Citizen Bytes

I believe that this is more the actions of a party that has become used to the fact they can rule without any opposition.

The media is scared to write any story that potrays them in a negative light because it means they will simply be shut out of any further press releases.

The media for instance when Lindsay Blackett closed down the wild rose fund, failed to report the full story. When then fund was closed there were screams from the non profit sector in Alberta. Several Executive directors were told after the story surfaced that they were delisted from the PC party membership. They were thrown out of all legislative comittees and then sent letters that if there charities wanted to exist in Alberta that the executive directors should resign.

There is no fifth estate in Alberta whatsoever and everyone is ignorant to it.

I find it hard to understand which side of the debate you are arguing!

It's a parent's right and duty to decide what kind of education a child should have.

I'm not sure what 'liberal education' means in your context; if you're talking about the Great Tradition and the Enlightenment, that brings you back to rights again - which seem to be something you are concerned about - or is it something else that's 'beyond all measure of rational and democratic sense'.

Teachers are hired to teach whatever their employers, the representatives of the parents of their students, decide is important. Where there's a lack of consensus, the parent's choice is more important that the teacher's philosophical position.

Well said, Dean!

The schools are in way advocating harmful information. They are presenting facts, which are especially important in a society as varied and multi-faceted as Canada.

Parents should not be permitted to shield their children from the truth. This is a form of control, and will only serve to encourage further close-mindedness and intolerance. Hardly what I would call adequate prerequisites for a peaceful and progressive society!

The best gifts we can give to our children are the knowledge, freedom and respect to make their own decisions and to be brave enough to become the people that they are intrinsically destined to be.

The only way to do this is by living truthfully, not by controlling, manipulating, and shielding information.

I agree with Dean, and find Bill 44 recently passed in Alberta an embarrassingly regressive piece of legislation.

Education involves more than simply instilling your own point of view into your children on various controversial subjects. Parents are more likely to provide their children with one point of view only - their own.

There is at least a greater likelihood that educators will present a more balanced spectrum of viewpoints on a subject, with the hope that children will learn to formulate their own opinions, and not simply adopt those of their parents.

This is the result of the continual use of things like the Human Rights Commission to forward politically correct thinking. Why are people surpried that the other side has chosen to use the same tactics to further their agenda?
I disagree with censorship of any kind but I find it humorous to see the outrage from people who are all too comfortable forcing others to their viewpoint using various methods.

The Human Rights Commissions have been subverted to only protect certain views. Perhaps when people realize that the same tools they use to achieve their ends can be used against them we will have a truly fair and equal society.

Any time anyone communicates, that person - whether teacher, parent or person posting online - selects and controls that information. One person's 'facts' are another's 'propaganda'. The question is really one of who decides which selection of facts a child - should be exposed to - a teacher or a parent.

True tolerance acknowledges that different people come to different conclusions on all kinds of topics; they understand and weight different facts differently. It's not tolerance to insist that all children must be given the set of facts their teacher (or their school administration, or the Minister of Education) thinks is important. It's the reverse. It's an attempt to reduce diversity and variation in the population.

Look. The fact that you are a teacher means you can't speak your true feelings anyway. Only retired teachers who are not at risk of censure should be speaking on this topic.

This is fundamentally the problem of our society now...if you don't agree with the politically correct (pro fringe) perspective, you better shut up. That is why I have to use a pseudonym to participate in this forum for risk of losing my job. What a pathetic democracy this is....

Those parents who are so determined to shield their children from learning about such "controversial" subjects such as sexuality, religion, and sexual orientation should seriously consider the option of private schools or home schooling.

Publicly funded schools should serve the best interests of the public, which in my opinion is educating and informing our future generation, not promoting ignorance or intolerance.

Those children pulled from classes that their parents deem are inappropriate will simply receive a crash course from their friends in the schoolyard upon their return to class, which is not likely to be entirely balanced or accurate. Is this really the objective?

Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is power.

It is obvious that the people of Alberta don't deserve the liberal (classical definition) education that is their birthright as members of a democracy like Canada.

This is fine by me - we already have asymetrical standards in this country, particularly with respects to cultural issues - however, I find it sad that Alberta's legislators opted for this law. There is obviously a lot of ignorance floating around this whole subject.

Ultimately, Albertans as a society, will get what they have asked for and what they merit. It's not a wise choice, to be sure.

