Jump to content

Reality


Jaydee
 Share

Recommended Posts

`RIGHTS HAVE TO HAVE TEETH'

COVID-19 RESTRICTIONS VS. THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

  • Calgary Herald
  • 20 Jan 2022
  • TYLER DAWSON National Post tdawson@postmedia.com Twitter.com/tylerrdawson
img?regionKey=yJjli6FFPEpyx8QfYp3eig%3d%3dARTUR WIDAK / NURPHOTO / FILES Every Canadian has, thanks to Section 6 of the Charter, the right to “enter, remain in and leave Canada” and the right to “move to and take up residence in any province.”

Over the course of the pandemic, Canadians have gone before the courts, arguing public-health measures to combat COVID-19 have infringed upon their rights.

Yet, time and time again, these attempts have failed. Interprovincial travel restrictions have been found constitutional; some members of the military failed to stop a mandatory vaccination policy; and quarantine hotels have been found justifiable.

While some of these court battles are ongoing, and many could be appealed to higher courts, two years into the pandemic, it's clear the courts have not been sympathetic to the idea that public-health measures have unreasonably infringed upon Canadians' rights.

At a time when Quebec is pondering a variety of mandatory vaccination — financial penalties for the unvaccinated — some experts are asking, to what extent is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protecting Canadians' rights?

Have courts struck an appropriate balance during the pandemic, and, will they do so afterwards?

“The reality is that, given that judges are not specialists in public health, they have shown an overwhelming tendency to defer to policy-maker's decisions, and they've been very reticent to step in and invalidate them,” said Joanna Baron, the executive director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation. “Rights have to have teeth. And I think that judges, they've erred too far on the side of deferring to government.”

What's critical to understand about the way courts have ruled during the pandemic, is that the rights the charter grants are not absolute.

“The very first section of the charter explains to us that all of the rights in the charter are subject to reasonable limits that can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society,” said Emmett Macfarlane, a political scientist studying the constitution at the University of Waterloo.

This isn't especially unique to Canada.

The U.S. Bill of Rights is often perceived to be tougher than the charter — after all, the First Amendment begins with “Congress shall make no law” — but those rights can also be limited: freedom of speech doesn't extend to child pornography; the Second Amendment right to bear arms doesn't extend to fully automatic weapons.

Yet, the existence of Canada's limitations provision was controversial back when Canadians were actually debating what the charter ought to say.

The initial version of Section 1, drafted in agreement between the federal government and the provinces, said charter rights would be “subject only to such reasonable limits as are generally accepted in a free and democratic society with a Parliamentary form of government.”

Peter Hogg, one of the leading authorities on Canadian constitutional law, wrote that of the 46 groups that addressed Section 1 in their discussions of how to improve the charter, 38 of them said it had to go. Among them: the Canadian Bar Association, which said it “must be deleted”; the National Action Committee on the Status of Women, which said it was a loophole so ginormous, members dubbed it the “Mack Truck clause”; and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, which, in a written memo from November 1980, said the government was “attempting, at one and the same time, to eat and have its constitutional cake.”

“Parliament must either fish or cut bait. Legislative supremacy and the entrenchment of human rights cannot co-exist in this way,” the memo said.

Jean Chrétien, who was then the justice minister, backed down in January 1981, and the language changed from “generally accepted” and “with a parliamentary form of government” to the current version, which says, charter rights are “subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” (As it happens, the government was actually prepared to drop Section 1 altogether, if this new draft was also rejected.)

“The purpose of the original draft was to ensure that the people, the legislatures and the courts would not look upon rights as absolute, but would recognize them as subject to reasonable limitation,” Chrétien said at the time.

It's inarguable that some aspects of the pandemic response have infringed upon rights. But, because the charter allows for limitations on rights, that does not mean the policy or law or regulation is unconstitutional.

“It's really a question of proportionality: Is the rights-restricting policy or law doing more harm or more good on balance?” said Macfarlane.

In May 2020, Newfoundland and Labrador instituted a travel ban. Days later, Kimberley Taylor, who lived in Nova Scotia, was turned away when she tried to visit for her mother's funeral. As it happened, eight days later, she was allowed in, but her lawsuit — she was joined by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association — was heard by the court to determine if a province could restrict travel.

Every Canadian has, thanks to Section 6, the right to “enter, remain in and leave Canada” and the right to “move to and take up residence in any province.” The court conceded that, yes, Taylor's mobility rights were violated.

But, it said, this infringement was “a reasonable measure to reduce the spread of COVID-19 in Newfoundland and Labrador.”

Cara Zwibel, director of the fundamental freedoms program at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, says it's not the charter's fault it isn't being used to strike down pandemic-related legalization. Yes, the charter exists, and, yes, it has various clauses that justify infringements upon rights, but, at the end of the day, it's judges who are making those analytical calls and deferring to politicians and public-health experts.

“Because of the nature of this particular emergency and the length of it, I think we do need the courts to be scrutinizing these measures more closely and requiring governments to really bring forward the evidence for why they're doing what they're doing,” said Zwibel.

The way in which a court decides if something is constitutional or not is somewhat complex.

But versions of this analysis have been done in many of the Covid-related court cases. In one case in the Federal Court, regarding the federal government's quarantine hotels, the judge had to analyze alleged violations of a number of charter rights, such as security of the person.

“It is not difficult to readily apprehend how the prospect of having to stay at (government-approved accommodation) or a (designated quarantine facility), and then actually being at such a facility, would cause feelings of stress and anxiety in some people,” wrote Chief Justice Paul Crampton. “However, I find that the alleged violations did not engage the Applicants' right to security of the person.”

Because of the pace of the pandemic — a restriction might have been lifted before it gets a court hearing — many issues haven't even come before courts or received charter analysis. In the United States, said Zwibel, the Supreme Court has heard stacks of Covid-related court cases.

“We just don't have a system that lets that happen at that kind of speed. And the speed is important, because we've had rules that change so frequently that by the time you get something in front of a court, the rules that you're challenging might no longer be in place,” Zwibel said.

In the four decades since the charter was adopted, courts both low and high have been sifting through these questions to determine the constitutionality of various laws and regulations, although, at times, the level of scrutiny has ebbed and flowed.

“The court has oscillated on how much it demands government actually present to demonstrably justify its laws,” said Macfarlane.

A recent — and obvious — example of this is the immediate post-9/11 era, when courts were exceptionally deferential to governments and their anti-terrorism legislation.

“The courts aren't immune from the broader political context of the day,” Macfarlane said.

An analogous phenomenon might be afoot now. So, what comes next? And what effect might the way the courts handled pandemic restrictions have on the way we perceive rights?

