By Bill Greenwood - Red Deer Advocate - August 01, 2008
There are what we call “truisms,” those kind of universal observations that form the basis of our collective wisdom.
You know, things like: “you can’t take it with you;” “you can’t get blood from a stone;” “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree;” that sort of thing.
We also have the kind of generalized ethnic observations that aren’t really all that far from the truth. Scandinavians are known to be stoic; Italians are outgoing; the Scots are taciturn.
Some of these kinds of things are actually true, as languages have a certain impact on social interaction that gives rise to these kinds of generalizations. Which, of course, leads us to another great truism: the French are difficult. OK. I’ve said it.
But let’s be honest here, there aren’t seven people in this readership who can claim honestly that they’ve never been forced to acknowledge this hard reality from other sources. After all, it was a French president who got up and left a G8 banquet because he was expected to eat (gasp!) British cuisine. (OK, so we all know that’s an oxymoron, but that’s not really the point, is it?) The entire D-Day invasion almost got sidetracked by Gen. Charles de Gaulle’s anti-Anglo bigotry, in spite of the fact that the entire invasion force amassed to liberate his country’s sorry ass was comprised of English-speaking soldiers.
The point of language is that it is a means of communicating.
In Canada, some French Canadians are caught up in the notion that, unless they can communicate in French, they would prefer not to communicate at all.
Worse, there’s always somebody willing to drag the courts into this.
Some years ago, a fluently bilingual federal civil servant felt an obligation to sue Air Canada simply because he wasn’t offered a choice of soft drinks in French, despite his obvious proficiency in English.
In Alberta, a bilingual truck driver has engaged in a rampant case of faux outrage simply because the traffic ticket wasn’t printed in French.
There is no high-minded principle at work here. None.
Let’s back this up just a bit, shall we?
Every time this issue comes up, it’s important to remember that, since 1759 in Canada, the very survival of the French language has depended solely on simple British courtesy. Without that protection, it would have faded into oblivion, like the fur trade and Napoleon’s dreams.
It’s too easy to overlook that, in a strict libertarian sense, helping the French language survive requires an inhibition of the civil liberties of those who don’t speak French.
Most of us are willing to let that slide — to a point.
But, when citizens who are fully conversant in English try to claim that their rights are somehow being violated by the lack of a French language label on a traffic ticket, then it’s time to push back.
Firstly, this isn’t a case of some poor soul accused of a high crime being forced to endure a trial in a foreign and inexplicable language.
None of us would stand for that.
It’s simply another case of a malcontent linguistic minority attempting to subject the rest of us to yet another level of governmental intrusion into our lives where none is warranted.
The logical extension of this complaint would require that all peace officers in Alberta be conversant in French, despite the fact that — on any given day — there are fewer unilingual Francophones in Alberta than there are mating pairs of Sasquatch in Clearwater County.
As I’ve said, language laws represent an unnecessary intrusion of the state into the affairs of the citizenry.
In Canada they exist solely to coddle the sensibilities of a far-too-insecure minority that can’t see the future for the past. Those laws ignore the hard realities of linguistic evolution, especially in the context of the societal evolution of North America.
We can also surmise that it’s not likely that, had history taken a different turn, the English-speaking inhabitants of New France would have been granted the linguistic and religious privileges that came out of the English victory at Quebec.
In their present form, our language laws offend me at a very deep level.
They unnecessarily expand the powers of the state and have gradually tightened the ability of the linguistic majority to participate in their own governments at several levels.
They simply prove the old adage. The French are difficult.
Bill Greenwood is a freelance writer living in Red Deer.
Alberta "Human Rights" Commission advises church to obtain consent to teach the Bible. (click LINK above)
In the wake of political violence gripping Zimbabwe, Queen Elizabeth has stripped Robert Mugabe of his honorary knighthood, an extremely rare move by the British monarchy.
The Queen revoked the honour acting on the advice of Foreign Secretary David Miliband. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said that Britain no longer recognizes Mugabe as Zimbabwe's legitimate leader.
"This action has been taken as a mark of revulsion at the abuse of human rights and abject disregard for the democratic process in Zimbabwe over which President Mugabe has presided," Britain's Foreign Office said Wednesday in a statement.
The revoking of the honour follows international condemnation of the widespread violence and intimidation of Zimbabwe's opposition before a presidential run-off this week. Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai has withdrawn from the vote, saying he fears for his life.
Scores of his supporters have been attacked and killed in recent weeks by police, soldiers and militant members of the ruling party.
Britain and the U.S. have said they will not recognize the result of this weekend's run-off because Tsvangirai has withdrawn, but Mugabe has refused to call off the race.
