Something on my Mind: Will the Really Bully Please Stand Up?

Joke: What's the difference between a Third World dictatorship and the current Alberta government? Don't know? Well, that's not surprising.

I don't know how many columns that I have pointed out the struggles of any socialist (read: NDP) government. They have proven to be great leaders of the opposition, but completely inept when they actually form the government.

Present Canadian history (the last twenty years or so) would show a trail of NDP-led governments of BC, SK, MB, and ON. But if one hadn't studied present Canadian history, that could explain why so many voted for the NDP last May.

Do I hate the NDP? Of course not; I'm sure many of the politicians are fine people. I simply hate their policies, and the way they are destroying our finances, families, and future. I can discuss them at length; so long as I don't diss or cuss them.

That notwithstanding, I am alarmed beyond words at the direction this province is going. Remember the days when Alberta was leading the way for all of Canada? Well, they still are, but in a much different direction.

One reason that I am alarmed is that there is a desperate loss of freedom of choice. Education, as an example, used to be marked by choice—public, alternative, charter, parochial, even home education. Choice is another word for options, but we seem to be running out of options under this current government's mandate. (Hello: Bill 10)

The other loss is that of freedom of speech, so, openly questioning government policies is not only not encouraged, it is discouraged (a much stronger word). I even have second thoughts about opining in this column sometimes. Words are only words, as long as there are no threats or hate-mongering. There is no place for that at all. Freedom to express oneself publicly, even to disagree with the government, was one pillar of a free democracy.

How much input did we have on Bill 10? Or did anyone have any sense of being heard on Bill 6? For that matter, did anyone see Bill 6 coming? Whatever happened to legitimate townhall meetings? Can you spell R-E-F-E-R-E-N-D-U-M?

Maybe the biggest scare of all is, What mad bill is next?

Back to Bill 10: I know it was introduced by the not-so-conservative Conservatives last year. In the minds of true conservatives, that was one reason they were finished off in May. The NDP could have helped their own cause (and that of all Albertans) by modifying or even killing Bill 10.

Reaction to this lastest nonsense—aka "guidelines and practices" (Bill 10)-- is now cutting across every form of education, every church and denomination, and every social class. I wonder if the Hutterites will go for it. Hardly. The Muslim schools? Not a chance. The congragated Mennonite sites. Are you kidding me? No, they will probably get an exemption.

However, certain schools systems of faith—eg., Roman Catholic and Protestant-- are seemingly not exempt at this stage, and there's the rub. One standard for some, a different one for others smacks of a double standard. If this had been done by the Tories in recent years, there would be no end of the howling from the left.

I believe we need to show the respect due to fellow human beings, but not at the expense of historical social order. (Maurice, that would be family). I think, in addition, that all humans must be treated this way, not just a very select and loud few.

Strange, but some of the motivation for this new policy is to prevent bullying. So how is it that in order to prevent bullying of the few the many get bullied? There is no place for bullying either way.

In other words, are the anti-bullies now the new bullies?

 

--

Sent using Postbox:
http://www.getpostbox.com

Something on my Mind: Intrusive Lunacy

I'm going to start with a brief story about smoking. It's what we call a "metaphor," one story that tells another one, if you will. That's not the most accurate definition, to be sure, but it fits for those of us common people.

Smoking is a bad habit enjoyed by a few, but endured by the many. For whatever good one may say about the smokers' choice, the bad outweighs it by a large margin.

Let me count the ways: 1. needless expense; 2. horrible smell 3. bad breath; 4. health issues; and 5. premature death. And there may be other issues to add to the list.

Now, I can't stop you from smoking, can I? I may go on a moral/medical crusade to demand that you do what I want you to do, what with all my persuasive arguments. You may try to do the same in reverse. The best compromise is to let you do your thing, and you let me do mine. After all, we're not doing damage in each other's space.

Anything more would be intrusive lunacy of the highest order.

Now, speaking of intrusive lunacy of the highest order, let me shift to what I'm really talking about. I suppose you've heard of the provincial government's latest blunder? The NDP is on a quest to force their "enlightened" same-sex and transgendered agenda down the throats of Albertans, starting with your local school. And that's only the beginning.