“You can see a sort of draining away of public enthusiasm and public perception of the legitimacy of the charter's protections,” Baron said. (The Canadian Constitution Foundation has also litigated against some COVID-19 policies, such as quarantine hotels.)

Just like the courts after 9/11 slowly became less willing to accept government arguments, as normalcy slowly returns, or the justifications for severe restrictions weaken, the courts may become more likely to strenuously question infringements upon rights.

“We're seeing a period of some deference to public-health decision-making, but that may moderate over time, as courts feel a bit more confident in entering into some of the charter analysis on these issues,” said Dwight Newman, a law professor at the University of Saskatchewan.

Since the way judges approach the charter shifts back and forth over time, so, too, does the perception that judges and the charter aren't protecting Canadians' rights.

“I think people would like to have an instrument that actually protects some absolute rights ... that draws some clear lines in the sand. And that's not the way Section 1 has come to be interpreted in the Canadian context,” said Newman.

But, he said, the charter still exists, and it still has power to protect against government overreach.

“People should feel some confidence in that,” Newman said.

It's hard to say what the effects will be in the long term, with regards to precedents and a shift toward judicial deference, experts said. Zwibel, though, argued individual rights have been devalued during the pandemic.

“I agree that it's a problem that's required collective action and responsibility, and that there are rights and responsibilities, and that collective interests are important, but I think that we've forgotten — or just not paid sufficient attention to — the importance of protecting individual rights and freedoms.”

YOU CAN SEE A ... DRAINING AWAY OF PUBLIC ENTHUSIASM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The WDYTWGTH file will soon need a room of its own.

I'm curious to see if the government controlled media will even cover this story.

Now all you need is a wild cat strike/protest by drivers all across the country, and don't be thinking it's out of the question either...  y'all may find that last 12% a bit harder to push around than you thought:

Schneider to shut down Canadian operations

Truckload carrier says being in Canada doesn’t fit with “long-term strategic focus”

Ooops spoke too soon, NP is on it:

One of the continent’s largest trucking firms, Schneider Transport, just announced it is shutting down its Canadian operations.

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will the Russians care about the sanctions.  They would of course turn off the natural gas to Europe etc.

  1. Russia is facing ‘severe’ sanctions for Ukraine threats. Here’s what that could mean

     
By Karin Strohecker and Andrey Ostroukh  Reuters
Posted January 20, 2022 11:41 am

Growing tensions between Moscow and Western powers have raised the prospect of new sanctions being imposed on Russia, possibly the most severe yet, if it attacks neighboring Ukraine.70c8fc80

U.S. Senate Democrats have unveiled a bill to impose sweeping sanctions on the Russian government and military officials – including President Vladimir Putin – as well as Russian banking institutions if Moscow engages in hostilities against Ukraine.

“If Russia is using its conventional military to acquire land in Ukraine, that will meet a severe economic response,” a senior White House official said on Wednesday.

Russia has massed tens of thousands of troops near Ukraine’s borders in what Kyiv and its allies fear could be preparation for a new military offensive.

Russia, which denies planning to attack Ukraine, has been subject to sanctions since its 2014 annexation of Crimea from its neighbor. Further punitive measures were added after a former Russian spy was poisoned in Britain in 2018 and following an investigation into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election won by Donald Trump.

Russia has denied any role in the poisoning of ex-spy Yuri Skripal and his daughter, and denies trying to interfere in foreign elections.

Here are some ways financial sanctions could target Russia.

Sanctions could target semiconductor chips

The White House has told the U.S. chip industry to be prepared for new restrictions on exports to Russia if Moscow attacks Ukraine, sources said.

This includes potentially blocking the country’s access to global electronics supplies.

Similar measures were deployed during the Cold War, when the United States and other Western nations maintained severe technology sanctions on the Soviet Union, keeping it technologically backward and crimping growth.

Sanctions could hit Russia's big banks, assets

The United States and the European Union already have sanctions on Russia’s energy, financial and defense sectors.

The White House is floating the idea of curbs on Russia’s biggest banks and has previously mooted measures targeting Moscow’s ability to convert roubles into dollars and other currencies. Washington could also target the state-backed Russian Direct Investment Fund.

Click to play video: 'Questions remain over how much more Canada’s military can help Ukraine'2:09Questions remain over how much more Canada’s military can help Ukraine

Questions remain over how much more Canada’s military can help Ukraine

Sanctions applied to individual firms often cause sector-wide pain, according to former U.S. State Department economist Mark Stone, as they make investors worry that the curbs will be widened or that they will be unable to differentiate.

“Sanctioning all transactions with Russian banks and freezing assets would be more impactful and more targeted” than a cut-off from the SWIFT global messaging system, said Brian O’Toole, a fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank.

Targeting Russia’s access to SWIFT, which is widely used in international financial transactions, would become useful really only following broad financial sanctions by the United States, Britain and the European Union, O’Toole said.

Sanctions could zero in on individuals with bans, freezes

Sanctioning individuals via asset freezes and travel bans is a commonly used tool and can sometimes resonate widely.

Britain imposed sanctions in April 2021 on 14 Russians under a new law giving the UK government the power to penalize those it says are credibly involved in the most serious corruption abroad.

Quote
  • Trade Picture
  • EU and Russia
  • Trading with Russia
  • The European Union and Russia have an important bilateral trade relation. Russia is the EU's fifth largest trading partner and the EU is Russia's largest trading partner. As reported above, in recent years bilateral trade flows went through severe fluctuations. A first factor is the evolution of the price of oil, with a sharp decline in 2012-2016 and a recovery in 2017-2018, as well as the relate…
See more on ec.europa.eu

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/15/2022 at 2:52 PM, deicer said:

 

What the Trans and other communities, including those of colour, are looking for is rights equal to everyone else.

Let's all live and treat each other with respect and it won't be an issue.

What rights are they missing?  I bet you can't think of one.  That is, unless, you're going to come up with some nonsense like; they have the "right" to not have people laugh at their fashion choices.

BTW, easier to treat people with respect when they don't get un-earned preference for everything from housing to scholarships to employment.  Accept that you're not deserving of special treatment and you'll get your equal rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Seeker said:

What rights are they missing?  I bet you can't think of one.  That is, unless, you're going to come up with some nonsense like; they have the "right" to not have people laugh at their fashion choices.

BTW, easier to treat people with respect when they don't get un-earned preference for everything from housing to scholarships to employment.  Accept that you're not deserving of special treatment and you'll get your equal rights.

 

5F6FE542-00F6-48AB-9838-BCF7BDD48A3E.jpeg

Edited by Jaydee
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Seeker said:

What rights are they missing?  I bet you can't think of one.  That is, unless, you're going to come up with some nonsense like; they have the "right" to not have people laugh at their fashion choices.