Mugabe was made an honorary knight in 1994, when he was considered an anti-colonial hero. Honorary knighthoods are conferred on people who are not British citizens, but are recommended by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and approved by the Queen.
The late Romanian leader Nicolae Ceausescu was stripped of his title in 1989 at the height of the Balkan nation's revolution.
| Charles Lewis, National Post Published: Thursday, June 19, 2008 LINK Christianity without Christ Reverend Connie denBok says to sum up what is wrong with the United Church of Canada, one need look no further than the name of the panel discussion being held tonight in Toronto. "Shouldn't the United Church Just Throw in the Towel?" is the opening event of a four-day Church-sponsored conference that will look at the future of the country's largest Protestant denomination. "If the people who are allegedly in a position of leadership, vision and inspiration for your organization are having that question, it tells you there is something very disturbing at the heart of the Church," said Rev. denBok, who is a pastor at a Toronto parish. "By even asking that question, we are acting as if we are a human organization rather than a God organization. It is a [national leadership] that is profoundly flawed with no strong sense of purpose or direction or destiny." She also said the relationship between the leadership and the congregations had become "parasitic." "They are sucking money out of the congregations ... taking huge amounts of money to run structures, to hire staff whose job is to look after committees whose job it is to meet with staff." Like most mainstream Protestant denominations, the United Church of Canada has seen dramatic drops in membership. There are now 3,400 United Church congregations; since 1996, the Church has lost about 460 parishes. The Church reports a membership of 558,000, down 21% since 1996. Rev. denBok, who will be on tonight's panel, said the United Church has moved from being a Christ-centred body to become a "government-sponsored social club" in which all classic Christian doctrines are open to question. She points to Gretta Vosper, a fellow minister who recently wrote a book called With Or Without God, as a prime example of what is wrong. Ms. Vosper, who disdains the title Reverend, said she does not believe in anything remotely Christian, let alone anything religious: not God, not the divinity of Jesus, nor the sacraments or the centrality of the Bible in Church life. "I cannot really fathom with integrity why she works within the broad spectrum of United Church theology and practice," Rev. denBok said. "But I think Gretta is simply the visible symptom of much deeper malaise." Rev. denBok said the leadership sets the tone for the kind of theological training that is taught in seminaries, and the result has been a disaster. "If we had a medical school that kept turning out graduates who consistently killed their patients, would we not ask some questions about the education?" David Giuliano, the Moderator of the United Church, said the title of the panel discussion was meant to be provocative -- not a call for the denomination's demise -- because the Church is living through a time of "chaos and confusion." He said one of the reasons for that confusion is that the Church has been pushed to the margins of society. "People are nostalgic for the days when the pews were packed and coffers were full, when we had a place of privilege in the secular community, as well. But to be honest, I think we're coming out of that and to a place where we're making peace with not being a social club but actually being communities of discipleship. But it is also quite clear to me that the centre of our common life is Jesus and the vision he held up for his followers on Earth." As for Ms. Vosper, he said her position in the Church is consistent with what he thinks is the true message of Jesus. "I don't remember Jesus requiring anyone to subscribe to a doctrine before he healed them. I don't remember Jesus requiring anybody being saved before he ate with them. In terms of my understanding of Jesus, it was one of radical inclusion of people of many perspectives. And to suggest that one needs to subscribe to a narrow understanding of who God is and who Jesus is seems antithetical to the understanding I have of Jesus revealed in the Gospels." Rev. denBok said she is not expecting a warm reception tonight but feels it is important that someone raise the question on which she believes the entire future of the Church turns. "We have a huge number of deeply demoralized clergy, congregations dwindling and dying, and either we say, 'Gosh, we've hit a dead end and should consider changing direction,' or we say, 'Our direction has been a good and righteous one and we're not getting anywhere with it and we should shut the whole organization down." | |
Note: It is believed that Sam Steele was a member of the Orange Order and perhaps some of these records will expand on that.
....."The highlight of the collection for us is Steele's medals and orders," says Loraine Lounsberry, senior curator of the Glenbow history collections. "They are literally jewels that are a distillation of his entire career."
Steele was "the quintessential military man of the Victorian period," she says.
A determined and daring "soldier-hero" who lived in what is now Alberta for 40 years, the Ontario-born Steele joined the North-West Mounted Police in 1873 and was one of the officers who led the new recruits on the March West in 1874 to bring law and order to the West. He participated in many of the important events in western Canadian history, including the North-West Resistance led by Louis Riel and the Klondike Gold Rush, in which he played a pivotal role.
