26 Replies to “Reader Tips”

  2. Speaking of rules, how about CUPE and PSAC using elementary school children in a political demonstration against Harper?
    “Two of Canada’s largest unions paid to bus hundreds of school kids to Parliament Hill on Tuesday to rally against what they call government inaction on First Nations education.”
    The children were in kindergarten to grade 6, and were taught to say that Harper was a liar; to sing anti-Harper songs..etc.
    Where’s the outrage from the parents? The teachers allowed this? And where’s the media on this?
    “Two of Canada’s largest unions paid to bus hundreds of school kids to Parliament Hill on Tuesday to rally against what they call government inaction on First Nations education.”
    http://forums.canadiancontent.net/news/104517-whos-using-children-political-pawns.html
    Look – you can, as an adult, demonstrate and protest about a govt program, but you do not, frankly, abuse children and use them as pawns in your protest.

  4. Go west, young man:
    “Eastern European criminals were responsible for more than 11,000 crimes in London last year. Nationals of Poland, Romania and Lithuania are most likely of all foreigners to be prosecuted by the police, an investigation has revealed.
    “Overall, foreigners are accused of one in four of all crimes committed in London.
    “Astonishingly, they make up nine out of ten drug suspects and are responsible for more than one in three sex offences…”

  5. “Astonishingly, they make up nine out of ten drug suspects and are responsible for more than one in three sex offences…”
    Astonishingly???? …only for someone who has their head in the sand or up their butt.

  7. Form new neural pathways using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) – Ritalin is old news:
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328501.600-zap-your-brain-into-the-zone-fast-track-to-pure-focus.html?page=1
    The author’s blog:
    http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2012/02/09/better-living-through-electrochemistry/
    The apparatus costs about $10 000, but there are links in the articles to do-it-yourself websites – not necessarily recommended.

