![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
In the news...
Jun. 12th, 2003 01:23 pm* The Ontario Appellate Court has ruled that homosexuals have the right to marry, under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The ruling may still be appealed, but the appeal must be filed before the 30th. I am ridiculously pleased by the decision as it means I can marry that lovely girlfriend I don't have. Go me. I was pleased to see Paul Martin frame the issue as a question of rights, which to my mind, is how it should always have been considered. Legalization of gay marriages is nothing more than the end to a particular form of legal discrimination of gays, and is not a moral or personal issue. Ralph Klein, Premier of Alberta says he will invoke the notwithstanding clause to block such a ruling in that province. He is very publicly saying that his homophobia is more important than his belief in a liberal democracy. I'm shocked. Aren't you shocked?
* Sven Robinson (MP, BC, NDP) currently has a private members bill that moves to include discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the the definition of hate crimes. I'm not sure if it's going to pass, as there is substantial opposition in Alberta and Saskatchewan, (the only provinces in which a majority of the population does not endorse both this bill and the legalization of gay marriage). Apparently the bill is opposed by a group that argues that if passed, the bible would be considered hate literature. I don't know about you, but I'm eager to read over the relevant passages of the proposed legislation and the bible. O.o I've seen the biblical passages that are supposed to decry homosexual activities and those are so open to various interpretations that I'm puzzled.
* The recent decriminalization of marijuana use (fines instead of jail time) has lead to increased discussion of legalization. The issue has been a hot topic for decades now, with neither side really gaining an advantage in the discussion - sadly, I have a feeling that Canada will not move to full legalization until the USA alters its own stance on drugs. I am not a recreational drug user but I do respect the right of adults to control their own bodies and when the substance in question is so mild as marijuana, I can't in good conscience support this illogical (double standard! double standard!) prohibition. It seems that a good portion of the opposition is due to a kind of puritanism that would like to see another prohibition against alcohol. I've been close to more than one alcoholic and addict and as much as I would at times like to see all such substances just go away, I do recognize that they won't and I accept their importance in social gatherings. We need to recast the drug 'problem' as a something to be managed and not necessarily 'solved'.
* Looks like Paul Martin is going to take the Liberal leadership (big surprise) and will likely be the next PM. Now, I respect the work he did as Finance Minister but I'm not pleased to see such a right wing, pro-business liberal take the party leadership. His personal charisma *cough* and his reputation as responsible (anyone else getting a 'head of the family' vibe?) are a large part of his popularity, but Cretien's own swiftly waning popularity and currency are bolstering Martin's. I've always liked the man, but he is too far right for me to ever be comfortable with him. Also, there is a heavy sense of predestination here - his leadership hangs over us like some doom-y anvil - which I always distrust, especially when the man has not done much to actually prove his leadership capabilities. Now, with the very long race ahead of him, Martin begins to seem like a man obsessed with his image and with power, and less the humble, hardworking MP. Score.
* SARS. The WHO is considering another travel ban. Ernie Eves, Premier of Ontario has ordered a probe into how the province has handled the outbreak. Scores of businesses are failing, as tourism dies. Shows are canceled. Health workers are stressed, exhausted and often shunned. All over a relatively minor outbreak. As some of you might remember, I recently had occasion to visit the hospital when the Best Friend was hit by a car. Funnily enough, I have not contracted SARS. The chances of a visitor to Toronto catching it are astronomically low and health officials are still hard at work tracing the infection path of the man from NC who recently came down with it - they aren't even sure that he got it in Canada. I understand that people are scared and hell, they have a right to be, but the whole reaction to the outbreak has reached operatic proportions. I look forward to the inevitable jokes. On the opposite side of the wacky spectrum are those people who refuse to go into quarantine. Um. Right. Ok, I get that you don't want to lose money, but don't you care about your family? Or are you working from the if-I-die-you-all-die principle, here? Just think, if these people were in positions of power, we'd all be screwed. Yay! My dad said to me the other day, "If I was told to go into voluntary quarantine, I wouldn't. I can't afford to lose ten days of pay." To be fair, he really can't afford it. "But dad, if you're dead and we're dead, what's ten days pay going to matter?" "Well what if none of us die? It'll matter then." I wouldn't take those odds.
So, some very open questions.