BTW, easier to treat people with respect when they don't get un-earned preference for everything from housing to scholarships to employment.  Accept that you're not deserving of special treatment and you'll get your equal rights.

If all you are going to base it on is fashion choices, then it isn't worth discussing.

It's like the priest who said 'what about all the good the residential schools did'.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, deicer said:

If all you are going to base it on is fashion choices, then it isn't worth discussing.

 

I'm not basing it on fashion choices.  I'm asking you to tell me what rights you think the "trans and other communities" are being short-changed on.  You brought it up so now tell us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, deicer said:

It's like the priest who said 'what about all the good the residential schools did'.

The claim that 150,000 Indigenous children were forced to attend residential schools between 1883 and 1997 now routinely appears in the media, embellished by descriptions such as children “forcibly removed from their families” or “ripped from their parents’ arms.”  Cree artist Kent Monkman depicted this fiction in his painting “The Scream” showing priests, nuns, and Mounties grabbing little Indian children from their terrified mothers.

But how true are these incendiary claims?  At best misleading, and at worst, false. 

If “forced to attend school” simply means compulsory school attendance that applies to all children, then the claim is misleading. School attendance, or its equivalent in homeschooling, is required of all Canadian children, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, as it is of children in all modern societies.

Indeed, school attendance was not even required of Indian children until 1920, when an amendment to the Indian Act made them subject to the same compulsory attendance as all others had been. However, prior to 1920 Catholic and Protestant residential schools had operated in one form or another for more than half a century. Indigenous children attended those schools because their parents wanted them to attend. Education was seen as a benefit.

Even after 1920, enforcement of attendance for Indian children was weak.  As late as 1944, records show that upwards of 40% of Indian children went to no school at all.

Typically, Indian parents who wanted their child to attend a residential school filled out an application which was forwarded to Ottawa for approval. Not all applications were accepted, as there was insufficient capacity for all children wishing to attend. 

In a similar vein, dissatisfied parents sometimes withdrew their children from the school. In 1922, for example, all parents in the community withdrew their children from the residential school at Kitimat and refused to allow them to return until the principal signed a paper affirming that the children would be “properly fed.”

Children who were “forced to attend” were mainly child welfare cases. From 1920 to the 1960s, the main option for Indian children from orphaned or troubled homes who could not be taken in by extended family was an Indian agent’s discretionary placement of a child in a residential school. 

And increasingly, from the 1940s until the mid 1960s, Indian agents took children out of homes that the agent deemed to be inadequate or dangerous and placed them in residential schools. For example, the 1967 Caldwell Report notes that in some Saskatchewan residential schools as many as 80% of the students were there primarily for child welfare reasons. Those neglected children were indeed forcibly removed from their parents, just as some children today, both Indigenous and other, are removed from inadequate parenting for their own safety.

But most Indian parents did not have those problems. They simply wanted their children to have the same education that other children received to help prepare them for modern life.

Joe and Balazee Highway were an example of such parents. 

They lived on a northern Cree reserve, where poverty and death were far too common, and they knew that education offered the best chance for their children to escape that fate. They loaded their children onto a silver Norseman floatplane and sent them south to the Guy Hill Residential School, near The Pas, Manitoba. Nine years later their son—acclaimed playwright and writer Tomson Highway—graduated at the top of his class. In his new book Perpetual Astonishment (reviewed here by lawyer Peter Best,) Highway described the time he spent at residential school as “nine of the best years of my life.”

As we know, not every student who entered a residential school had such a positive experience. There were negative experiences as well. But the positive experiences, like those of Tomson Highway, must be remembered if we are to have a balanced historical portrait.

The picture of 150,000 students being “forced to attend” and “forcibly removed from their parents” is simply not accurate. Kent Monkman’s painting is a work of mythic imagination, and should not be mistaken for history.

Brian Giesbrecht is a retired judge of the Provincial Court of Manitoba. Tom Flanagan is professor emeritus of political science at the University of Calgary.

Edited by Jaydee
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

National Post

'No dissent is allowed': School board bars teacher from raising concerns over transgender books

Tom Blackwell  1 hour ago
 
 
 
 
Like18 Comments|
 
 

An Ontario school board is facing charges of censorship this week after shutting down a teacher’s presentation to the group, saying her comments about books on transgender issues violated the province’s human rights code.

 

Carolyn Burjoski was discussing publications she said are available in the libraries of Kindergarten to grade six schools. She had begun to argue the books made it seem too simple and “cool” to medically transition to another gender when her presentation was cut short by the Waterloo Region District School Board’s chair.

Scott Piatkowski ruled she could not continue and the board eventually voted 5-4 to back up his decision. The fallout has continued since.

Though controversial and opposed by most transgender advocates, concerns have been voiced before — including by leading figures in the movement itself — that gender-dysphoric young people are sometimes pushed too aggressively into medical transition.

Piatkowski later told a local CTV station , however, that Burjoski’s comments were actually transphobic and “questioned the right to exist” of trans people. Meanwhile, the organization took down its recording of the meeting — a regular, public session of elected officials — and had YouTube remove another copy of the video for alleged copyright infringement.

And then the teacher was given what she calls a “stay-at-home order” and told not to communicate with colleagues or students, though she’s still being paid and is slated to retire soon. On Thursday, she says her union rep informed her the board had appointed an outside investigator to examine her actions.

In her first interview on the affair, Burjoski said she was “flabbergasted” by what happened at the meeting and Piatkowski’s remarks afterward.

“I am not a transphobic person. It’s crazy that just because you ask a question, the first thing people do is call you that,” she said. “We do need to have a conversation about the intersection of biology and gender. We’re not having those conversations in our culture because, look what happened to me.”

She said the order to stay away from school was likely meant to make an example of her: “The message is clear: no dissent is allowed.”

Piatkowski declined to comment Thursday, saying he was already the target of organized online harassment and didn’t want to feed it further. He referred to two previous interviews with local media outlets.

The human rights code bars discrimination based on gender identity and other grounds in the areas of housing, employment and providing services.

Asked to explain how Burjoski’s comments violated the code, the chair told 570 News radio station that he would not repeat or respond to her remarks and “give them oxygen.”

But he said he stood by his decision, and that chairs of other boards in the province have told him they would have done the same thing.

“This person was speaking about transgender people in a way that was disrespectful, that would cause them to be attacked and I really needed to ensure it did not continue,” Piatkowski said. “I’m quite confident it was the right decision.”

He said Thursday he knew nothing about the board’s actions against Burjoski or removal of the video of the meeting.

Two groups representing the LGBTQ community in Waterloo could not be reached for comment. Trans activists, however, often argue that statements questioning medical transition in any way can fuel transgender harassment, discrimination and violence.