So if we are going to be a multicultural nation, doesn't that mean we respect the views of Christians and those who have doubts about the theory of evolution?
Or are the only cultures that are valid are those of the minorities?

As far as limiting the exposure of children to evolution and alternative lifestyles and other information, aren't we already limiting their exposure to by not acknowledging the fact that the rate of STDs among homosexuals is 5 to 10 times that of the heterosexual population?
Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
It's okay for the school system to censor anything not politically correct but they damn the parents for deciding what moral guidance their children get.

This is law is a great step forward. I couldn't care less about the debate on God or evolution or sex education is taught, but I love the idea that the parents are wresting some power back from the nanny state.
We are a people with a government, not a government with a people.
They work for us, not the other way around.

I wholeheartely agree with Dean's position. We need to teach our children about the world, not hide them from it. There is NOT, however, 'popular support' for this bill. It has been pushed through and does CERTAINLY NOT reflect the view of most Albertans that I know.

This is a party with a dangerous sense of entitlement without opposition.

The society we currently live in talks a great deal about support for multiculturism, diversity, and differing points of view. However, if we are really honest with ourselves, we will acknowledge that it is always the prevailing, majority view point(s) or ideology that is promulgated in any educational institution, whether it is elementary, secondary or post-secondary schools. This means that any opposing minority viewpoint is beaten down by the majority.

The current prevailing ideology is that society and educators should dictate the curriculum in the schools. But the question is, what is being taught in the schools? Only what is the current prevailing view point(s).

This then means that the ideas inculcated in children of parents with minority viewpoint(s) will not align with those of their parents. In a way, these children are being stolen from their parents, starting from a young age; their ideas/personalities may be directly opposed to those their parents wish for them. The rights of their parents are being ignored/shredded.

It was not so long ago that the European ideology was in full swing and aboriginal children were stolen from their parents. Now we have a very similar immoral discrimation in full swing. Canadian society is now the all knowing parent and the real parents are being relegated to the sidelines. The Animal Farm by George Orwell illustrates this point very well.

So, I cheer the fight against hypocrisy and discrimination of the majority. Hooray for minority rights! Hooray for the Alberta decision in favour of parents' rights.

Why can't we just go back to teaching the facts in schools? Teach science, teach math, teach languages, geography, history- all important things children need to learn and will actually make use of in life. When did we start teaching children 'individual's points of view' or 'groups of people's beliefs and interests'.

I for one could care less about what other people want to beleive in or want to do behind closed doors in their bedrooms, your business, but don't think for a second this gives you the right to teach my children this is how it is- just because it is yours, or a larger groups point of view.

Society dictates we are about freedom of choice, free to beleive in what we want without discrimination, fine I can agree to that. The second you make this part of a forced curriculum it crosses the line. There is no place in education for 'beliefs' and especially 'sexual conduct'except for perhaps how to do this safely and responsibly. There is lots of time for the rest, it does come naturally you know..... come on Kindergarden-give me a break.

By the way Tanya from Quebec, what exactly is the truth, and where do you get off thinking you can decide what I shield my children from- kind of sounds like my jurisdiction as a parent to me- I know maybe we shouldn't let our kids come home at all while they are growing up so they don't get influenced at all by their rightful parents- just the misguided opinions of a specific group in society that thinks they have to be right....

SMP2006 - you prove my point exactly.

I cannot see how you can conclude that sex education, introduction to various religions, and the like is 'propoganda'.

You state: 'True tolerance acknowledges that different people come to different conclusions on all kinds of topics; they understand and weight different facts differently.'

I agree with this. However, do you think that our children are going to 'understand and weigh facts' when they are only hearing a limited version of them from their families? People don't learn when they are boxed and controlled.

The real act of courage here is to give our children wings to fly and to subject them to diverse opinions/thoughts. Just because a parent does not agree with something does not make it wrong. It is up to our children to 'understand and weigh the facts', as you yourself say, and to formulate their own thought processes and opinions! They can't do that with just their families' viewpoints on things!

What you are essentially saying is that teachers are wrong and the parent is right and the only 'facts' that the children should be weighing are those that the parents choose to subject them to.

This is the farthest thing from true tolerance!!

By all means, hide the truth from children to "protect them", if you want to produce conformist, mindless consumers who are perfectly willing to join the military, or otherwise do as they are told.

