Yesterday several bombs blasted in Brussels. Today a carillon rang out with the tune to John Lennon’s “Imagine”. Designed to bring hope and peace to a beleaguered city – in reality it serves just the opposite. John Lennon was just as the song says, a dreamer, one who lives apart from reality. No god “no heaven”, “no religion too”, “Nothing to kill or die for”, “no possessions”, “No need for greed or hunger”, by John Lennon’s own words – No Hope.
Over the past several decades this has become society’s mantra; “Imagine all the people Living for today…” Forget tomorrow, it doesn’t get any better. You are right and nobody has the right to tell you differently. They are the ones “wrong” about the way of life, wrong about God. This is your reality. “You have it all”. Except – you don’t and you know it but, there is nothing better, “that’s what the man says”(Paul McCartney), in other words there is “No Hope”.
Over the past several decades suicide rates in Canada have increased by 60% overall, but for some segments of society it is becoming epidemic. Why? There is “No Hope”. Attempted suicides have increased three fold and only by medical intervention has the actual suicide rate not gone higher. Most suicides have “attempted” several times before achieving death, suggesting a cry for help rather than a real wish to die. Has society, then failed these people? Failed to give them hope, something to live for? But society can’t and won’t counsel against its mantra.
Over the next several months Parliament is bound by the Supreme Court to pass a law on doctor assisted suicide. Call it what you prefer, Assisted Death,, Euthanasia, End of Life Law, it all amounts to the patient dying before the natural course of death. It all amounts to bringing on an end where there is no hope. When we consider the man who recently lost his job, his house, his wife and kids and has now drowning his sorrows in booze and thinks of suicide for his relief, is his life’s future all that different than the one who is terminally ill?
Where is the hope among Aboriginal people and communities where there are serious concerns about mental illness and social ills such as substance abuse, addiction, violence and suicide. European culture is an imposition to indigenous culture and imposes the loss of lifestyle and self-determination and is seen as a major cause of health and social problems within the indigenous population. What is the vision for hope among many Aboriginal youth? What is their future?
There is still much hope for the terminally ill – it is called Hospice. Doing all we as society can for the patient to bring a peaceful and comfortable end of life most often at home with family and friends. The problem with hospice, it costs money and therefore seen as an intrusion on society in general. “Can’t afford it” is the budgetary cry of all institutions. Assisted Death is the less expensive option. Most medical institutions and doctors have introduced the “Living Will” to protect themselves and suggested the patient voluntarily restrict ‘heroic’ medical measures in severe cases.
What does it say for our government to condone, to pass a law making legal the nu-natural end of life measures of Physician-assisted Suicide. Does it not say to members of society in distress, “Society expects you to do the right thing, end it” after all, as we have said all along – there is NO HOPE.
Heard in passing, “I am a feminist. I believe in the equality of men and women. -Sophie, open your own damn door!”
To purposely encourage more women to enter into politics is not equality, it is reverse gender discrimination and is probably having the opposite effect than intended. Every EDA meeting I have ever attended has had 3 times as many men in attendance than women. Why? Just as every school parents meeting will be attended by more women than men. There is obviously a family connection taking place. Not that men do not care for their families or women have less regard for politics, it is the reality of gender roles taking precedence and no amount of “feminist” activity is going to change that. Women are exceedingly more likely to choose their families over a temporary political career.
Federal Election 2015 elected the highest number of female MPs ever. In total, 88 women were elected – 50 for the Liberals, 18 for the NDP, 17 for the Conservatives, two for the BQ and one for the Green Party but, due to the increase in the number of MPs, still only represent 26 per cent of the total MPs in the House of Commons – almost the exact proportion of female MPs when the election was called on Aug. 2 and 27 per cent of the Liberal caucus even though women comprised 31 per cent of the Liberal candidates.
Justin Trudeau can gender balance the cabinet and gender balance appointments to boards but, what does it prove? Good for optics, he will receive much applause but are many of the majority of men who were elected, who just may be more qualified or deserving, being overlooked? If so it was not the best choice. Just because it’s 2015 is not a valid reason.
Is there really equality between women and men? Women firefighters receive the same pay as their male co-workers, great, so they should. Equal pay for equal work. What then if the majority of male firefighters choose a sexually explicit movie for movie night at the fire house. Should the female firefighters be legitimately offended? If so, are they really equal?
What does it say about Justin’s gender equality stance when the overwhelming majority of ‘selfie’ requests are from women? …and little is done to improve the balance?
Society cannot force gender equality mainly because it is unrealistic and untrue. Women will always choose to enhance their sex appeal through make-up, clothes and demeanor just as men will always attempt to improve their masculinity. That is nature and that is a fight society will lose every time.
Would it not be better for girls to be brought up as ladies and boys to be gentlemen both with respect and honor for each other and the opposite sex? Vive les différences entre les enfants!
Minimum Guaranteed Income is Back On The Discussion Table.
Both the federal government and the provincial governments of Ontario, Manitoba and Quebec are about to explore the concept of guaranteeing a minimum income to all people.
Basic income: New life for an old idea
A combination of economic uncertainty and political possibility is giving new life to an old policy idea
Ontario will test idea of a guaranteed minimum income to ease poverty, spending on social programs
This conversation needs to back up a whole chapter or two.
Firstly, Why? What would this program hope to accomplish? Canada already has social assistance, pensions, employment insurance etc. Are all the present systems to be replaced? Would monies be doled out and then taxed back? More and more peoples are becoming entrenched in the idea that they are owed a living, that they have a fundamental right, a ‘Charter Right’ to social assistance, to ‘Free Money‘ SORRY! It is not so.
Under our Canadian Charter of Rights and freedoms the closest the Charter comes to ensuring the rights of citizens is the following clause:
7. “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.”
This clause does not guarantee anyone they will be given a ‘Life’ and ‘security’ and ‘freedom’, just guaranteed that they will not be deprived of a ‘Life’. The more people are guaranteed a living income the more it becomes entrenched that it is Canada’s collective duty to supply that living income.
Would it not be more fundamentally ‘just’ to precede clause seven with:
“Each and every person (citizen of Canada) has the duty and obligation to be a law abiding, productive, peaceful member of society and a defender and protector of the person and rights of all other individuals residing in Canada.”
When persons are living according to their Charter duties, doing their best to be productive, only then would they have claim to a living income, notwithstanding disability, incapacity or old age.
More and more this move toward a guaranteed income has more to do with stimulating the economy than the surety of life. If so, Canadian society is in far deeper trouble than just fiscal management. The terminology the federal government is using reads ‘living income’ which is a step or two higher than minimum wage or social assistance. These monies to be given regardless of whether recipients work or meet a means test.
“Basic income is universal, unconditional and individual. That means every individual in society automatically receives a monthly payment… Whether you’re employed or unemployed, man or woman, rich or poor, you would get this money in your bank account every month,” said Jonathan Brun of Revenu de Base Quebec.
The opening lines of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms reads as follows:
“Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:”
Is Canada about to belie forever the Biblical passage, “Don’t you remember the rule we had when we lived with you? “If you don’t work, you don’t eat.” And now we’re getting reports that a bunch of lazy good-for-nothings are taking advantage of you. This must not be tolerated. We command them to get to work immediately—no excuses, no arguments—and earn their own keep. Friends, don’t slack off in doing your duty.” 2 Thessalonians 3: 10-13
Stimulus money is a good and fair use of tax monies but not if unjustly given to individuals or corporations.