“I’m not sorry that someone who opened the door to transphobic comments was stopped from keeping that door open,” Laura Mae Lindo, the NDP MPP for Kitchener Centre, commented on Twitter. “That’s not over-reach. Protect the most vulnerable. Uphold human rights. If you can’t do that, sit down.”

One Waterloo trustee who came to Burjoski’s defence on Monday, though, blasted the board’s decision and said he’s never seen a delegation silenced in that way before.

“It’s censoring presentations that the chair doesn’t agree with,” said long-time board member Mike Ramsay, who has served as chair three times himself. “As decision makers, we have to make informed decisions.… If we’re going to just take one point of view and say that’s sufficient, that’s wrong on so many fronts.”

Burjoski said she has worked for more than 20 years as a teacher of English as a second language, specializing in children who have immigrated from various countries affected by war and political unrest.

She appeared as a one-person public “delegation” in a session discussing the board’s controversial decision to conduct a system-wide removal of books it considered “harmful.”

Her comments focused on resources recommended by the board for a transgender awareness day. Trouble started when she turned to a book called The Other Boy by M.G. Hennessey and a scene that depicts a meeting between Shane, a transgender boy (born a girl), and a doctor. He voices excitement about starting on testosterone and when the physician says it would mean he likely wouldn’t be able to have children, he says, “It’s cool.”

As Burjoski remarked that such books make it seem overly straightforward to take cross-sex hormones, Piatkowski interjected to warn she may be violating the code.

The teacher then went on to say the book was misleading “because it does not take into account how Shane might feel later in life about being infertile. This book makes very serious medical interventions seem like an easy cure for emotional and psychological distress.”

At that point, Piatkowski told her he was “ending the presentation.”

The widely used “affirmation” approach to children who identify as transgender has raised some concerns in several countries, and not just among obvious critics. Two leading psychologists in the transgender medical community, one of them a trans woman, complained in a recent article about sloppy and dangerous assessment of young people presenting as trans, with overly hasty resort to hormones.

Pam Buffone, whose parents group Canadian Gender Report highlights similar issues, said Burjoski raised legitimate questions about the appropriateness of school materials, as places like Finland restrict the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

“If there’s a reason to hide this discussion from public scrutiny, then there’s really something wrong,” she said.

image.png

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Seeker said:

I'm not basing it on fashion choices.  I'm asking you to tell me what rights you think the "trans and other communities" are being short-changed on.  You brought it up so now tell us.

Here's a summary...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Canada

The fact that we still have to discuss this shows that it is still a problem.  Having spent my whole career in an industry that has a large faction of gay workers, I had my viewpoint turned around and now have become more in tune with the fact that they are people, just like everyone else.  

So if you want to highlight differences, isn't that what racism, ageism, religious discrimination and all the other 'isms' are all about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jaydee said:

The claim that 150,000 Indigenous children were forced to attend residential schools between 1883 and 1997 now routinely appears in the media, embellished by descriptions such as children “forcibly removed from their families” or “ripped from their parents’ arms.”  Cree artist Kent Monkman depicted this fiction in his painting “The Scream” showing priests, nuns, and Mounties grabbing little Indian children from their terrified mothers.

But how true are these incendiary claims?  At best misleading, and at worst, false. 

If “forced to attend school” simply means compulsory school attendance that applies to all children, then the claim is misleading. School attendance, or its equivalent in homeschooling, is required of all Canadian children, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, as it is of children in all modern societies.

Indeed, school attendance was not even required of Indian children until 1920, when an amendment to the Indian Act made them subject to the same compulsory attendance as all others had been. However, prior to 1920 Catholic and Protestant residential schools had operated in one form or another for more than half a century. Indigenous children attended those schools because their parents wanted them to attend. Education was seen as a benefit.

Even after 1920, enforcement of attendance for Indian children was weak.  As late as 1944, records show that upwards of 40% of Indian children went to no school at all.

Typically, Indian parents who wanted their child to attend a residential school filled out an application which was forwarded to Ottawa for approval. Not all applications were accepted, as there was insufficient capacity for all children wishing to attend. 

In a similar vein, dissatisfied parents sometimes withdrew their children from the school. In 1922, for example, all parents in the community withdrew their children from the residential school at Kitimat and refused to allow them to return until the principal signed a paper affirming that the children would be “properly fed.”

Children who were “forced to attend” were mainly child welfare cases. From 1920 to the 1960s, the main option for Indian children from orphaned or troubled homes who could not be taken in by extended family was an Indian agent’s discretionary placement of a child in a residential school. 

And increasingly, from the 1940s until the mid 1960s, Indian agents took children out of homes that the agent deemed to be inadequate or dangerous and placed them in residential schools. For example, the 1967 Caldwell Report notes that in some Saskatchewan residential schools as many as 80% of the students were there primarily for child welfare reasons. Those neglected children were indeed forcibly removed from their parents, just as some children today, both Indigenous and other, are removed from inadequate parenting for their own safety.

But most Indian parents did not have those problems. They simply wanted their children to have the same education that other children received to help prepare them for modern life.

Joe and Balazee Highway were an example of such parents. 

They lived on a northern Cree reserve, where poverty and death were far too common, and they knew that education offered the best chance for their children to escape that fate. They loaded their children onto a silver Norseman floatplane and sent them south to the Guy Hill Residential School, near The Pas, Manitoba. Nine years later their son—acclaimed playwright and writer Tomson Highway—graduated at the top of his class. In his new book Perpetual Astonishment (reviewed here by lawyer Peter Best,) Highway described the time he spent at residential school as “nine of the best years of my life.”

As we know, not every student who entered a residential school had such a positive experience. There were negative experiences as well. But the positive experiences, like those of Tomson Highway, must be remembered if we are to have a balanced historical portrait.

The picture of 150,000 students being “forced to attend” and “forcibly removed from their parents” is simply not accurate. Kent Monkman’s painting is a work of mythic imagination, and should not be mistaken for history.

Brian Giesbrecht is a retired judge of the Provincial Court of Manitoba. Tom Flanagan is professor emeritus of political science at the University of Calgary.

You have no link to this, but going by the links in the article you have posted, you contradict yourself.  That copy and paste is a good attempt at revisionist history.

This from the very first link:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/canadas-residential-schools-were-a-horror/

The goal of Canada’s Indian residential school system, after all, shared that of its U.S. Indian boarding school counterpart: “Kill the Indian, and save the man.” More than 150,000 children were taken from their homes between 1883 and 1997, often forcibly, and placed in distant boarding schools where the focus was on manual labour, religious instruction and cultural assimilation. The TRC Final Report concluded that the Indian Residential School system was an attempted “cultural genocide,” but the escalating number of recovered unmarked graves points to something even darker. Given that more than 1,300 graves have been identified using ground-penetrating radar at only four of the 139 federally run residential schools, the current official number of 4,120 students known to have died in the schools will end up being only a fraction of the actual total. 