In 1900, during the South African Boer war, he was offered command of Lord Strathcona's Horse, which he regrouped seven years later as a permanent unit in the Canadian Army.
"The collection contains artifacts that will bring Sam Steele alive," says Glenbow president and CEO Jeffrey Spalding, saying the collection includes medals, uniforms, regalia and other personal effects.
"He is so legendary in every way to Western Canada and so central to our story that not to let it slip away is a point of great pride as well as great relief to all of us.".....
Raymond J. de Souza, National Post
Published: Thursday, June 12, 2008
Four years ago, I wrote an article entitled "Thinly Disguised Totalitarianism" for the religious journal First Things, surveying the erosion of Canadian religious liberty under various regulatory bodies, professional associations and human rights tribunals. I wrote then that "there are no restrictions on freedom of worship in Canada today." That's no longer true.
As Ezra Levant details below, the Stephen Boissoin case is an egregious assault on religious liberty, press freedom and freedom of speech. And for those of us who previously underestimated the threat to religious liberty, it serves as a rude correction.
The judgment of the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission (AHRCC) against the Reverend Stephen Boissoin, a Protestant youth pastor, is a direct violation of his religious liberty. Whatever his "guilt" --and who is not guilty before the human rights commission? -- the judgment requires him to write an apology abjuring his views on homosexuality, and prohibits him and the Concerned Christian Coalition from making "disparaging" remarks about homosexuals.
It is not specified what the AHRCC might consider "disparaging," but simply reading in public -- as in a sermon -- the Biblical admonitions against homosexual acts is not precluded. Indeed, the scope of the AHRCC order is so wide that it effectively says that Rev. Boissoin may not speak publicly on homosexuality ever again, unless he changes his opinion.
Given that the "offence" was a letter to the editor published in the Red Deer Advocate, the judgment by implication would apply the same restrictions to the newspaper itself. The offence was "causing to be published" the letter, which "was likely to expose homosexuals to contempt or hatred because of their sexual orientation." In order for something to be published in a newspaper, both a writer and an editor/publisher are required. Had the complainant in this case named the Red Deer Advocate in his charge, there is every logical reason to expect that the AHRCC would have slapped a perpetual ban on the newspaper publishing any "disparaging" stories on homosexuality.
Rev. Boissoin is not the only Alberta clergyman hauled before the AHRCC. In 2005, Frederick Henry, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Calgary, was brought before the commission for writing a pastoral letter against same-sex marriage to his own flock. Before the AHRCC had a chance to find him guilty, Bishop Henry clarified his remarks and the complaint was withdrawn. It is now clear that had it gone ahead, the AHRCC would have ordered the bishop of Calgary not to speak about same-sex marriage ever again.
There have been numerous other cases too, including ones against the Knights of Columbus and Catholic Insight magazine. We can expect more after this most recent AHRCC ruling.
Until a real court throws all of this out, the ruling against Rev. Boissoin stands. And it is no sure thing that the courts will not accommodate themselves to restrictions on religious liberty, even as they did on free speech when the "hate" speech prohibitions enforced by human rights commissions were first tested at the Supreme Court in 1990. If the courts uphold what the AHRCC did to Rev. Boissoin, religious liberty will be mortally wounded in Canada.
Rev. Boissoin, as one would nobly expect of a clergyman and citizen of free country, has said he will neither write the apology nor pay the "damages" assessed. Unless the courts overturn the AHRCC decision, he will eventually be found in contempt and imprisoned--a prisoner for religious liberty and press freedom.
About 18 months ago, a journalist friend writing a book surveying trends in world Catholicism called to inquire about whether, apropos of my totalitarianism article, I thought it likely that priests in Canada would, in my lifetime, have to go to prison for preaching their faith. I said then what I believed to be true: No. After the Boissoin ruling, that is manifestly not the correct answer.
The Charter of Rights enumerates freedom of religion as its first freedom. Freedom of the press is its second. As a priest first and a journalist second, I should be comforted. Yet I am not. Those freedoms are at risk in Canada, an attack not only on pastors and journalists, but on citizens of a free country. The enemies of liberty got Rev. Boissoin. They tried to get Bishop Henry. They are going after Ezra Levant. Everyone with a pulpit or a column should ask: When will they come after me?
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=580627&p=2
Click on LINK
By Mark Steyn, MacLeans
...Bill Baergen of Stettler, Alta., wrote:
"I take exception to Mark Steyn's unfounded allegation that the human rights racket is a disgrace. I am proud to say I was one of seven commissioners on the Alberta Human Rights Commission from 1995 to 2006 and never felt I was part of a racket, much less a disgraceful one. Nor do I accept the kangaroo court epithet thrown around by the erudite generalization-manufacturer, Steyn.