  9. It’s almost time for pitchforks in the streets, as the Supreme Court upholds Quebec’s indoctrination program in the schools (ECR, or ERC en francais):
    http: //scc.lexum.org/en/2012/2012scc7/2012scc7.html
    English version of the judgment of McLachlin C.J. and Binnie, Deschamps, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ. delivered by
    DESCHAMPS J. —
    (paragraph 1) “The societal changes that Canada has undergone since the middle of the last century have brought with them a new social philosophy that favours the recognition of minority rights.”
    And we’re off on the wrong foot. This case is about the individual rights to freedom of conscience and religion, not minority rights.
    (5) “Dubois J. of the Superior Court found that the appellants had not proved that the ERC Program infringed their freedom of conscience and religion (2009 QCCS 3875, [2009] R.J.Q. 2398). He concluded that the objective presentation of various religions to children did not put them [translation] ā€œin an obligatory and coercive situationā€ (paras. 64 and 66) … Having found that the ERC Program did not infringe the right to freedom of conscience and religion, he held that the school boardā€™s decision to deny the exemptions was valid (para. 123). ”
    If one is coerced into listening to a presentation about a religious or philosophical viewpoint that differs from one’s own (or even one that doesn’t), that is an infringement of freedom of conscience and/or religion, as applicable. Whether the ERC program itself infringes the right to freedom of conscience or not, the coercive aspect of attendance certainly does.
    The major objection to ERC was precisely the lack of objectivity.
    (8) “To begin, this Court must decide whether the trial judge erred in holding that the school boardā€™s refusal to exempt the appellantsā€™ children from the ERC course did not infringe the appellantsā€™ freedom of conscience and religion. This issue turns on whether the trial judge erred in finding that the appellants had not proven that the ERC Program itself infringed their freedom of religion.”
    As stated above, the correct issue is coercion, which infringes freedom of conscience and religion.
    (20) “In Canadian Civil Liberties Assn. v. Ontario (Minister of Education) (1990), 71 O.R. (2d) 341, the Ontario Court of Appeal considered a regulation that made periods of religious education a compulsory part of the public school curriculum. The court … noted that a program that taught about religion and moral values without indoctrination in a particular faith would not breach the Canadian Charter (p. 344).”
    Non-religious indoctrination should also be held to breach the Charter, if that document has any worth at all.
    (25) “… the following comment of Wilson J. in R. v. Jones, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 284, at p. 314, which Iacobucci J. quoted in Amselem, para. 58, bears repeating: s. 2(a) of the Canadian Charter ā€œ does not require the legislature to refrain from imposing any burdens on the practice of religionā€ (emphasis omitted; see also Edwards Books). ā€œThe ultimate protection of any particular Charter right must be measured in relation to other rights and with a view to the underlying context in which the apparent conflict arisesā€ (Amselem, at para. 62). No right is absolute.”
    This is dangerous territory. The very notion that a person who wishes to send his children to a private religious school should also have the imposition of paying taxes to support the public school system is a serious violation of freedom of religion. A right includes the right not to pay to support opposing viewpoints to one’s own, by definition.
    (26) “The appellants sincerely believe that they have an obligation to pass on the precepts of the Catholic religion to their children (A.F., at para. 66). The sincerity of their belief in this practice is not challenged by the respondents in this case. The only question at issue is whether the appellantsā€™ ability to observe the practice has been interfered with.”
    Clearly it has, if their children are receiving contrary information.
    (28) “In their requests for exemption made to the school board on May 12, 2008, the appellants had alleged that the ERC course was liable to cause the following harm:
    [TRANSLATION]
    1. Losing the right to choose an education consistent with oneā€™s own moral and religious principles; interfering with the fundamental freedom of religion, conscience, opinion and expression of children and their parents by forcing children to take a course that does not reflect the religious and philosophical beliefs with which their parents have the right and duty to bring them up.
    2. Being put in the situation of learning from a teacher who is not adequately trained in the subject matter and who has been deprived of freedom of conscience by being forced to perform this task.
    3. Upsetting children by exposing them at too young an age to convictions and beliefs that differ from the ones favoured by their parents.
    4. Dealing with the phenomenon of religion in a course that claims to be ā€œneutralā€.
    5. Being exposed, through this mandatory course, to the philosophical trend advocated by the state, namely relativism.
    6. Interfering with childrenā€™s faith. [A.R., vol. III, at pp. 499ā€‘500]”
    It is perhaps unfortunate that “relativism” was identified by the plaintiffs as the philosophical trend advocated by the state, when the reality is broader and much more sinister: left-wing “values” (or most of them anyway).
    (29) “The principal argument that emerges from the reasons given by the appellants in their requests for an exemption is that the obligation they believe they have, namely to pass on their faith to their children, has been interfered with. In this regard, the freedom of religion asserted by the appellants is their own freedom, not that of the children. The common theme that runs through the appellantsā€™ objections is that the ERC Program is not in fact neutral.”
    Yes, the parents’ rights have clearly been violated. Why is the Court so blind to the obvious?
    (30) “We must recognize that trying to achieve religious neutrality in the public sphere is a major challenge for the state. The author R. Moon has clearly described the difficulty of implementing a legislative policy that will be seen by everyone as neutral and respectful of their freedom of religion:
    ‘If secularism or agnosticism constitutes a position, worldview, or cultural identity equivalent to religious adherence, then its proponents may feel excluded or marginalized when the state supports even the most ecumenical religious practices. …” (ā€œGovernment Support for Religious Practiceā€, in Law and Religious Pluralism in Canada (2008), 217, at p. 231)'”
    “Secularism” is not a position or worldview, it is a broad category that includes numerous non-religous positions. The state has no more right to indoctrinate in any particular secularist belief system than it does in a religious one. The Supreme Court seems not to understand this crucial point.
    (32) “Therefore, following a realistic and non-absolutist approach, state neutrality is assured when the state neither favours nor hinders any particular religious belief, that is, when it shows respect for all postures towards religion, including that of having no religious beliefs whatsoever, while taking into account the competing constitutional rights of the affected individuals affected.”
    Again, this may deal with the aspects regarding religious belief but it completely ignores other, non-religious belief systems.
    (37) “… I cannot conclude that exposing children to ia comprehensive presentation of various religions without forcing the children to join themi constitutes in itself an indoctrination of students that would infringe the appellantsā€™ freedom of religion.”
    If coercion is involved, it is an infringement.
    (40) “Parents are free to pass their personal beliefs on to their children if they so wish. However, the early exposure of children to realities that differ from those in their immediate family environment is a fact of life in society. The suggestion that exposing children to a variety of religious facts in itself infringes their religious freedom or that of their parents amounts to a rejection of the multicultural reality of Canadian society and ignores the Quebec governmentā€™s obligations with regard to public education. Although such exposure can be a source of friction, it does not in itself constitute an infringement of s. 2(a) of the Canadian Charter and of s. 3 of the Quebec Charter.”
    The lesson to be learned from this fiasco is that we need the separation of school and state in the same way and for the same reasons as for the separation of church and state. No compromise is possible on this. A voucher system would be a first step in the right direction.

  11. At PJMedia, thereā€™s an article about Canadaā€™s embrace of multiculturalism by Phyllis Chesler, “Why Multiculturalism Is Racism”.
    ā€œThe worm inside the doctrine of multiculturalism is the lie that all cultures are worthy of equal respect and equally embracing of individual freedom and democracy.ā€ – Dr. Salim Mansur
    Her source is the estimable Salim Mansur’s book, ā€œDelectable Lie: A Liberal Repudiation of Multiculturalismā€. Hereā€™s the article:
    http://pjmedia.com/blog/why-multiculturalism-is-racism/?singlepage=true

  12. I, Justin Trudeau (by proxy Lorrie Goldstein):
    http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/17/what-would-justin-do
    … Sometimes I think my mouth isnā€™t big enough for my brain, sort of like the Brain in Pinky and the Brain.
    This is a burden I, Justin Trudeau, must bear ā€” for the sake of the starving children of Africa, who look up to me ā€” so that I can make life better for everyone ā€¦ who is not Justin Trudeau. (Thatā€™s me.) …

