condie, a 41-year-old Edmonton mother and corporal at CFB Edmonton, has been charged with arson and the attempted murder of her three children following her husband’s divorce of her.
The incident occurred in July 2015 but wasn’t taken to court until August of this year.
Lawyer John Carpay is president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF.ca).
Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau declared in 1969 that “there’s no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation,” and that the government should ignore “what’s done in private between adults.” On that basis, his Liberal government proceeded to remove sodomy from the Criminal Code.
Today, 50 years later, some Canadians believe that government should be keenly interested in “what’s done in private between adults”—this time not in bedrooms but in the offices of psychologists, on therapists’ couches, and in private counselling sessions with clergy at mosques, synagogues, churches and temples.
A proposed ban on “conversion therapy” in Edmonton is not limited to discredited practices such as shock therapy attempting to change a person’s sexual orientation. Rather, it is worded so broadly that it invites the government into every psychologist’s office, every therapy session, and every pastoral or spiritual counselling session that a religious leader might have with a member of her or his congregation.
If passed by Edmonton’s City Council, Bylaw 19061 would make it illegal to offer or provide “counselling or behaviour modification techniques, administration or prescription of medication, or any other purported treatment, service, or tactic used for the objective of changing a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or gender preference, or eliminating or reducing sexual attraction or sexual behaviour between persons of the same sex.”
Providing and promoting “gender-affirming surgery or any service related to gender-affirming surgery” would be the only legal choice left available under Bylaw 19061.
Bylaw 19061 applies not just to doctors, psychologists, counsellors and psychiatrists, but also to pastors, priests, rabbis, imams and all religious leaders. The “business” prohibited by Bylaw 19061 includes non-profits “however organized or formed” and includes every “profession” or “calling” without an exemption for clergy.
Bylaw 19061 addresses practices that are governed not by politicians, but by the various professional associations that accredit doctors, psychologists, counsellors, pharmacists and other professionals. For example, the “administration or prescription of medication” is governed by the College of Physicians and Surgeons, not by the 13 politicians who currently run Edmonton.
Based on information posted on the City of Edmonton website, neither Mayor Don Iveson nor any of the 12 Councillors appear to have any formal education, expertise or credentials in psychology, psychiatry, medicine or pastoral care.
Bylaw 19061 targets private conversations between consenting adults about sexual orientation, gender identity, expression and preference: conversations to which no government should have access. This Bylaw shows no respect, or even tolerance, for “what’s done in private between adults” in regard to their personal choices about sexual feelings and sexual behaviour, and their personal choices about what spiritual, psychological and behavioural goals to set for themselves. Bylaw 19061 is another example of a “government knows best” ideology that disrespects the freedom of adults to make their own choices about their own lives.
Bylaw 19061 takes away choice from a person struggling with gender identity confusion (dysphoria), by keeping legal only the option of seeking opposite-sex hormones, and eventually surgery, in an attempt to make the body conform to thoughts and feelings. The Bylaw makes it illegal for any psychologist, clergy, psychiatrist, doctor or counsellor to assist people in overcoming their feelings of confusion, and helping them to accept and embrace their biological reality. People “de-transition” all the time because they are dissatisfied with the transgender narrative and the results of their attempts to transition sexes. Government has no lawful business attempting to prevent them from doing so.
Bylaw 19061 also takes away the individual’s choice to seek and obtain help to practice celibacy. Not every Canadian accepts the motto “If it feels good, do it.” There are religious and non-religious persons in Canada who want to change or curtail their sexual behaviour, including people who are same-sex attracted. But Bylaw 19061 makes it illegal for pastors, rabbis, imams, priests and even leaders of voluntary 12-step programs, to assist same-sex attracted people who choose to practice celibacy.
Ironically, Bylaw 19061 allows these same pastors, rabbis, imams, priests and 12-step leaders to promote celibacy to those who feel attracted to the opposite sex. Under Bylaw 19061, an unmarried Orthodox Jewish man can receive his rabbi’s encouragement not to have sex with women, but it’s illegal for this rabbi to encourage an unmarried man to abstain from having sex with other men.
Those who support Bylaw 19061 are no doubt motivated by the good intentions of helping people and preventing harm, but their arrogance is astounding. Who are they to dictate to people struggling with unwanted same-sex attractions that the only valid choice is to act on those feelings? How is it humane or compassionate to remove support from people who want to practice celibacy? The number of people who want to practice celibacy may be small, but that is irrelevant to the importance of their rights and freedoms respected by a free society. After all, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is about protecting minorities, even very small ones, and especially unpopular ones. As the Supreme Court of Canada explains it, the majority’s views have no need for constitutional protection, as they are tolerated in any event.
Bylaw 19061 is pure politics, not medicine or science. It is political grandstanding, designed to impress the LGBTQ lobby, and to promote transgender ideology.
Fifty years after Trudeau proclaimed tolerance for “what’s done in private between adults,” Bylaw 19061 tells us that it’s OK for consenting adults to engage in the sexual practices of their choice, but it’s not OK for consenting adults to discuss those sexual practices freely if their conversation heads in the “wrong” direction. The “wrong” direction, under Bylaw 19061, is that which challenges currently popular beliefs about sexuality. By making certain private conversations between consenting adults illegal, Bylaw 19061 invites the government into private spaces that ought to remain private.