There's no way that I can go into all the frightening details; you have seen some responsible citizens voicing their outrage at this latest moral gaffe by the NDP in this paper over the past few weeks. These are brave people who stand up and speak their minds. I never sensed they were known to be bigots or bullies.

If you could take a moment out and go over the metaphor for me, just replace "smoking" with the "transgendered." I don't want to have to fill in the blanks for you, but a repressive law is about to be foisted on Alberta's citizens very shortly.

I have always believed in tolerance, equal rights, and justice. I was raised that way and I have raised my family that way, as have thousands of other Albertans. Now, because those of us don't see "the light" on a new morality, we are labelled as intolerant.

I think the ramifications of this bill are unfathomable, be they moral, sociological, economical, or judicial. If we're talking matters of tolerance, equal rights, and justice, then the architects of this repressive legislation must be reading from a different dictionary—certainly from a different history book

When kids, in particular, are free to choose their gender for that day, when they can use the bathroom of their choice, and by extension, when adults can do the same, the end result will be total moral and sexual chaos. Seriously? They even get to vote till they're 18.

That would mean post-puberty boys in girls' bathrooms, and vice versa. There is no tolerance, equal rights, and justice in that, is there? And by the way, I'm thinking of both the non-transgendered and the transgendered.

I'm sure you would agree that it's courageous to stand up for the protection of our children, to do what we believe is morally right. How can that be grounds for being a bigot or a bully? And how can I protect my daughter (or your daughter) from a boy in the girls' bathroom?

By the end of March, every school jurisdiction must have a plan for how they will carry out the government's decree of transgendered bathrooms. Who knows what will that ultimately look like? And who will protect the children—better, who will protect your children and grandchildren?

This goes beyond religious values, people: Parental rights are at stake here.

So then, what's next--Airports? Malls? Rinks? And while you're at it, check out any newsfeed from the States and see what's already happening there. Believe me, I don't make this stuff up.

Back to the metaphor: If a few people choose to smoke, would it be right to turn every room in every institution into a smoking room, to lay a guilt trip on those who don't smoke, and then have those same non-smokers (and all Albertans) be forced to pick up the medical bills for the smokers?

No, we give them their space, and so we should. But it's never at the expense and inconvenience of non-mokers. Never. So why is this issue any different? Well, it is different: It's far more serious.

Enough talk already, Alberta. We need some action here.

 

--

Sent using Postbox:
http://www.getpostbox.com

Something on my Mind: Book. It.

They say that March is National Book Month, so I need to speak up in celebration of literacy This is my chance to join the "volumes" of librarians, authors, publishers, teachers, and readers in celebrating "books."

I don't know who taught me how to read back in grade one or grade two, back in1961-1962. I think it was Miss Lamont at B. W. Garrett in Richmond, BC. I will ever be grateful for that significant contribution she made to my life. I can't imagine not being able to read. Colouring pictures gets so boring after a while, you know. And I know I could read more, even though I read everyday as it is.

As a homeschooler supervisor, I am seeing countless devoted mothers, who may or may not even have grade 8 education themselves, teaching their own kids to read. These Mennonites mothers are making a tremendous contribution to our province in that way alone.

I hope our friends in Alberta Ed appreciate that.

I feel sad when I hear of people—kids and adults-- who want to read, but don't have the opportunity to learn how to. But I feel angry when I know of those who can read, but rarely do it—and even then, only when they have to. What an absolute waste of a privilege!

I cannot remember a night that I didn't go to bed without reading something, sometimes parts of two books or magazines! I have a wide variety of books and magazines on my shelves. I think we have a bookcase in every room in my house, and that inclues the bathrooms.

(After all, where do you put Uncle John's Bathroom Reader?)

I know there is something out there called e-book and Kindle, but I'm not into that style. I'm old school when it comes to reading. I like flipping pages and holding the book. Not sure if that makes me a tactile reader, but, boy, that sure sounds intelligent. Nor does it mean that I'm right (or stubborn, for that matter); it just means that I like a particular approach to reading. There is no right or wrong to it; more of a this way or that way.

The key is to get of your duff and read. (No, no, actually, it means stay on your duff and read.)