What you get when you promote myths over truth to a couple generations of children is,
MY country...America.

Now, do you really want that?

This is a much bigger deal than it should be from both sides of the arguement. As a parent I do believe it is my right to decide what opinions my child is subjected to and as we've all experienced, some teachers bring more of their own opinions to their craft than they should. Whick can on ocassion skew the intented information behind the teaching point.

However, it is also my responsibility as a parent to instill the tolerance and respect for the opininos of others in my child. As well, to subject them to the opinions of others and allow them to cultivate their own opinions and reasonings. The boost this topic has gained seems to stem from a person/people's lack of confidence in themselves as parents and their children's ability to think for themselves.

At the same time, I hope this whole ordeal doesn't bottleneck the information given to those children who have the freedom from topic filtering.

So if we are going to be a multicultural nation, doesn't that mean we respect the views of Christians and those who have doubts about the theory of evolution?
Or are the only cultures that are valid are those of the minorities?

As far as limiting the exposure of children to evolution and alternative lifestyles and other information, aren't we already limiting their exposure to by not acknowledging the fact that the rate of STDs among homosexuals is 5 to 10 times that of the heterosexual population?
Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
It's okay for the school system to censor anything not politically correct but they damn the parents for deciding what moral guidance their children get.

This is law is a great step forward. I couldn't care less about the debate on God or evolution or sex education is taught, but I love the idea that the parents are wresting some power back from the nanny state.
We are a people with a government, not a government with a people.
They work for us, not the other way around.

SMP2006 "One persons facts are another persons..." What?!? Facts are just that, facts. They exist, in and of themselves, independent of people or parties or viewpoints.

Young people have sex: fact. When young people have sex, they contract STDs, get pregnant: fact. Some will have abortions, some will have babies they cannot care for, those babies will not have the same opportunities as babies that were planned by older, more financially secure parents: fact.

The only "propaganda" I know of in all this is how much these unwanted babies cost society, how many end up in prisons, how many end up with addictions, how many end up dead early. Those numbers seem to differ significantly, depending on which side of the political fence you are on. No one seems to seriously deny they exist, just to what magnitude.

Education will bring the numbers down. Who will educate the children? I have heard for years that it is the parents' place to decide when their children should learn this information. So, tell them. Most parents can't do it. Go ahead and try. If you can walk into your 7th grader's room and discuss sexual activity, reproductive health, and safe sex, then you pass. If you can't, then you are already too late. By 8th grade your child can teach you: fact.

Teachers teach. Parents won't do it, so we have to. Support them, or do it yourself. But realize it must be done, one way or the other.

MMG 8th grade science teacher

I'd always thought that education should teach people how to think ; not what to think.
However , this idea is much like 'peace on earth'. LGBT Canadians are not an "issue", nor are 'we' to be be bounced around academic chit-chats , like - "well do you think they should have rights , or should we go back to tradition and let blood lap up against the curbs?" Religion is based on faith ; not facts. We are facts.

The government of Alberta may have had no choice , due to the nature of its constituents. But it is a step backwards , not just decades , but to another era. " Don't worry , dear , if anyone is prepared to say anything kind , decent , or respectful towards those people , in front of Alberta's youth ; we'll give ya plenty of notice. And , oh yes , m'am , please help yourself to my Copenhagen chewing tobacco. So nice 'n minty."

So if we are going to be a multicultural nation, doesn't that mean we respect the views of Christians and those who have doubts about the theory of evolution?
Or are the only cultures that are valid are those of the minorities?

As far as limiting the exposure of children to evolution and alternative lifestyles and other information, aren't we already limiting their exposure to by not acknowledging the fact that the rate of STDs among homosexuals is 5 to 10 times that of the heterosexual population?
Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
It's okay for the school system to censor anything not politically correct but they damn the parents for deciding what moral guidance their children get.

This is law is a great step forward. I couldn't care less about the debate on God or evolution or sex education is taught, but I love the idea that the parents are wresting some power back from the nanny state.
We are a people with a government, not a government with a people.
They work for us, not the other way around.

The purpose of school is to educate your child with a range of knowledge, to help them determine who they are as individuals, to figure out what they believe in, and to prepare them for life beyond the classroom. Allowing your child to recieve an education with a range of perspectives and beliefs does not eliminate the lessons a parent can teach them at home, and both lessons are important for a young person to be able to make their own INFORMED decision.