Trudeau doesn't remember Canadian military spending numbers, Trump calls Canada 'slightly delinquent'
US President Donald Trump addressed media in a meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, openly name-calling Canadian military spending.
In the meeting, Trump criticized countries that do not meet the recommended threshold of military spending did not end at Canada, which is specified at 2 percent of a country’s GDP. Currently, Canada does not meet the standard, falling flat at just 1.4 percent.
When Trump was asked where Canada stood surrounding the country’s military spending specifically, Trump called Canada “slightly delinquent.”
“Slightly delinquent, I’d say Canada. But they’ll be okay. I have confidence. Just slightly delinquent. Some are major delinquent, some are way below one percent. And that’s unacceptable. Then, if something happens we’re supposed to protect them, and it’s not really fair. And it never has been fair,” said Trump.
Trump was then asked, about Canada not meeting Trump’s two percent figure, and whether Canada should have a plan to meet the two percent standard.
“We’ll put them on a payment plan, I’m sure the prime minister would love that,” joked Trump, before asking Trudeau what figure Canada was at.
“The number we talk about is a 70 percent increase,” said Trudeau, avoiding the fiture. “Including significant investments in fighter jets, significant investments in naval fleets, increasing significantly from previous governments who cut it,” stated Trudeau.
To which Trump replied, “What are you now in terms of your number?”
Trudeau then looked off-camera to an advisor, confirming the number. “1.3 percent? 1.4 percent.”
“They’re getting there. They know it’s important. Their economy’s doing well… It’s to their benefit,” said Trump, noting that Canada was a valued ally.
Construction is set to begin on the first section of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.
According to the Globe and Mail, Trans Mountain Corp. will begin to lay pipe near Edmonton as the delayed project finally moves towards construction.
The progress could help ease some friction between Alberta and the federal government, although this could once again be constrained should environmentalists begin another campaign to stop pipeline growth.
The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion will triple the current capacity and allow for more oil to make it to both export markets in Vancouver and refineries in the United States.
Currently, the multiple organizations believe Canada loses from 50-70 million per day as a result of lacking pipeline infrastructure.
Saskatchewan’s Finance Minister Donna Harpauer has said in a 2018 interview with the CBC, that if current discounts continued, her province’s industries would stand to lose about $7.4 billion in revenue.
Canadians like to think of ourselves as living in a sovereign nation, to the extent that we are in control of our own destiny and make our own decisions.
However, that has become increasingly doubtful.
An important aspect—probably the MOST important aspect—of being a sovereign country is having the ability to defend your own nation.
If you don’t have that, nothing else really matters.
For a country like Canada, having a strongly-equipped armed forces wouldn’t really be much of a challenge, considering our high relative wealth and high level of technology.
And yet, our armed forces are in a state of disrepair.
We have pilot shortages, we have recruitment problems, our air force is flying 40-year-old leftover planes other countries don’t want, our navy is miniscule, and the strategically valuable north is practically undefended.
In short, Canada lacks the ability to defend ourselves, placing the burden of defending our own citizens on our ally, the United States.
The issue is that it’s both unfair to the United States, and unfair to Canadian Citizens for our government to outsource our national defence.
It’s unfair to the U.S. because we should be pulling our own weight in our alliance with them, not putting it all on their shoulders.
And it’s unfair to Canadian Citizens because our own country is put at risk by being reliant on others to do the job we should be doing ourselves.
Unfortunately, Canada’s political establishment is unwilling to take any of this seriously.
In a dangerous world, Canada’s politicians continue to ignore the defence of our nation, just hoping that things will magically “work out” and we will never be faced with any real danger.
Of course, the world doesn’t work like that. The world is becoming increasingly dangerous, with China and Russia building up their arctic forces, and China’s military expanding at an alarming rate.
In that threatening environment, hoping for the best could lead to total disaster for Canada.
That’s why we need to start seeing this as the crisis it really is. The weakness of our armed forces is becoming a bigger and bigger threat to the future of Canada, and that threat must be addressed now.
For that reason, building up our military must take precedence over balancing the budget.
It’s a simple political reality that any party that proposed making big cuts to social spending in order to build up the military would be destroyed in an election campaign. There simply isn’t any appetite for that trade-off. So, that leaves deficit spending as the only politically-feasible path to building up our armed forces.
Considering that the budget deficit is at about $20 billion, considering that we spend roughly $25 billion on our armed forces today and that doubling that number would be a huge boost to our national defence, we would be looking at deficits of roughly $45 billion if we immediately embarked on a military build-up, while keeping other spending on the current trajectory.
$45 billion is a large deficit, but it is smaller than the deficits run by the Harper government during a portion of the 2008 financial crisis aftermath.
Additionally, much of that increased deficit would be going towards wages for more members of the armed forces, military-focused research and development at Canadian universities, and a huge surge in domestic manufacturing, all of which would strengthen our domestic economy, boost GDP, and make it easier to balance the budget down the road as the economic benefits spread throughout the nation.
The final point is this: It’s usually a bad idea to run budget deficits, but there are exceptions. And the crisis facing our nation due to our inability to protect our own territory is one of those exceptions. Canada needs a military build-up, and we need it now. And if that means running bigger deficits for a while, then that’s a price we must be willing to pay to ensure our nation is secure.