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/report-confirms-canada-guilty-of-cultural-genocide-say-aboriginal-leaders/

 

“From Confederation until 1969, when the decision was made to close residential schools, Canada participated in a period of cultural genocide,” Sinclair said at the closing of a three-day event to hail the release of the executive summary and the 94 recommendations of the report, which was six years in the making.

Sinclair was referring to the 100-year period when more than 150,000 First Nations, Inuit and Métis children were forcibly removed from their families and put into boarding schools run by the government and religious institutions. The schools were poorly built and maintained, and an estimated 6,000 children died in fires, of malnutrition, of physical abuse, of rampant disease and of suicide. Many were physically, sexually, and psychologically abused, and all were taught to be ashamed of their language, faith practices and culture.

https://central.bac-lac.gc.ca/.item/?id=1920a013&op=img&app=indianaffairs

https://umanitoba.ca/colleges/st_pauls/ccha/Back Issues/CCHA1983-84/Carney.pdf

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, deicer said:

Here's a summary...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Canada

The fact that we still have to discuss this shows that it is still a problem.  Having spent my whole career in an industry that has a large faction of gay workers, I had my viewpoint turned around and now have become more in tune with the fact that they are people, just like everyone else.  

 

From the first paragraph:

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights in Canada are some of the most extensive in the Americas and in the world.

From the second paragraph:

Canada was referred to as the most gay-friendly country in the world, when it was ranked first in the Gay Travel Index chart in 2018, and among the five safest in Forbes magazine in 2019.

From the third paragraph:

In recent decades, Canada went through some major legal shifts in support of LGBT rights (e.g. decriminalization, anti-discrimination, anti-harassment, gay marriage, homoparentality, blood donations, transgender rights and outlawry of conversion therapies).

How far do I have to go to get to the part that lists the "rights" being denied?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, deicer said:

 

So if you want to highlight differences, isn't that what racism, ageism, religious discrimination and all the other 'isms' are all about?

No, I don't care to highlight differences but you stated that trans and "other communities" are "looking for rights equal to others".  I'm simply holding your feet to the fire - what rights are they looking for that are being denied? 

They might believe they are being denied some right based on the fact they are constantly told they are helpless victims by groups like BLM but the truth is that they are not being denied any rights.  In fact when it comes to employment, education and scholarship opportunities people of colour hold uber-rights.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, deicer said:

good attempt at revisionist history.

LOL…at what point does the Left think enough is enough? on top of the HUNDREDS of BILLIONS Canada has already given them free and clear…(but apparently they haven’t yet figured out how to have clean drinking water :Scratch-Head:) )… and now with Trudeau bending over :icon_butt: yet again promising BILLIONS more of free $$$$ in the offing, it only makes sense to make the story seem as horrible as possible..so sorry NOT !!…in case you haven't heard Canada is BROKE. Time to move on from this BS. :white:

Canada pledges $31.5 billion to compensate indigenous children taken from families

https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20220105-canada-pledges-31-5-billion-to-compensate-indigenous-children-taken-from-families

Edited by Jaydee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 But only at airports in cities where the residents are deemed too crazy for Crazy Island:

TSA confirms it lets illegal immigrants use arrest warrants as ID in airports

TSA said the document would be checked against CBP databases

 

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely a spoof? 

M&M’s makeover: Candy maker revamps mascots with less sexist look

Candy maker Mars said it wants to give its mascots more nuanced personalities as a way to promote inclusivity.

M&M’s candy is seen in Nashville, Tennessee
Mars, whose brands include Twix and Snickers, said that it will also put added emphasis on the ampersand in the M&M's logo to demonstrate how the brand aims to bring people together [File: Mike Stewart/AP Photo]
Published On 21 Jan 202221 Jan 2022
 

Candy maker Mars is giving a makeover to its six M&M’s characters as a way to promote inclusivity.

The company said that it will provide a modern take on the appearances of the characters — which Mars calls “lentils” — and give them more nuanced personalities. The lentils, which are featured in red, green, orange, yellow, brown and blue, will also come in different shapes and sizes.

 

Some of the changes to the M&M’s characters include making two of them less stereotypically feminine. In the new version, the green M&M ditches high-heeled boots in favour of sneakers and the brown candy no longer wears stilettos, opting instead for lower heels.

“Our ambition is to upend the expected, breakthrough barriers, and discover the little joys shared in everyday life. Imagine a world with less judgment & more connection & consistent laughter,” the United States-based company said on its website.

Mars, whose brands also include Twix and Snickers, said that it will put added emphasis on the ampersand in the M&M’s logo to demonstrate how the brand aims to bring people together.

The move towards inclusivity and embracing individual differences comes at a time when consumers are growing increasingly aware of how products are marketed to them. Mars is aware of this, having had to change the name of its Uncle Ben’s rice brand in 2020 due to criticism. Quaker Oats Company’s Aunt Jemima brand pancake mix and syrup — part of PepsiCo — rebranded last year because it said that Aunt Jemima was based on a racial stereotype.

But some marketers believe that Mars may be overthinking the marketing of its M&M’s.

Allen Adamson, co-founder of marketing consultancy Metaforce, says the move to overhaul the character of the M&M’s is a “good idea”, but it’s just an example of how worried marketers are about offending consumers. And he believes this step is on the “verge of potential overthink”.

Marketing consultant Laura Ries agrees, though she praises Mars’s emphasis on the ampersand as a symbol of unity.

“They’re looking for some attention and trying to jump on the bandwagon of trying to be more inclusive,” Ries said. “I don’t think there was an overall outcry of the overall sexualisation of the M&M. It’s just an M&M.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, deicer said:

good attempt at revisionist history.

In Kamloops, Not One Body Has Been Found
 

By Professor Jacques Rouillard

Jacques Rouillard is professor emeritus in the Department of History at the Université de Montréal.

https://www.dorchesterreview.ca/blogs/news/in-kamloops-not-one-body-has-been-found


 

AFTER SEVEN MONTHS of recrimination and denunciation, where are the remains of the children buried at the Kamloops Indian Residential School? 