To take away the opportunity of a child to learn about the world, and the wide range of beliefs within the world, is only to disadvantage them. A parent won't be able to shield their child from their surroundings forever, and leaving them unprepared to deal with a diverse soceity is unfair because it is a reality. If you don't expose your children to differences in school, they won't know how to behave and function outside of school. In today's world, there are times when everyone will have to accept some things that they might not agree with. Why not let children practice dealing with these things in the classroom, which is the ultimate point of school?

Go ahead and teach your children at home opposing views to what they learn in school, but don't deny them the right to a rounded education. A parent should guide and teach their child how to live in a world where not everyone agrees on everything, because thats exactly what the child will have to do beyond classroom walls.

I agree fully with smp2006. The child's right to a broad education must come second to the right of the parent not to be upset by strange ideas. People who have studied for years to gain a full understanding of their subject area must bow to the parents’ wishes. Obviously this will include doctors and judges who are also employed by the people's representatives. We must remember that knowledge and understanding must always come second to individual rights. The group right to an open tolerant society must again come second to that of the parents.

Irony. Gays/Lesbian use the argument that their marriage/wedding does not take anything away from heterosexual marriage/wedding. Similarly, parents who choose to take their kids out of class when certain controversial subjects are taught does not take anything away from your kids. Freedom of choice is a two way street. If don't agree, then maybe after birth, we should all send our kids to be raise by the government and they can dictate what goes in their little minds. Let's be rational here. Be respective of other people's view.

My God it is funny how the majority of people making comments about this matter are making them from the point of view of the small minority of people who because of the lifestyle you chose will not have children. If it ever happens that you can and I fail to see it maybe you with all that education that parents lack in your opinion can , but not going to happen, if so make the decisions for your own children and not the rest of Canada. Some of the best minds in or out of Canada were educated during the years when sex education was unheard of in our schools, and in those days most teenagers did not end up in the university of hard knocks as lots are today. Think it might have anything to do with your liberal ideas? Guess not , it would have to be because the stupid parents wont allow you to indoctorinate them into the culture you are pushing. If you are indeed quoting Ignatieff , then I guess my opinion of him is not misplaced. When they become yours to support and raise then speak to how they are raised , until then please SHUT up.

My God it is funny how the majority of people making comments about this matter are making them from the point of view of the small minority of people who because of the lifestyle you chose will not have children.

If it ever happens that you can and I fail to see it maybe you with all that education that parents lack in your opinion can , but not going to happen, if so make the decisions for your own children and not the rest of Canada.

Some of the best minds in or out of Canada were educated during the years when sex education was unheard of in our schools, and in those days most teenagers did not end up in the university of hard knocks as lots are today. Think it might have anything to do with your liberal ideas? Guess not , it would have to be because the stupid parents wont allow you to indoctorinate them into the culture you are pushing.

If you are indeed quoting Ignatieff , then I guess my opinion of him is not misplaced. When they become yours to support and raise then speak to how they are raised , until then please SHUT up.

This is a selection from Michael Ignatieff's "Rights, Intimacy and Family Life" (from Massey lecture).

I think it is relevent here.

"Children do have rights. They have the right not just to be sheltered and cared for and protected from abuse, but also, to be treated as moral agents in their own right, with intentions, purposes, and visions of the world that we should not presume are identical to our own. A liberal ideal of parenting puts empathy at the heart of modern family life - that is, no longer taking children for granted, no longer assuming that they should be silent and obedient witnesses to the godlike dramas played out above their heads, but acknowledging that they are incipient adults whose minds must be read, whose hearts must be understood, and whose love must be earned."

-Dean

Yes Dean , just read your excerpt from Ignatieffs speech and this makes you right because? Why is he being quoted as the parent to beat all parents, lol, and why do you think because he and you beleive you can and should indoctorinate our children instead of as you see it the awful parents does that become fact. As stated before the minds produced in Canada and under a totally different system than today are still some of the best anywhere , witness how you look at Ignatieff. Cant change fact and the facts are that parents not you or he should make decisions for other peoples children.

I think that this poem sums things up beautifully!

On Children
Kahlil Gibran

Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,
which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them,
but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.