Books are likely the easiest, cheapest, and fastest form of entertainment. Kids can read in the backseat without the racket of a cd or a dvd; they can curl up on the couch for hours on end, and there's no serious distraction; or they can head to bed early and snuggle up with a book.

The same applies to the adults in newspaperland: Why go out to a movie when you can curl up with a mug of tea and find all the excitement, grim, suspense, and laughter within the covers of a book? No need to travel to Bali, Belize, Barbados, or Bolivia, when you can do it (virtually) at home—for next to nothing?

For myself, I read mysteries, histories, and biographies. They put me in situations that I don't have the time, money, or ability to pursue--and perhaps I'm just too chicken to do. If they are too intimidating, I just shut the book and crawl under the covers—and scream for help under my pillow.

I can travel for free and for as long as I want when I read a book. The one thing I have to pack is my imagination. The only jetlag I ever experience is a numb arm from being immobile for so long—and another part of my anatomy from sitting on it too long (too polite to mention the word here).

So why do people, boys especially, not enjoy reading? I have no idea. Maybe my boys are different, but they all love (present tense) reading. It took them years after the girls started reading to get into it, but when they did, they really did. They have advanced so far in so many areas because of it. We as parents modeled it, so I'm sure that was a factor.

It's not the only reason, of course: We made books available throughout the house. We encouraged reading (another form of modeling). We read to them when they were younger (okay, my wife did most of it, but I did my fair share).

Reading, then enjoying reading, and finally, maintain a reading lifestyle helps immensely, of course; but it also helps with directions, instructions, maps, street signs, and trouble-shooting, for starters.

If you read this column and understood it, maybe you should go thank your own Miss Lamont.

 

--

Sent using Postbox:
http://www.getpostbox.com

Something on my Mind: The Worst V-word Ever

I have written a couple of these "letter" columns before. (Can you remember which letters?) With two down, I have 24 to go. That means that I have enough left over to write a column like this every second week for almost a year.

Then again, if I doubled up the letters (eg., "b" would be for busy and bully; and "e" would be entitlement and escapism), I could fill up a whole year's worth. Clever thought, but I don't plan to do it quite like that.

However, I will drop these "gems" in now and thenbecause I need to lighten up from my rants about carbon footprints and climate change, the Liberals' evil agenda, abortion and vaccinations, GSA and NDP, David Suzuki and Michael Moore, Bill 6 and 10, and other wholly unscientific and irrational matters.

You know that I'm saying the above to bait you, and that's not really kind of me. I'm sure other equally nice people have equally strong feelings about these matters, only from a different perspective. I apologize in a general way for how I say this, but not for what I say. I believe, along with the muted majority, that there are so many issues out there that are being crammed down our collective throats, without so much as an opportunity for public dialogue.

From my studies in history, I am reminded a little of Stalinist Russia.

I think one of the hallmarks of a free democracy is something called a referendum. Wouldn't be bad pratice, but we need a free democracy to carry it out.

Meanwhile, back at the letter"V": What are your guesses? Venom? Villagers? Vegreville? Victim? "Victor Victoria"?

Let's try the word "virtual," as in not real, not physically existing or not having substance, or simulated, artificial, and imitation.

A little grammar lesson here, please. When I eat imitation crab at Christmas, though it's not real crab, it does have substance. Or when there is a tribute to Roy Orbison, he is not there, as he left us too soon many years ago. However, someone else is there, so there's the substance, just not the real thing.

So in both cases, we can't use the word "virtual."

No, the angle that I am working today is that non-existent information that sits on one's computer screen day in and day out, year in and year out—it is there, but not real. And if one lives long enough in that world, it's a real struggle adapting to the outside world. I don't want to even imagine how many hours per week kids sit in front of any sort of screen—and then multiply those hours by weeks in a year.

Staring at a screen can lead to a zombie-like existence, that zoned-out mind set that seems too prevalent today. All kids? Hardly. Just too many kids. Maybe even kids I know personally, so I am not spouting off from a theoretical perspective.

And that, in a nutshell, is the pith of many problems at many levels in today's culture, especially among the young. Let's see: there's virtual death, sex, grief, violence, issues, and relationships. When one extricates oneself from the virtual world of graphic violence, then shifts into the real world, the tranistion is so painful and awkward that it becomes an emotional, physical, mental, social, and moral calamity.