"First, why does he place 'human rights' in quotation marks? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, forged by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948 uses the phrase, so it needn't be treated as something foreign to most people."
Well, since you ask, I put "human rights" in scare quotes when I refer to, say, the Alberta "Human Rights" Commission because the "human rights" commissions' notion of "human rights" has nothing to do with real human rights such as those adumbrated in the UN declaration. Indeed, Canada's scare-quote "human rights" — the "human right" to a labiaplasty or to smoke marijuana in another guy's doorway or to not be called a "loser" in the hair salon — explicitly trample over several of the real human rights in the Universal Declaration, notably the right to the presumption of innocence. That's why there's a 100 per cent conviction rate for federal Section 13 cases. So Bill Baergen's pals are in sustained systemic breach of the UN declaration.
As for Mr. Baergen's "pride" in being on the Alberta Human Rights Commission for a decade, chacun à son goût. Personally, I'd be ashamed. Here's why: the Danish cartoons crisis precipitated a lot of predictably craven remarks by European commissioners, U.S. State Department officials, the British foreign secretary, etc., all giving aid and comfort to the thugs and bullies threatening to "behead the enemies of Islam." Yet, for all the Anglo-Euro-American squishiness and generalized anguish about the need for the media to be more "sensitive," only one government agency in the Western world actually hauled a publisher into court for the "crime" of publishing those cartoons — and it was the Alberta Human Rights Commission, which dragged Ezra Levant of the Western Standard into an interrogation room to explain himself before one of Mr. Baergen's colleagues. So, yes, the Alberta HRC is a racket, and a disgraceful one, and that's why the system has so few defenders other than its apparatchiks...
Read the entire MacLean's article HERE
ROME (Reuters) - The body of the mystic monk Padre Pio, one of the Roman Catholic world's most revered saints who died 40 years ago, has been exhumed to be prepared for display to his many devotees.
The body of the Capuchin friar, who was said to have had the stigmata -- the wounds of Christ's crucifixion -- on his hands and feet -- is to be conserved and put in a part-glass coffin for at least several months from April 24.
A Church statement said the body was in "fair condition", particularly the hands, which Archbishop Domenico D'Ambrosio, who witnessed the exhumation in the southern Italian town where Pio died, said "looked like they had just undergone a manicure".
A spokesman for the monastery at San Giovanni Rotondo said he believed morticians would be able to conserve the face of the bearded monk well enough for it to be recognizable.
The body, which had been buried under marble in a crypt, was exhumed during a three-hour service that ended after midnight.
A Catholic magazine once found that far more Italian Catholics prayed to Padre Pio than to any other icon of the faith, including the Virgin Mary or Jesus.
Some 7 million people visit his tomb every year. There are some 3,000 "Padre Pio Prayer Groups" around the world, with a membership of around 3 million.
The friar, born Francesco Forgione, died in 1968 aged 81. Continued...
Note: To express your objection regarding a member of the Cdn Forces holding a Queen's Commission and has failed to up hold his oath to H.M., please write to his Commanding Officer:
Commandant
Royal Military College of Canada
PO Box 17000, Station Forces
Kingston, Ontario CANADA
K7K 7B4
======================================
Officer's complaint a royal pain, judge says
Captain of Irish descent objected to drinking to 'an unelected monarch of foreign origin'
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail January 22, 2008 at 4:03 AM EST
Outward displays of loyalty to the Queen are fundamental to Canadian military discipline, a judge has ruled, rejecting the complaint of an army officer of Irish ancestry who objected to toasting "an unelected monarch of foreign origin."
Captain Aralt Mac Giolla Chainnigh has campaigned for years to be excused from regimental dinner traditions such as toasting the Queen, saluting the Union Jack or singing God Save the Queen.
However, in a 28-page ruling released yesterday, Mr. Justice Robert Barnes of the Federal Court said confusion would ensue if members of the military could opt out of various protocol requirements.
"A chaotic and unworkable situation would arise in such an environment."
The ruling was the latest setback for Capt. Mac Giolla Chainnigh, who told the court that "he has throughout his military career consistently expressed his disaffection for the British monarchy."
In an interview yesterday, Capt. Mac Giolla Chainnigh, said that Canada, as a sovereign democracy, cannot be at the same time be beholden to a foreign queen. "It's a logical impossibility," he said.
He referred to the Queen as "Elizabeth Windsor."
In his judgment, Judge Barnes wrote that the Chief of the Defence Staff, General Rick Hillier, was right when he decided in August, 2006, to support a grievance board ruling that rejected the captain's claims.
