Connect with us

Alberta

‘Liberal’ parents of gender-confused kids among supporters of Alberta’s proposed ‘transitioning’ ban

Published

9 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Parents whose kids have undergone medical or surgical ‘transitioning’ say that Premier Danielle Smith’s policies will spare other families from ‘the heartache their families have been through.’

As highlighted in a recent Epoch Times report, parents whose kids have undergone medical or surgical “transitioning” say that Smith’s new policies will only benefit families in general and spare them from “the heartache their families have been through.”

On January 31, Smith announced what is perhaps the strongest pro-family legislation in Canada, protecting kids from life-altering so-called “top and bottom” surgeries as well as other extreme forms of transgender ideology.

According to Crystal, a mom from Calgary, her son Noah, when he was in Grade 9, had a friend who made a “transition” from a female to a male. Her son had noted he was what is called a “trans ally,” but suddenly he began to identify himself as “she/they.”

“Fast forward to the early part of Grade 10, and out of the blue I get a text from my kid while he’s at school saying, ‘I’m now identifying as she/they,’” said Crystal, who said she is “quite a liberal parent.”

However, despite being a “liberal,” she admitted that she did not have an easy time with her son changing names and using different pronouns.

“Out of the blue is this vitriol towards me when I didn’t get it right,” she said, adding she then just decided to call her son “kiddo.”

However, Noah then told her he wanted hormones. Crystal and her ex-husband had thought Noah was just going through a phase, as he was “well known” for this.

“He would try on different so-called ‘identities’ like a jock, a nerd, a rapper,” Crystal said, and even as he was supposed to be “transitioning,” took on a look of a “goth.”

Alberta’s forthcoming regulations include a ban on so-called “top” surgeries (mastectomies, breast constructions) as well as “bottom” surgeries (vaginoplasties, phalloplasties) for children ages 17 and under. Puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones are also restricted to those age 16 and older but only with parental consent.

Smith said her United Conservative Party (UCP) government will soon introduce legislation that, if passed, would bar doctors in the province from medically or surgically “transitioning” children under age 17. The new legislation will also mandate parental consent for pronoun changes in school. Coming in the fall will be additional legislation that bans men who claim to be women from competing in women’s sports.

Campaign Life Coalition (CLC) praised Smith’s decision to introduce legislation to ban doctors from chemically or surgically “transitioning” children, calling it a “political miracle.”

Crystal’s line in the sand for her son: ‘No medical affirmation’

When the Alberta government was researching its new policy regarding banning surgically or chemically “transitioning” children, Crystal said she was one of the parents they talked with to get feedback.

She admits at the time she was not a fan of Smith or her party, but now says she is “doing this right.”

Crystal noted that if this policy had been in place only three years ago, all the heartache could have been avoided.

“This is blowing up relationships,” she said.

When speaking to her son, Crystal noted that her “line in the sand will always be [that] there will be no medical affirmation.”

As a result, she then said she was “hit with the vitriol.”

Due to Crystal having had to deal with her son wanting to become something other than his birth sex, she contacted parents with similar situations via a group called Our Duty.

After connecting with parents on the site, Crystal noted how her son Noah “checks a lot of the boxes” with other kids who say they are transgender.

She said that kids in these situations all use the same “script” of saying they are going to “kill myself if I don’t get the proper medical intervention if you don’t use the pronouns.”

“It’s the constant threat of suicide,” she noted.

Complaint filed against doctor who gave hormones

Despite Crystal trying to delay her son wanting to undergo a “medical transitioning,” she did book an appointment with a doctor to talk about hormones.

However, after being referred to a clinic to further talk about her son’s matter, she said the personnel were “aggressive.”

Crystal noted how the clinic was constantly emailing and calling her to make an appointment for her son, and she was told she had to have all the paperwork and blood work done before the meeting.

She said that this made “no sense,” so she told the clinic that she was “not signing a consent form.”

When she went to the appointment with her son, she was taken to a room with a doctor alone and was told that this appointment was not for her but for Noah.

The doctor only spoke with her for 10 minutes and was already willing to prescribe her son hormones. At this point, she confronted the doctor for not doing a thorough psychological assessment or any other screening. The doctor mentioned to her that while she was able to oppose the treatment, she could end up in the courts and that he would testify on Noah’s behalf. He then said he had always won in similar situations with other parents.