  13. From Ted Belman at Israpundit:
    ā€œ. . . the Obama administration has made a strategic decision to join forces with the Islamists rather than fight them. . . . It is no accident that the Islamists are now in power in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt or that the the US has fully embraced Islamist Erdogan of Turkey and is supporting the advent of the MB in Syria. Nothing could be more ominous.ā€ Ted Belman (Ted is a Jewish Canadian who recently made Aliyah, which means he moved to Israel to live.)
    A note from Investigative Project on Terrorism Executive Director Steven Emerson:
    ā€œPlease take the time to read this very important story [The State Dept has embraced the Islamist Agenda at home and abroad] written by a courageous Egyptian liberal intellectual about the Islamist and Muslim Brotherhood lobbies in Washington and the OBAMA Administrationā€™s secret collaboration with these pro-terrorist, anti-Western, anti-women, anti-American and anti-Semitic organizations. This is one of the most important articles I have read in years. . . .
    ā€œDuring the next several months, the IPT (Investigative Project on Terrorism) will be releasing a series of major investigative reports revealing the secret infiltration by and collaboration with radical Islamic organizations by the OBAMA administration that has spread to the National Security Council, the Dept of Justice, the FBI, the Dept of Homeland Security, the CIA and the State Department as well as local law enforcement.ā€ (Emphasis mine)
    http://www.israpundit.com/

  15. batb, Lorrie Goldstein has a great article there describing Canada’s homegrown narcissist in waiting.

  16. Bur if Bambi is poison, why does he consistently poll at 50% ?
    It is baffling that Americans could be so stupid, but they did elect him once, kind of says it all.
    If they want more pain, more taxes, even higher gas prices, and more economic stagnation, re-elect the Marxist.

  17. Dan, let me take a stab at answering your question. I very much subscribe to what Dennis Prager said in this famous video. Americans have had it soooooo good for so long that they’ve forgotten (been taught) that money does not grow on trees and hard work IS required to earn the things they want.
    Obama is not the cause of America’s current woes but merely a symptom.

  18. I believe that 47% of the American population doesn’t pay fedral taxes, but are the beneficiaries of government largesse. They’ll vote for anyone, as long as the $$ keep coming.
    Now, the other 53%? Let’s remember that public schools, universities, and the MSM either ignore or lie through their teeth about what’s really going on.
    Good Lord, deliver us.

  23. Neo-AGW PR.
    Supplies and avalanches.
    But, here’s his agenda: “He said the real message is that the world has to start limiting its use of fossil fuels.”
    BTW, “the climate” is not threatened.
    …-
    “Coal, not oilsands, the real threat to climate, study finds”
    “One of the worldā€™s top climate scientists has calculated that emissions from Albertaā€™s oilsands are unlikely to make a big difference to global warming and that the real threat to the planet comes from burning coal.
    ā€œI was surprised by the results of our analysis,ā€ said Andrew Weaver,”.
    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1133882–coal-not-oilsands-the-real-threat-to-climate-study-finds
    …-
    “Three dead in Washington state avalanche
    Globe and Mail”
    “Swedish man survives two months trapped in snow-covered car
    National Post”

  24. Any twittering yet ā€™bout left-liberal Snooper Googoo?
    The faux conservative libertarian/libertines and their left-liberal allies are silent.
    ā€¦-
    ā€œGoogle officials sued over ā€˜privacyā€™ tacticsā€
    ā€œResearchers at Stanford University said Google programmers developed codes that allowed them to avoid privacy settings created by their rivals at Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple.
    The settings were designed to block cookies, or small pieces of code, that can be used to follow usersā€™ activities on the Web. The Wall Street Journal reported Googleā€™s actions in bypassing the privacy settings earlier this week.
    Soble is seeking class-action status for his suit, which was filed on behalf of individuals ā€œwhose default privacy settings on the web browser software produced by Apple, known as Safari, were knowingly circumvented by Google,ā€ according to the suit.ā€
    http://www.theprovince.com/business/Google+officials+sued+over+privacy+tactics/6177049/story.html

  25. Great Balls of Fire, starring “The Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls”.
    Socialism’s natural end result.
    “The Shadow Chancellor, Ed Balls, accused Berlin of playing with fire over recent weeks. “I donā€™t think Germany has faced up to the reality itā€™s in a single currency and there are collective obligations in a single currency,” he told the BBC.”
    Ich Bin Ein “on the brink”.
    …-
    “Germany bows to global pressure and signals Greek rescue deal”
    “Europeā€™s key powers are on the brink of a ā‚¬130bn (Ā£108bn) debt deal to rescue Greece and avert the first sovereign default in Western Europe in over half a century.”
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9092320/Germany-bows-to-global-pressure-and-signals-Greek-rescue-deal.html

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation