Shall we allow or not allow then
Discussion
Personally, I'm not very fond of having kids on puberty blockers and going through life alternating surgeries. Alberta's restrictions on kids transitioning do not go far enough.
Having the Liberal party leader say that he would use the power of the Federal government to over turn Alberta's jurisdictional laws isn't a good look.
So we need bigger government to lay more controls? I thought left leads to bigger government
What do you mean? I don't think I understand the question you're asking, could you rephrase?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems you're asking whether I believe government should excerpt more control over personal decisions?
You got it. Should the government control more or control less is my question
Ah, got it!
I think there are a couple of different ways to approach this question. We can either focus on the current government structure and legal framework, or we can explore it more philosophically, how we believe things should work.
Given that we’re in the middle of an election cycle, I’m choosing to look at it through the lens of our current system, not from an idealistic standpoint, if that makes sense.
In Canada, healthcare is universal and primarily a provincial responsibility. The federal government contributes through transfer payments, ensures provinces meet national standards, and regulates new treatments. Meanwhile, provincial governments manage the actual delivery of care, administer health insurance plans, oversee budgets and resource allocation, and license healthcare providers.
So when the federal Liberal leader says he would overturn a provincial regulation on youth transitioning, I see that as top-down interference. In Alberta, a strong majority supports the regulation. For the federal government to override that is, in my view, an example of overbearing control.
If healthcare weren’t universal and taxpayer-funded, we could have a different conversation. But under the current system, where my time, energy, and resources are taken through taxation to fund healthcare, I believe I should have some say in how those funds are used. Being compelled to contribute to something I fundamentally disagree with, especially when it involves children, is to me, a clear overstep of government authority.
The counter argument to my point, I'm assuming, from the Federal government's view, is that they are protection a minority's (trans-youth) constitutional rights.
Universal healthcare should be universal, therefore if Alberta is the only province with such laws, it makes it so that care is different across the nation, therefore not universal.
From their perspective, federal involvement isn’t government overreach, it’s a safeguard against provincial overreach.
are you suggesting we just shoot the people who do this to kids to keep the government smaller?
No I did not suggest that, I just asked a question
youre disingenuous.
no one “just asks questions”
all questions have implications.
more line you’re just here to play games and act all innocent like youre not a passive aggressive manipulator.
Don’t assume what people want to do or guess the intent behind. I didn’t express my opinion. It is just a question. Anyone dare to ask question is an enemy is the wrong mindset no matter what profession you are.
Without knowing where everyone's heart lies, I can agree with both.
Asking questions is good, when taken at face value. We shouldn't be opposed to people asking questions.
In this case, if the intent behind asking the questions is to further understand the thought process that I have or to challenge my belief system, I see no issues with it
On the flip side, questions can 100% have implications behind them and can be used for manipulation of discussion while hidding under the guise of "I'm just asking questions". We see countless example of it everyday.
I don’t even know what we are debating, why so hard to communicate sigh