I think, and I am just expressing my opinion here (because this one is really dicey), that one reason for so much random violence today, as an example, is because there is such a frightening disconnect between the virtual world and the real world. In fact, there is no connection whatsoever.

For example, there is the vitual death and destruction, guts and gore, and then there's the real thing. Real knives produce real wounds, which can lead to real damage (even real death).

There is no easy solution, so don't read on looking for one. I suggest it's like an addiction. No, actually it is an adiction –and must be treated with the same kid gloves, the same firm but gentle approach.

A virtual world leads to a fantasy existence. A fantasy existence leads to a irrational lifestyle. And we are already paying a heavy price for the results.

 

--

Sent using Postbox:
http://www.getpostbox.com

Something on my Mind: The Canada I Love

I never thought it would take me three columns to develop these few thoughts about the Canada I love. And there could be more, but three's enough. It's a much broader subject than I realized, when I started out, two deadlines ago.

Grammar, maybe; word play, definitely. But love for one's country? That's so, so American, isn't it?

Well, being "so" American isn't all that bad, or at least it wasn't a decade or two ago, say, in the pre-Clinton era. I wouldn't want to identify with present America, at least not until that Obama-nation is removed.

Meanwhile, up here in Canada...

I know that my simple thesis is, once again, wishful thinking, but very much in a literal (not figurative) sense. Literally, these are real wishes that I'm hoping to come true, for the good of all. And figuratively, "wishful thinking" means "pie-in-the-sky-in-the-sweet-by-and-by." In other words, no real basis in reality.

I like to think that I speak for grassroots man and the common sense woman when I suggest that life in a small prairie town reflects what the rest of Canada should look like--naysayers and doomsdayers, notwithstanding.

So let me continue my flow of the "Canada I love":

The Canada I love should have that small town sense of community: I have attended countless meetings, workshops, celebrations, and fundraisers, and each one had that sense of community. I have a greater sense of community when I am involved in the community. The cold, distant nation that I often see and hear about is not one that I want to be part of.

We need a Canada where we can feel at home, drop our guard, celebrate each culture, and mesh as a cohesive unit. I know that sounds kind of wussy, but I once knew a Canada like that once.

"Familiarity" could be another word for "community," though I think the latter speaks to the broader issue. It's that sense of belonging, of being part of something. There is so much disconnect in today's Canada. And with that disconnect, there seems to be no sense of ownership and responsibility, and you know the lifestyle that that leads to.

The Canada I love should have that small town sense of security: That's sort of tied into "accountability," but it has its own application. I know for a fact that there are people who don't lock their houses at night, who leave their keys in their car. Not me—so don't get any ideas--but I understand the thinking.

It's an on-going trust, an unpretentious thinking, something you can't and shouldn't do in the big city. It is so reassuring to raise a family in that kind of environment. I would like to live in a land that is safe and secure, free from having to look over one's shoulder, bolting one's door, and taking excessive protective measures. I would like to restore that sense of security to our nation. We once had a Canada like that.

Sure there's trouble in small towns: Homes get broken in to, marriages fall apart, petty vandalism marks a bored punk culture—that sort of trouble is nowhere near the same level in a city. People are people, and there's more trouble when there's more of them.

The Canada I love should have a small town sense of morality: Remember the days of right and wrong, good and bad, male and female, and appropriate and inappropriate? I was raised that way—and I don't just mean in my parents' home. It was taught in every institution I knew.

People are moral or immoral no matter where they live. My point is that, or at least it seems to me, there appears to be a clearer moral distinction, a more definite line in the sand, when people are not lost in the haze of mass humanity. We need to restore our sense of morality as a nation.

When I think of the shape of the future of the Western world—forget the Middle East and Asia for now—I shudder. We've got it great here in Canada and we need to keep it that way. We need to remember, then restore, the values from the past to shape the vision for the future.

If you're not sure what I mean, go visit a small prairie town or stay in the one you're in—and keep on maintaining your town's values.

 

--

Sent using Postbox:
http://www.getpostbox.com