The Canadian Press has just honoured the children of residential schools as the “Person of the Year 2021.” The huge media story last summer grew out of the scanning of part of the site in the British Columbia interior where the school operated from 1890 to 1978. The “discovery” was first reported last May 27 by Tk'emlúps te secwépemc First Nation Chief Rosanne Casimir after an anthropologist, Sarah Beaulieu, used ground-penetrating radar in a search for the remains of children alleged by some to be buried there. She is a young anthropologist, an instructor in Anthropology and Sociology at the University of the Fraser Valley since 2018. Her preliminary report is actually based on depressions and abnormalities in the soil of an apple orchard near the school – not on exhumed remains. According to Chief Casimir, these “missing children” represent “undocumented deaths.” Their presence, she says, has long been “knowledge” in the community and “some were as young as three years old.”[1]

From new research revealed at a July 15 press conference last year, the anthropologist scaled back the potential discovery from 215 to 200 “probable burials.” Having “barely scratched the surface,” she found many “disturbances in the ground such as tree roots, metal and stones.” The “disruptions picked up in the radar,” she says, led her to conclude that the sites “have multiple signatures that present like burials.” But she cannot confirm that until the site is excavated – if it is ever done. A community spokesperson says the full report “cannot” be released to the media.[2] For Chief Casimir, “it is not yet clear whether the continuing work on the Kamloops site will involve excavation.”

The Kamloops “discovery” of 2021 created a major sensation in Canada and abroad. Based on the preliminary assessment and before any remains were found or any credible report made, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau immediately referred to “a dark and shameful chapter” in Canadian history.[3] British Columbia Premier John Horgan said he was “horrified and heartbroken” to learn of a burial site with 215 children that highlights the violence and consequences of the residential school system.[4] Several other Aboriginal communities and media outlets then followed up with references to unmarked graves.

On May 30, the federal government lowered the flags on all its buildings to half-staff. Later, it instituted a new holiday to honour "missing" children and survivors of residential schools. Spontaneously, clusters of shoes and orange shirts and other paraphernalia were placed on church steps in many cities or on the steps of legislatures in memory of the little victims. Around the country, churches were burned or vandalized. Statues were spray-painted and pulled down in apparent retaliation for the fate of the children. The statue of Queen Victoria in front of the Manitoba Legislature was defaced and pulled down. Montreal’s statue of Sir John A. Macdonald, Canada's first prime minister, was knocked down, his detached bronze head symbolically rolling on the ground.      

In the wake of unsubstantiated claims by Aboriginal leaders, several media outlets amplified and hyped the story by alleging that the bodies of 215 children had been found, adding that “thousands” of children had “gone missing” from residential schools and that parents had not been informed. The undisturbed sites even became “mass graves” where bodies were dumped in a jumble. 

This supposed “news” made the rounds in all sorts of media, tarnishing Canada’s self-image and reputation abroad. Under the title “Horrible History: Mass Grave of Indigenous Children Reported in Canada,” the May 28 New York Times, even when updated on Oct. 5, reported that “For decades, most [sic] Indigenous children in Canada were taken from their families and forced into boarding schools. A large number [sic] never returned home, their families given only vague explanations, or none at all.” The indigenous community “has found evidence of what happened to some of its missing children: a mass grave containing the remains of 215 children on the grounds of a former residential school.”[5]

 

False Reports

THESE FALSE REPORTS induced the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to portray the situation as “a large scale human rights violation.” The UN urged Canadian authorities and the Catholic Church to conduct “thorough investigations into the discovery of a mass grave containing the remains of over 200 children”  again before a single verified body had been exhumed.[6] Amnesty International is demanding that the persons and institutions responsible for the “remains” that had been “found” in Kamloops be prosecuted.[7]

It was certainly ironic that China of all countries — itself probably the greatest human rights abuser in history — called for an investigation into human rights violations against the Indigenous people in Canada at the UN Human Rights Tribunal in June 2021. This demand was required just before Canadian officials read a statement to allow the UN human rights chief access into Xinjiang to investigate the unlawful detention of over one million Uyghur Muslims. Trudeau responded that Canada had a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but that “China is not recognizing even that there is a problem.”[8]

The supposed perpetrators of this “crime” are also making excuses: governments, religious communities, the Conference of Catholic Bishops. In June Pope Francis expressed his pain for “the shocking discovery in Canada of the remains of 215 children” at Kamloops,[9] and in an exceptional gesture promised to come to Canada. Aboriginal leaders are demanding a formal apology and some (including Rosanne Casimir) that the church provide more compensation for survivors.[10] To find out the truth about unmarked graves, the Canadian government made available in June an envelope of $27 million to “to identify and delineate burial sites, and returning remains home if desired.”[11]

By never pointing out that it is only a matter of speculation or potentiality, and that no remains have yet been found, governments and the media are simply granting credence to what is really a thesis: the thesis of the “disappearance” of children from residential schools. From an allegation of “cultural genocide” endorsed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) we have moved to “physical genocide,” a conclusion that the Commission explicitly rejects in its report.[12] And all of this is based only on soil abnormalities that could easily be caused by root movements, as the anthropologist herself cautioned in the July 15 press conference.

According to another anthropologist, Scott Hamilton, who has worked on residential school cemeteries for the TRC between 2013-2015, one must be very careful with the use of ground-penetrating radar because the soil may have been disturbed over the years by "sedimentary texture, ... culturally-derived unconformities, obstructions or voids."[13] A project to test the soil with the same method at the Brandon Residential School in Manitoba, which began in 2012 and was re-launched in 2019, has not yet yielded any conclusive results. In June, the research team works to identify 104 potential graves and still needs to consult the residential school's archives and interview survivors.[14]

 

Subscribe to support accurate history-reporting. 

Use the Discount Code FIVER and get $5 off your first issue.

 
 

 

In its 2015 report, the TRC identified 3,200 deaths of children at residential schools. Surprisingly, it was unable to record the names of one-third of the children (32%) or for half (49%), the cause of death.[15] Why are there so many “nameless” residential school students? According to Vol. 4 of the Report, there are “significant limitations in both the quality and quantity of the data the Commission has been able to compile on residential school deaths.”[16]

In fact each trimester, school principals reported the names of students attending school to be funded by the government and specified the names of any students who had died. But “in many cases,” the Report says, school principals simply reported on the number of children who had died in the previous year, without identification. Or, they might give a total of the number of students who had died since a specific school opened, but with no indication of the name, year, or cause of death.[17]

The Commission included all these unnamed students in the total of student deaths. That means that student deaths could have been counted twice: both in the trimester report by the principals and in the general compilation with no names. The Commission admitted that this possibility exists that some of the deaths recorded in the Named Register might also be included in the Unnamed Register.[18]

This obviously biased method inflates greatly the number of missing students and the actual state of knowledge surrounding their deaths. And this flawed information is what lies at the root of the assumption that any unnamed students disappeared without their parents’ being informed and that the schools crudely buried them in mass graves.

