this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2025
58 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

10404 readers
674 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] twopi@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 day ago

Hard disagree. In short, No. I don't think so. And it is, in fact, not so.

The question was asked if Canada should implement a law. I answered the question with my preference and stated my bias.

Ethical veganism (also started from puratin Quakers) would like people to stop eating meat.

There is a western bias against using cats/dogs for testing and for eating. Ford recently passed a law banning it.

Before legalization, weed was banned.

And currently children are not able to consume tobacco nor alcohol products.

In Canada, raw (unpasturized) milk is banned but RFK is legalizing it in the US, saying people should be able to choose what's best for their health.

So we already have laws that prevent people from consuming substances for different reasons. And they are different in different places. You have different preferences than mine, that's OK. You also can vote like me. But to say that your stance is to allow everyone to make their own choice is not correct nor honest. You have a different preference for food restriction laws but you don't argue against all food restrictions.

What is legal is also what is legal to have a profit motive in. I don't think having a profit motive (and thus marketers) for substances that can be abused or dependent is a policy we should pursue.

The only argument I respect is combating the black market. But most people still are only OK until "hard drugs". I consider an arbitrary line but again people vote based on those preference in favour of weed legalisation but against safe injection sites.