Crystal filed a complaint with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta against the doctor regarding her experience with her son, but for the time being, is not making public his name.

Her son later went to that doctor alone and started to take hormones. It was at this point she realized she had no control over the situation.

Crystal said that in the past her family doctor along with a child psychologist did not affirm Noah’s gender dysphoria. She noted that it was only the “gender experts,” all of whom had “zero history with my child,” who suggested this.

“They did not solicit the qualified professionals we had in place,” she said.

As for Noah, who is now in grade 12, the doctor who had the complaint against him told Noah that it was his mom who did this, which made her son mad.

“I will never forgive you for this,” he told her.

He then ran away from home and told people that he was not “safe” at home with his mom.

“I just want to be your mom,” she had mentioned to him.

While many so-called “gender-affirming care” workers claim that the effects of puberty blockers can be reversed, according to Dr. Jane Anderson, vice president of the American College of Pediatricians, as per The Epoch Timesthe hormones can severely impact brain development.

Puberty blockers can cause heightened depression, severe mood swings, and weight gain.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Calls for a new pipeline to the coast are only getting louder

Published on

From Resource Works

Alberta wants a new oil pipeline to Prince Rupert in British Columbia.

Calls on the federal government to fast-track new pipelines in Canada have grown. But there’s some confusion that needs to be cleared up about what Ottawa’s intentions are for any new oil and gas pipelines.

Prime Minister Carney appeared to open the door for them when he said, on June 2, that he sees opportunity for Canada to build a new pipeline to ship more oil to foreign markets, if it’s tied to billions of dollars in green investments to reduce the industry’s environmental footprint.

But then he confused that picture by declaring, on June 6, that new pipelines will be built only with “a consensus of all the provinces and the Indigenous people.” And he added: “If a province doesn’t want it, it’s impossible.”

And BC Premier David Eby made it clear on June 2 that BC doesn’t want a new oil pipeline, nor does it want Ottawa to cancel the related ban on oil tankers steaming through northwest BC waters. These also face opposition from some, but not all, First Nations in BC.

Eby’s energy minister, Adrian Dix, also gave thumbs-down to a new oil pipeline, but did say BC supports expanding the capacity of the existing Trans Mountain TMX oil pipeline, and the dredging of Burrard Inlet to allow bigger oil tankers to load Alberta oil from TMX at the port of Vancouver.

While the feds sort out what their position is on fast-tracking new pipelines, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith leaped on Carney’s talk of a new oil pipeline if it’s tied to lowering the carbon impact of the Alberta oilsands and their oil.

She saw “a grand bargain,” with, in her eyes, a new oil pipeline from Alberta to Prince Rupert, BC, producing $20 billion a year in revenue, some of which could then be used to develop and install carbon-capture mechanisms for the oil.

She noted that the Pathways Alliance, six of Canada’s largest oilsands producers, proposed in 2021 a carbon-capture network and pipeline that would transport captured CO₂ from some 20 oilsands facilities, by a new 400-km pipeline, to a hub in the Cold Lake area of Alberta for permanent underground storage.

Preliminary estimates of the cost of that project run up to $20 billion.

The calls for a new oil pipeline from Bruderheim, AB, to Prince Rupert recall the old Northern Gateway pipeline project that was proposed to run from Alberta to Kitimat, BC.

That was first proposed by Enbridge in 2008, and there were estimates that it would mean billions in government revenues and thousands of jobs.

In 2014, Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper approved Northern Gateway. But in 2015, the Federal Court of Appeal overruled the Harper government, ruling that it had “breached the honour of the Crown by failing to consult” with eight affected First Nations.

Then the Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who succeeded Harper in 2015, effectively killed the project by instituting a ban on oil tanker traffic on BC’s north coast shortly after taking office.

Now Danielle Smith is working to present Carney with a proponent and route for a potential new crude pipeline from Alberta to Prince Rupert.

She said her government is in talks with Canada’s major pipeline companies in the hope that a private-sector proponent will take the lead on a pipeline to move a million barrels a day of crude to the BC coast.

She said she hopes Carney, who won a minority government in April, will make good on his pledge to speed permitting times for major infrastructure projects. Companies will not commit to building a pipeline, Smith said, without confidence in the federal government’s intent to bring about regulatory reform.

Smith also underlined her support for suggested new pipelines north to Grays Bay in Nunavut, east to Churchill, Manitoba, and potentially a new version of Energy East, a proposed, but shelved, oil pipeline to move oil from Alberta and Saskatchewan to refineries and a marine terminal in the Maritimes.

The Energy East oil pipeline was proposed in 2013 by TC Energy, to move Western Canadian crude to an export terminal at St. John, NB, and to refineries in eastern Canada. It was mothballed in 2017 over regulatory hurdles and political opposition in Quebec.

A separate proposal known as GNL Quebec to build a liquefied natural gas pipeline and export terminal in the Saguenay region was rejected by both federal and provincial authorities on environmental grounds. It would have diverted 19.4 per cent of Canadian gas exports to Europe, instead of going to the US.

Now Quebec’s environment minister Benoit Charette says his government would be prepared to take another look at both projects.

The Grays Bay idea is to include an oil pipeline in a corridor that would run from northern BC to Grays Bay in Nunavut. Prime Minister Carney has suggested there could be opportunities for such a pipeline that would carry “decarbonized” oil to new markets.

There have also been several proposals that Canada should build an oil pipeline, and/or a natural gas pipeline, to the port of Churchill. One is from a group of seven senior oil and gas executives who in 2017 suggested the Western Energy Corridor to Churchill.

Now a group of First Nations has proposed a terminal at Port Nelson, on Hudson Bay near Churchill, to ship LNG to Europe and potash to Brazil. And the Manitoba government is looking at the idea.

“There is absolutely a business case for sending our LNG directly to European markets rather than sending our natural gas down to the Gulf Coast and having them liquefy it and ship it over,” says Robyn Lore of project backer NeeStaNan. “It’s in Canada’s interest to do this.”

And, he adds: “The port and corridor will be 100 per cent Indigenous owned.”

Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew has suggested that the potential trade corridor to Hudson Bay could handle oil, LNG, hydrogen, and potash slurry. (One obvious drawback, though, winter ice limits the Hudson Bay shipping season to four months of the year, July to October.)

All this talk of new pipelines comes as Canada begins to look for new markets to reduce reliance on the US, following tariff measures from President Donald Trump.

Alberta Premier Smith says: “I think the world has changed dramatically since Donald Trump got elected in November. I think that’s changed the national conversation.”

And she says that if Carney wants a true nation-building project to fast-track, she can’t think of a better one than a new West Coast oil pipeline.

“I can’t imagine that there will be another project on the national list that will generate as much revenue, as much GDP, as many high paying jobs as a bitumen pipeline to the coast.”

Now we need to know what Mark Carney’s stance on pipelines really is: Is it fast-tracking them to reduce our reliance on the US? Or is it insisting that, for a pipeline, “If a province doesn’t want it, it’s impossible.”

Continue Reading

Alberta

Central Alberta MP resigns to give Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre a chance to regain a seat in Parliament

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Conservative MP Damien Kurek stepped aside in the Battle River-Crowfoot riding to allow Pierre Poilievre to enter a by-election in his native Alberta.

Conservative MP Damien Kurek officially resigned as an MP in the Alberta federal riding of Battle River-Crowfoot in a move that will allow Conservative Party of Canada leader Pierre Poilievre to run in a by-election in that riding to reclaim his seat in Parliament.

June 17 was Kurek’s last day as an MP after he notified the House Speaker of his resignation.

“I will continue to work with our incredible local team to do everything I can to remain the strong voice for you as I support Pierre in this process and then run again here in Battle River-Crowfoot in the next general election,” he said in a statement to media.

“Pierre Poilievre is a man of principle, character, and is the hardest working MP I have ever met,” he added. “His energy, passion, and drive will have a huge benefit in East Central Alberta.”

Kurek won his riding in the April 28 election, defeating the Liberals by 46,020 votes with 81.8 percent of the votes, a huge number.

Poilievre had lost his Ottawa seat to his Liberal rival, a seat that he held for decades, that many saw as putting his role as leader of the party in jeopardy. He stayed on as leader of the Conservative Party.

Poilievre is originally from Calgary, Alberta, so should he win the by-election, it would be a homecoming of sorts.

It is now up to Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney to call a by-election in the riding.

Despite Kurek’s old seat being considered a “safe” seat, a group called the “Longest Ballot Committee” is looking to run hundreds of protest candidates against Poilievre in the by-election in the Alberta Battle River–Crowfoot riding, just like they did in his former Ottawa-area Carleton riding in April’s election.

Continue Reading

Trending

X