"Whether Capt. Mac Giolla Chainnigh likes it or not, the fact is that the Queen is his Commander-in-Chief and Canada's Head of State," Judge Barnes wrote.
Refusing to display loyalty to the Queen, the judge added, "would not only be an expression of profound disrespect and rudeness, but it would also represent an unwillingness to adhere to hierarchical and lawful command structures that are fundamental to good discipline."
Having represented himself in Federal Court, Capt. Mac Giolla Chainnigh said he cannot afford the professional counsel needed for an appeal. He is hoping republican groups might pick up his cause.
Capt. Mac Giolla Chainnigh, who legally changed his name from Harold Kenny to the Gaelic version, is an associate professor of physics at Royal Military College in Kingston, and a member of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry.
He has long been active in promoting Irish culture in Canada. His office voicemail answers in Irish Gaelic and he is president of the North American Association for Celtic Language Teachers.
Asked whether his background might have informed his views on the monarchy, he said he didn't want to mix culture and politics.However, he added that "Ireland, like most countries that have been colonized and suffered the scourges of imperialism, understands perhaps a little bit better than other nations what the extremely negative aspects are of a government that's not responsible to the people."
When he enrolled at the age of 16 in 1975, Capt. Mac Giolla Chainnigh had been reluctant to take the required oath of allegiance to the Queen and said he proceeded only after being told that it was simply "a figurative way" of pledging his loyalty to the people of Canada.
"I recognize loyalty to the people of Canada alone. I could drink a toast to Elizabeth as a person - if I knew her," the captain told the court. "I could drink a toast to her as the head of state of the United Kingdom, in respect for visitors from that country. But I cannot in good faith toast her as the Queen of Canada."
==============================================
He is a deliberately ignorant, pompous and tiresome bore.
Understanding the creation and structure of a constitutional monarchy is not beyond his abilities; he chooses to ignore our heritage and history to argue an irrelevant case. He is a Canadian, not an Irishman. If he were Irish and serving in our military, he would be duty bound to follow our conventions, not those of some other nation.
Patriotism - devotion, loyalty, nationalism, partisanship – is little understood these days. A patriot is a proud supporter and, or defender of his country and its way of life.
Our Head of State is Queen of Canada. As a constitutional monarch, The Queen abides by the decisions of the Canadian Government, but she continues to play important ceremonial and symbolic roles. In all these duties, The Queen acts as Queen of Canada, quite distinctive from her role in the United Kingdom or any of her other realms.
Elizabeth II does not visit Canada or any other Commonwealth nation as a representative of Great Britain. The British Prime Minister and his government deals with our Prime Minister and Government. Elizabeth II can and does represent Great Britain when she visits non-Commonwealth nations such as France, Germany, Italy, Japan and so on, but when she leaves for Canada, she leaves and arrives as the Queen of Canada.
An officer of the Canadian army who claims that we toast the Queen of England is betraying his lack of knowledge of Canada, our constitution and the Monarchy. We honour and toast the Queen of Canada, not the queen of any other entity or nation. When she acts for us or on our behalf, or visits, she is exclusively ours.
| | ||
The minister of the department is Eamon O'Cuiv - grandson of former taoiseach and famous republican Eamon de Valera. The money will be paid out over the next two years in counties Donegal, Leitrim, Cavan and Monaghan. It will go to a company, Cadelmo Ltd, set up to support an initiative in the border counties to promote and organise the Orange institution in the Republic. The funding will support the work of a development officer and will also be available for the repair and refurbishment of Orange halls. "A number of Orange halls in rural areas have been attacked in recent times, activities I totally deplore, so I am delighted to be in a position to provide funding," Mr O'Cuiv said. He added that he hoped the funding would encourage higher levels of participation by Orange Order members in the wider community in the area. Drew Nelson, grand secretary of the Orange Order, welcomed the funding. "Our members in the Republic are much more willing now to engage with civic society," Mr Nelson said. "Prior to this, I would have noticed that their way of survival for the last three or four generations has been to keep their heads down, don't put your head above the parapet, don't engage with the administration in the Republic. "A change has come about in their attitude - there's much more confidence." | ||
The interrogation of an Alberta publisher who printed the news story regarding the Mohammed cartoons in the Western Standard news magazine approximately two years ago. Mr. Levant does a superb job standing up for our basic rights of freedom of speech while exposing these so-called "Human Rights Commissions."
Commentary by Pat Condell regarding the challenge to free speech, etc. in Canada. The bloke's a rabid atheist but his comments are worth hearing on this matter. Click link-