It is likely that this methodological gap relates to the years prior to 1950 because the death rate recorded by the Commission in residential schools from 1921 to 1950 (named and unnamed deaths) is twice as high as that of Canadian youth in the general population aged five to fourteen for the same years. This mortality rate averaged about four deaths per year for every 1,000 youth attending the schools. Their deaths were mostly due to tuberculosis and influenza when the Commission could identify the cause. 

On the other hand, the mortality rate in residential schools was actually comparable to the Canadian average from 1950 to 1965, again for youth aged five to fourteen.[19] That drop from the previous period is most likely the result of the inoculation by vaccines that took place in the residential schools as in other Canadian schools.

 

Kamloops Residential School Deaths

THE COMMISSION expressed the hope that further investigation would occur into the reports of deaths in industrial schools, and Rosanne Casimir said that it is “of critical importance to identify those lost children” in Kamloops.[20] I am happy to announce here in THE DORCHESTER REVIEW that we have completed a follow-up study.

Founded in 1890 on the initiative of Shuswap Chief Louis Clexlixqen (pictured below), the Kamloops industrial school was run by successive generations of priests and brothers of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate, and by the Sisters of St. Anne from Quebec. In the 1950s, with approximately 500 children, the school was run by four English-speaking Oblates and 11 sisters of Saint Anne, according to the estimate by Frédéric Barriault, research director at the Montreal Centre for Justice and Faith. He believed that a typical residential school run by the Catholic Church had two or three Oblates, a dozen nuns, and often hundreds of children.[21] 

 

chief_480x480.jpg?v=1641926994

Shuswap Chief Louis Clexlixqen, the founder of Kamloops Residential School who loved and respected the Oblate Fathers.

 

At the Kamloops residential school, the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation (NCTR) officially recorded the names of 51 children who died from 1915 to 1964.[22] We have been able to find information on these children from the records in Library and Archives Canada and from death certificates held by the British Columbia Archives’ Genealogy resource online which, it seems, was not consulted by NCTR researchers.[23]

Combining these two sources provides a good picture of the deaths of at least 35 of the 49 students (two are duplicates).[24] Seventeen died in hospital and eight on their own reserves as a result of illness or accidents. Four were the subject of autopsies and seven of coroners’ inquests. As for burial sites, 24 are buried in their home Indian Reserve cemetery, and four at the Kamloops Indian Reserve cemetery. For the rest of the 49 children, information is either missing or requires that the complete death certificate in the B.C. Vital Statistics Agency be consulted. This is a far cry from the unverified claim that authorities overlooked or somehow covered up their deaths, or that the parents were not informed, or the remains never returned home. Most were informed and most were returned home.

Beginning in 1935, the Department of Indian Affairs imposed a specific procedure for handling the death of a student. The principal of the residential school had to inform the departmental agent, who formed an inquiry committee composed of himself, the principal, and the doctor who had diagnosed the death. Parents must be informed of the investigation and were allowed to attend and make a statement.[25]

For example, Kathleen Michel, 14 years old, fell ill on April 25, 1937 and was treated at the school by a nurse, who called a doctor. On May 1, she was taken by car to the Royal Inland Hospital of Kamloops. She was treated by a doctor but died two days later of acute nephritis with contributing causes of measles and cardiac dysfunction. In his report, the doctor did not find any deficiencies in the care provided at the residential school. The father was informed of the investigation, but did not want to attend. Unfortunately, the memorandum of the inquiry does not specify where she was buried.[26]

 

SIGNIFICANTLY, THE Kamloops residential school is located at the heart of the Kamloops Reserve itself — a fact that is never reported by Aboriginal spokespersons or the media. The TRC report states that “schools were virtually all church-run in the early years of the system [and] Christian burial was the norm at most schools.” Also, the adjoining church cemetery “may be used as a burial ground for students who die at the school as well as for members of the local community and the missionaries themselves.”[27] This is what happened in Kamloops. Our research shows that four students are buried in the Band cemetery on the reserve that is located near St. Joseph’s Church, not far from the residential school.

With the cemetery so close by, is it really credible that the remains of 200 children were buried clandestinely in a mass grave, on the reserve itself, without any reaction from the band council until last summer? Chief Casimir states that the presence of children’s remains had been “known” in the community for a long time. Aboriginal families are certainly as concerned about the fate of their children as any other community; why did they say nothing? Moreover, how can one think that entire groups of religious men and women dedicated to high moral standards could conspire to commit such sordid crimes without dissent and not even a single whistleblower? 

 

"With the Kamloops Reserve cemetery close by, is it really credible that the remains of 200 children were buried clandestinely — on the reserve itself — without any reaction from the band council until last summer?"

 

The school is also close to the City of Kamloops. Agents of the Department of Indian Affairs, closely monitoring school operations, would have responded quickly to news of any missing or deceased children – if there had been any. Finally, as we have seen, the province required the completion of a death certificate for all deceased persons. At the turn of the twentieth century, British Columbia was not the wild west. A researcher today wishing to obtain the death certificate of any child attending the Kamloops residential school, can get it by entering the name and date of death on the the British Columbia Genealogical Records website. This type of research is also possible in other provinces.

Let us conclude with a side-note on another “nameless burial” site near a residential school, that of the Cowessess (Marieval) First Nation in Saskatchewan, which created more shock waves last June after the announcement in Kamloops. Operating since 1899 in a remote area, it was run by the Oblates and the Sisters of St. Joseph of St. Hyacinthe. The surface search by georadar is more advanced there as 751 well laid out graves have been discovered. As shown by a CBC News reporter, this is in fact simply the Catholic cemetery of the Mission of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Marieval. 

According to the register of baptisms, marriages and burials from 1885 to 1933, there are certainly graves present on site of children who died at the residential school, but also those of many adults and children under five years of age from the surrounding area. “There was a mixture of everyone in that graveyard, in that cemetery,” said local resident Pearl Lerat and her sister, Linda Whiteman, who attended Marieval residential school from the late 1940s to the mid-1950s. Pearl said “the sisters’ parents, grandparents and great-grandparents are buried there along with others from outside the First Nation,” whites and natives together. According to other residents living nearby, the graves had crosses and headstones until the 1960s when a priest allegedly removed them because the cemetery was in “terrible shape.”[28]

According to historian Jim Miller of the University of Saskatchewan, “the remains of children discovered in Marieval and Kamloops had been buried in cemeteries according to Catholic rites, under wooden crosses that quickly crumbled.” “The wooden cross was a Catholic burial marker for the poor,” confirms Brian Gettler of the University of Toronto.[29] The residential school cemeteries with their wooden crosses probably look like the present St. Joseph’s Native Cemetery on the Kamloops Reserve (see photo).