1. Do you accept that people should be allowed to do things that you very deeply believe are wrong? To what extent do you accept this principle - is there a point where you reject it?
2. Do you look beyond the media image (be honest)? Do you look for the facts behind a news story and look for dissenting viewpoints? Are there stories and personalities you are more likely to accept as being 'real'?
3. Is it more important to be recognized in the eyes of the law, or in the eyes of the people? Is it more important to obey the law of your country, or the law of your god?
* Sven Robinson (MP, BC, NDP) currently has a private members bill that moves to include discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the the definition of hate crimes. I'm not sure if it's going to pass, as there is substantial opposition in Alberta and Saskatchewan, (the only provinces in which a majority of the population does not endorse both this bill and the legalization of gay marriage). Apparently the bill is opposed by a group that argues that if passed, the bible would be considered hate literature. I don't know about you, but I'm eager to read over the relevant passages of the proposed legislation and the bible. O.o I've seen the biblical passages that are supposed to decry homosexual activities and those are so open to various interpretations that I'm puzzled.
* The recent decriminalization of marijuana use (fines instead of jail time) has lead to increased discussion of legalization. The issue has been a hot topic for decades now, with neither side really gaining an advantage in the discussion - sadly, I have a feeling that Canada will not move to full legalization until the USA alters its own stance on drugs. I am not a recreational drug user but I do respect the right of adults to control their own bodies and when the substance in question is so mild as marijuana, I can't in good conscience support this illogical (double standard! double standard!) prohibition. It seems that a good portion of the opposition is due to a kind of puritanism that would like to see another prohibition against alcohol. I've been close to more than one alcoholic and addict and as much as I would at times like to see all such substances just go away, I do recognize that they won't and I accept their importance in social gatherings. We need to recast the drug 'problem' as a something to be managed and not necessarily 'solved'.
* Looks like Paul Martin is going to take the Liberal leadership (big surprise) and will likely be the next PM. Now, I respect the work he did as Finance Minister but I'm not pleased to see such a right wing, pro-business liberal take the party leadership. His personal charisma *cough* and his reputation as responsible (anyone else getting a 'head of the family' vibe?) are a large part of his popularity, but Cretien's own swiftly waning popularity and currency are bolstering Martin's. I've always liked the man, but he is too far right for me to ever be comfortable with him. Also, there is a heavy sense of predestination here - his leadership hangs over us like some doom-y anvil - which I always distrust, especially when the man has not done much to actually prove his leadership capabilities. Now, with the very long race ahead of him, Martin begins to seem like a man obsessed with his image and with power, and less the humble, hardworking MP. Score.
* SARS. The WHO is considering another travel ban. Ernie Eves, Premier of Ontario has ordered a probe into how the province has handled the outbreak. Scores of businesses are failing, as tourism dies. Shows are canceled. Health workers are stressed, exhausted and often shunned. All over a relatively minor outbreak. As some of you might remember, I recently had occasion to visit the hospital when the Best Friend was hit by a car. Funnily enough, I have not contracted SARS. The chances of a visitor to Toronto catching it are astronomically low and health officials are still hard at work tracing the infection path of the man from NC who recently came down with it - they aren't even sure that he got it in Canada. I understand that people are scared and hell, they have a right to be, but the whole reaction to the outbreak has reached operatic proportions. I look forward to the inevitable jokes. On the opposite side of the wacky spectrum are those people who refuse to go into quarantine. Um. Right. Ok, I get that you don't want to lose money, but don't you care about your family? Or are you working from the if-I-die-you-all-die principle, here? Just think, if these people were in positions of power, we'd all be screwed. Yay! My dad said to me the other day, "If I was told to go into voluntary quarantine, I wouldn't. I can't afford to lose ten days of pay." To be fair, he really can't afford it. "But dad, if you're dead and we're dead, what's ten days pay going to matter?" "Well what if none of us die? It'll matter then." I wouldn't take those odds.
So, some very open questions.
1. Do you accept that people should be allowed to do things that you very deeply believe are wrong? To what extent do you accept this principle - is there a point where you reject it?
2. Do you look beyond the media image (be honest)? Do you look for the facts behind a news story and look for dissenting viewpoints? Are there stories and personalities you are more likely to accept as being 'real'?
3. Is it more important to be recognized in the eyes of the law, or in the eyes of the people? Is it more important to obey the law of your country, or the law of your god?