View topic - POLL: Should CPC Eliminate Status of Women Canada Agency? :: Free Dominion - Principled Conservative - Party and Canadian Politics

Unlike the "Status of Women Agency: For Women Only" thread, this is a place for commentary from both men and women of ALL conservative stripes (both so-con, fis-con and "other-con") on the issue of the elimination of the Status of Women Canada Agency.

Knowing what you know about the Status of Women Canada Agency:
1)The exclusivity/discriminatory nature of the Status of Women
(they consistently decline to fund groups like "Real Women" which have conservative perspectives) http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06040702.html

2) the notable annual budget of SWC ($23 million)

3) the questionable nature of some of their projects, such as Women's History Month (even if you agree with the sentiment behind this issue, why isn't Heritage Canada handling this topic?) their funding of the homosexual agenda http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/jun/04061405.html
and their past funding of anti-Christian bigotry http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/sep/05090102.html

4) this agency tends to be comprised of feminists lobbying the government for funding for their issues, and as such are not representative of Canadian women

do you favor the CPC eliminating this agency?
_________________

Sha'alu Shalom Yerushalyim (Pray for the peace of Jerusalem)

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 12:29 pm Post subject:

It should be abolished yesterday.

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 12:32 pm Post subject:

Suzanne is blogging about this today

http://bluewavecanada.blogspot.com/2006/08/it-is-time-to-eliminate-status-of.html

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 12:54 pm Post subject:

Yes
_________________
Before you comment on economics buy a new or used a copy of "Theory of Money and Credit" (1912) by Ludwig von Mises

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 1:12 pm Post subject:

It should have been abolished before it even had a chance to form.It should have been gone yesterday.Harper should cut all government funding from this No Liberals

boondoggle agency and get rid of it NOW.It is better late than never.

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 1:56 pm Post subject:

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 2:17 pm Post subject:

It's mostly redundant as Justice Canada and the Labour Program (HRSDC) are mostly responsible for the key issues this group deals with such as Pay Equity.

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 2:52 pm Post subject:

The only good reason to keep it is to give more grist to the anti-progressive mill by seeing what ridiculous projects our opponents will endorse and how far away they are from traditional Canadian values. And even this is not a good enough reason.
_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
“The purpose of an open mind is to close it, on particular subjects. If you never do — you''ve simply abdicated the responsibility to think.”
- William F. Buckley, Jr.
CPC

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 2:53 pm Post subject:

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 2:53 pm Post subject:

Whose the schmuck who voted "no"?!?! Mad

_________________
"Who is in your face here? Who started this? Who is on the offensive? Who is pushing the envelope? The answer is obvious. A radical Left aided by a cultural elite that detests Christianity and finds Christian moral tenets reactionary and repressive is hell-bent on pushing its amoral values and imposing its ideology on our nation. The unwisdom of what Hollywood and the Left are about should be apparent to all." -Patrick J. Buchanan

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 2:57 pm Post subject:

The approach for the government to take on such entities is to a) close them down, b) have regularly scheduled meetings whereby third party organizations can submit abstracts on women's issues (both right and left etc), for the government's perusual and c) encourage women personally to come forward and tell their story to the government itself.

Hearings can be held across the country that are non-partisan and USE some of the $20 M budget given to this government supported pressure group.
_________________
"All which a man without authority can give, -- his unbiased opinion, his honest advice, and his best reasons." Edmund Burke

I support multiculturalism and massive third world immigration to Israel.

Did you know that anybody or everybody in the world is a potential Canadian within 3 months time?

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 3:04 pm Post subject:

Thank you for being the voice of reason on this, RtS.
_________________
Follow Me on Twitter

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 3:06 pm Post subject:

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 3:29 pm Post subject:

I'll repost what I said on the "women only" thread: I am uncomfortable to a certain extent with the Government funding lobby groups at all. But I am more uncomfortable with the National Action Committee. I don't like the direction they are wanting to take society and I don't agree with their definition of feminism and womanhood. And I don't think any radical social change should be done except by up-front voting for a political party.

Feminism as a social movement is often referred to as having come in waves, only the first of which makes any sense to me.

First Wave 19th & early 20th centuries. Focus was on Suffragette movement, with many crossover links with slavery abolitionist movment in USA. Women's Christian Temperance Union and other "conservative" movements were involved. Many first wave feminists were pro-life (e.g. Elizabeth Cady Stanton & Susan B. Anthony). "Equal Pay for Equal Work" goes back to first wave feminism. Feminists for Life look back to these women, and most social conservatives would be generally comfortable with them.

Second Wave Feminism (from the early 1960s to 1980s) seems to me to be overly influenced by Marxism, that is, it analyzes everything and every man-woman social interaction as being a politicized power struggle. I just don't think that analysis is accurate. Furthermore, I fundamentally and adamantly disagree with the premise that killing children through abortion is somehow "necessary" for women's freedom.

Third Wave feminism (late 1980s to present) is feminism on deconstructionist steroids. For them, "essentialism" is a dirty word. They don't believe there is such a thing as "human nature" or "womanhood" or "manhood." It's all a construction, 100% of it. There is no meaning except the one you personally assign to it: there are no universals. In this, I think they have become quite disconnected from reality.

NAC advertises that it is all about women's professional associations, rape crisis centres, shelters for battered women, etc. But it also funds a lot of things that most people would raise eyebrows at. REAL Women's website outlines some of them:
http://www.realwomenca.com/newsletter/2003_sept_oct/article_7.html

I think feminism has gone beyond its original "fair's fair" mandate and is now trying to be some sort of concious collective effort at completely overhauling the social order via a philosophy that is at best female chauvenist and at worst outright anti-male. I don't think the government should be funding that. If people want to fundamentally overhaul the social order they will do that up front, say by voting NDP. I don't think it is fair to do it by back-door financing of Third Wave feminism.

Posted: 08/ 22/ 06 4:04 pm Post subject:

I think Status of Women should be scrapped. I'm all in favour of equality for women, but that's not the issue here. We're talking about a radical feminist movement trying to push forward an agenda that is not in the long-term interests of women (or Canada).

The government is desperately seeking places to cut costs so it can finance its election promises. This is the perfect place to start.

	The time now is 02/ 09/ 10 11:25 am
	Home ∴ Forum ∴ Recent ∴ Register ∴ Profile ∴ Log in to check your private messages ∴ Log in FAQ ∴ Search ∴ Donate ∴ Activist's Toolbox ∴ FD Links ∴ FD Swag [ Login to join chat ] FD Arcade - Click Here-->