 

kam_480x480.jpg?v=1641848403

Photo: Four Kamloops children who died at the residential school are buried in this cemetery — that of the Kamloops Aboriginal community (Credit: Ken Vavrhodt, Kamloops This Week, Nov. 17, 2020). The monument shown here is that of Shuswap Louis Clexlixqen, chief from 1852 until his death in 1915. A strong advocate of Indian education, he assisted the Oblate Fathers in establishing a day-school on the Kamloops Reserve in 1880 and initiated the Residential School built there in 1890.

 

According to the TRC report, the churchyard often served as a place of worship and burial for students who died at school as well as for members of the local community and the missionaries themselves. As residential school cemeteries have been abandoned, neglected, and even forgotten after their closure, they have blurred into the background. In many cases, they became difficult to locate or were used for other purposes.[30] The Commission rightly proposed that they be documented, maintained, and protected.

It is hard to believe that a preliminary search for an alleged cemetery or mass grave in an apple orchard on reserve land near the residential school of Kamloops could have led to such a spiral of claims endorsed by the Canadian government and repeated by mass media all over the world. It gives a terrible and simplistic impression of complex issues in Canadian history. The exhumations have not yet begun and no remains have obviously been found. Imaginary stories and emotion have outweighed the pursuit of truth. On the road to reconciliation, isn’t the best way to seek and tell the whole truth rather than deliberately create sensational myths? 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Seeker said:

No, I don't care to highlight differences but you stated that trans and "other communities" are "looking for rights equal to others".  I'm simply holding your feet to the fire - what rights are they looking for that are being denied? 

They might believe they are being denied some right based on the fact they are constantly told they are helpless victims by groups like BLM but the truth is that they are not being denied any rights.  In fact when it comes to employment, education and scholarship opportunities people of colour hold uber-rights.

 

You feel you need to hold my feet to the fire, yet you base it on taking my original point out of context.

Why isn't it considered out of line that I responded that way to a statement that (to paraphrase) 'uber rights' were being given that was trampling on rights?

We wouldn't be having this conversation if only people treated each other with respect and equality.

You think it's 'uber-rights', however, maybe you are just upset that they are being given the same rights as you?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/20/2022 at 2:40 PM, Wolfhunter said:

Now all you need is a wild cat strike/protest by drivers all across the country, and don't be thinking it's out of the question either...  y'all may find that last 12% a bit harder to push around than you thought.

Ya, I know it’s Rebel news, that doesn’t mean it’s not true though. Who’d a thunk they’d ever do such a thing eh?   

https://www.rebelnews.com/canadian_truckers_freedom_convoy_2022_set_to_depart_bc_for_ottawa_to_protest_vaccine_mandate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, deicer said:

You feel you need to hold my feet to the fire, yet you base it on taking my original point out of context.

Well, it's because you do this all the time - casually throw out some line like "the trans community is just looking for the same rights as everyone else".  You've probably used that line, and been unchallenged, so many times that you can't even process the concept of providing some proof of it.  Every once in a while I like to ask - what rights are they being denied?  I asked you and you linked me to a Wikipedia article that said, essentially, that Canada is one of the best places in the World to be trans or BIPOC or from a minority community and that there are no rights being denied.  I'm not surprised that you can't provide any data to back up your claim.

 

1 hour ago, deicer said:

We wouldn't be having this conversation if only people treated each other with respect and equality.

You think it's 'uber-rights', however, maybe you are just upset that they are being given the same rights as you?

Riiiiight.  Like the CBC posting job positions with the statement "if you're not a minority don't bother to apply."   Peterson just posted an article about this very topic.  His white, male grad students have virtually no chance of employment in their field due to diversity hiring formulas but you think I'm upset because minority communities have been given the "same" rights?

You haven't been following along - there is virtually no-one anywhere that is opposed to equal opportunity for everyone, everywhere.  We passed equality several decades ago.  The problem is that certain blowhard leftists now want equal outcome - a completely different animal altogether.

And, respect?  How much respect is due to someone who get's accepted to university with lesser marks (because of their racial background), get's more tuition assistance, scholarships and bursuries (because of their racial background) and then gets more and better career opportunities (because of their racial background).

Respect and equality - possible.

Respect and equity - not possible.

I'll tell a little story.  My daughter graduated from High School some years ago - a smallish High School in a small suburban community.  There was maybe 20 small scholarships available - more than half of them went to a single minority girl/woman who was going to university.  She was no stellar student and certainly no more deserving than any other student except for one thing - I think you can guess what it was. So, how fair is that?  Each scholarship committee came to the exact same decision for the exact same reason - "here's a minority, let's give her the money".  This woman had all of her tuition paid, all of her expenses paid with money left over and the white kid from the single parent family who's mother works as a cashier at Walmart got SFA.

Your comment - we should all just respect each other kinda rankles me since I've seen the system in action and seen the fallout.

I would never in a million years say that race, gender, sexual orientation, etc, etc, should exclude someone from any job, educational opportunity, club membership, neighbourhood and, in Canada, it hasn't for a very long time. 

This is not what we're talking about here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

COMMON SENSE


It used to be common. In the past, people who didn't have common sense, never used to live long. Few reached adulthood and reproduced. Their numbers were minimal compared to the people who had it.

You know the type. They cross train tracks while the boom is down. Unfortunately, in our haste to make the world a safer place, we've allowed the common sense deficient, to proliferate at phenomenal speed. We've now reached the stage where a cup of coffee has to come with a warning label stating that the contents are hot.

I dread the day when they become the majority.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Jaydee said:

we've allowed the common sense deficient, to proliferate at phenomenal speed.

Helmet and seatbelt laws had two outcomes IMO, they reduced the effects of natural selection and simultaneously ushered in the era of government over reach. It's now difficult to tell which drives the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Seeker said:

 

This is not what we're talking about here.

Yes it is.

A member of this forum, who I will respectfully state is way more learned and intelligent than I am, use to talk about how things were a 'three legged stool', and how politics was a 'pendulum'.

As you see, things have been so one sided for so long, now that the pendulum has swung the other way, you don't like it?

It's about balance.

We don't have that anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, deicer said:

It's about balance.

We don't have that anymore.

Well you are right about one thing.…society has gone full blown crazy ever since the Left were elected

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, deicer said:

As you see, things have been so one sided for so long, now that the pendulum has swung the other way, you don't like it?

So you acknowledge the pendulum has swung too far but still go on about how these "communities" are simply looking for the same rights as everyone else.  We are long past the same rights but that's OK because 100 years ago it was the other way 'round.

 

4 minutes ago, deicer said:

It's about balance.

Some black dude was discriminated against in the 50's so we'll discriminate against a white dude now to balance it out.  There's a recipe for success!

I'm all for encouraging members from a marginalized community to participate.  I'm all for tearing down obstacles and ensuring equality but when it comes to writing the entrance test - everybody writes the same test.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...