• investorsexchange@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    5 months ago

    I oppose Poilievre being in government.

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

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    5 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.

    • LostWon@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Yes. So upon seeing that headline, my first thought is that “for kids under 18” is rather suspect phrasing. Like they had to get “kids” in there no matter what.

  • undercrust@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    5 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