19
submitted 7 months ago by grte@lemmy.ca to c/canadapolitics@lemmy.ca
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 19 points 7 months ago

Who else would you use them for??

[-] investorsexchange@lemmy.ca 16 points 7 months ago

I oppose Poilievre being in government.

It’s hard to understand why his opinion should carry any more weight than mine.

[-] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago

It starts here, Canada. Abortion is next.

[-] LostWon@lemmy.ca 13 points 7 months ago
[-] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

Sigh.

I'm so sorry Gen Z, Gen Alpha. We've let you down.

[-] kbal@fedia.io 13 points 7 months ago

So many words on this topic, so few of them addressing the obvious questions about why doctors might have a use for "puberty blockers" or what legitimate basis politicians could possibly have for wanting to abolish them.

[-] m0darn@lemmy.ca 12 points 7 months ago

Aren't puberty blockers more reversible than puberty?

[-] LostWon@lemmy.ca 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Yes. So upon seeing that headline, my first thought is that "for kids under 18" is rather suspect phrasing. Like someone wanted to get "kids" in there no matter what.

[-] undercrust@lemmy.ca 9 points 7 months ago

The decision to use puberty blockers should be based on a conversation between a young person and their doctor, Boissonnault said.

“I don’t see M.D. after Pierre Poilievre’s name or Danielle Smith’s,” he said. “So, not their business.”

THIS RIGHT FUCKIN HERE

this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
19 points (95.2% liked)

CanadaPolitics

1870 readers
1 users here now

Placeholder for any r/CanadaPolitics refugees

Rules:

All of Lemmy.ca's rules apply

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS