OK, kiddo! Here are all the fantastically amazing posts tagged with Alberta
Alberta Puts The Chill On Gay Classroom Topics
The Alberta legislature has passed a bill that requires teachers to receive parental permission before discussing or acknowledging topics of sexual orientation in the curriculum, or else face being brought before the Human Rights Commission for violating parental rights.
This means, very soon, teachers will be at risk of being brought before a tribunal if they acknowledge gay issues without first taking care to selectively evacuate students from the classroom. Not only does this send a terrible message to gay students—that topics about their lives pose such a profound hazard that their classmates’ attendance must be filtered based on privilege—but it enables and reinforces schoolyard bullying through that same knowledge.
So how did such a controversial bill pass so effortlessly? The wordsmithing employed by its supporters offers some clues. In the comments section of a National Post article I linked to on Friday, a supporter of the bill wrote: “The core issue here is who has the right to shape the minds of children, individuals or the State.” This simplification is a real eye-opener. Are those the only two options that supporters see? What about, say, the students being able to shape their own minds?
By the time students are old enough to be introduced to sexual education in the curriculum, they are citizens of their own right. For a guardian to forcibly bar a student from hearing information and viewpoints other than their own is not only narrow-minded, but irresponsible. Astonishingly, though, it seems bill proponents don’t view students as inquisitive minds that are capable of forming their own views; rather, they are seen as a form of human property for whom it is the exclusive right of the guardian to indoctrinate as they see fit. It is no wonder, then, that these parents see open classroom discussions and the analysis of opposing viewpoints as an affront to their plan—a way to undo the views they wish to force into their child, unchallenged via the careful censorship of information.
In this light, it actually begins to make sense that, since some parents wish to coercively inbue uncontested beliefs into their child, they project that same behaviour onto the state. Anti-bullying programs and lessons that include acknowledgement of gay persons, they think, must be part of some agenda to brainwash and take control of the younger generation. Why, I bet they even think my subliminal messages and short-wave thought injection gun are being used for more than just corporate advertising.
Still, what a sad day for education and enlightenment in Alberta.
Texan Posters Launch 44 Tiara Brains
In my web travels, I often collect stories that I intend to share, but then become distracted by newer, shinier stories—or feel too lazy to illustrate them individually. This is what becomes of those stories: a Pile o’ Slaps!
A Texan mayor has announced that he’s leaving the States to legally live with his lover, a gay, illegal immigrant. In other news, conservative Texans have been mysteriously exploding.
A progressive church in Québec has embraced the silly “Adam and Steve” play on words, erecting a large anti-homophobia poster with the slogan: “Si Jésus aimait Jean, pourquoi pas Adam et Steve?” Or, if I may flex my translation skills: “If Jesus loved John, why not Adam and Steve?”, referring to a popular French expression about John being “the disciple Jesus loved.” Already, the sign has caused controversy as some residents complain about its proximity to a school bus stop, and one enraged mother declaring “I don’t care what people do in their bedroom but I don’t have a picture of my husband and I naked with a fig leaf in front of our crotch outside my house.” Err… Does that mean she doesn’t use the fig leaf?
Still on the topic of Québec, the province has announced that they will be launching an anti-homophobia campaign by the end of the year. The campaign has been confirmed to be province wide, hopefully referring to Alberta—where it’s needed most.
Speaking of which, the Alberta legislature is very, very close to passing the inappropriate Bill 44, legislation that will require teachers to receive parental permission before mentioning any gay topics in class, and to pull out any students whose parents don’t approve. A good clue that this is a terrible idea: The National Post, Canada’s largest right-wing newspaper, is already referring to it as hillbilly human rights.
Slap reader John writes in with a story about a gay student who successfully ran as his high school’s homecoming queen, complete with tiara rights. Congratulations!
Finally, Canada’s capital city is examining the health of its arts scene and nightlife as more and more gay Ottawans leave for larger neighbouring cities, such as Toronto and Montréal. It’s what city officials are dubbing the “gay brain drain,” but, uh, are they absolutely sure it’s due to the arts scene and not, say, proximity to Stephen Harper?
Well, that’s all for this Pile o’ Slaps! Until next time, have a great weekend kids!
Anti-Gay Lobby Urges Parents To File Against Teachers
One of Canada’s largest anti-gay lobby groups is seizing on Alberta’s Bill 44, a proposed amendment to the Human Rights Act that would disallow teachers from mentioning or discussing gay topics in front of students that did not receive parental permission.
The bill is ominously vague—a point which has piqued the interests of Brian Rushfelt, head of Canada Family Action Coalition. “It’s up to the parent to make [the legislation] as broad or narrow as they want,” he said, adding that neither “the schools nor the government should be the ones to put parameters on it and say it’s only sexuality classes or only evolution classes or only religion classes.”
Anti-gay lobby groups have been actively opposing measures to prevent the bullying of gay students for years, but now may have a new tool beyond the mere lobbying of school boards to get what they want. Parents, according to Rushfeldt, should file human rights complaints against teachers who promote tolerance of gay students so that the boundaries of the new law can be broadened. Broadened, of course, in a means befitting only to those crazy enough to devote time to this nonsense.
This proposed abuse should be enough evidence for even supporters to reconsider the bill, but the real flaw lies within its intended uses. The effect of this legislation is to always postpone discussion of gay rights, student reports on gay historical figures and role models, anti-bullying campaigns, and sexual education information until all parents can be consulted. But parents who want their children to be able to actively examine different sides of issues as they arise, who wish for spontaneous discussion to be encouraged, whose lives—if they are gay—will now be treated as a topic so dangerous that all discussion of it must be halted until every student’s family gives their blessing to proceed, and who would have to see their child’s fellow classmates ushered out into the hallway when their family is up for discussion, would have no say in any of these matters if Bill 44 passes.
Although, come of think of it, this bill may have its uses, too. Why, I actually heard of a teacher once explaining that her name was changed to “Mrs. so-and-so” because she had just married her husband. Can you imagine? Flaunting her heterosexuality and the myriad bedroom implications it entails to the whole class! And don’t even get me started on lessons that contradict the teachings of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
- Parents must get say in all teaching, group says [Calgary Herald]
School Censors Little Girl’s History Report
Natalie Jones, a sixth grade student in San Diego, has been disallowed from reading her history report on Harvey Milk, the United State’s first openly gay and tragically slain politician, until her fellow classmates receive permission from their parents to hear it.
Theresa Grace, the principal of the girl’s elementary school, said that a school board policy forbids the teaching of any topics that include discussions of sexual orientation without first receiving parental permission.
Sound both absurd and familiar? It should! Ted Morton, a Conservative MLA in Alberta, has thrice tried to introduce a bill that would implement the same policy province-wide. And now Lindsay Blackett, a Conservative cabinet minister, has introduced a similar bill that would require teachers to pull students out of class unless they have permission to hear reports like Natalie’s.
I guess I can see where they’re coming from, though. I was involuntarily and irreversibly transformed into a homosexual after hearing too much of a classmate’s report on the Enola Gay.
- Sixth Grader Denied Right to Freely Present Report on Harvey Milk [Digital Journal]
- ACLU says school censored student’s Milk report [Yahoo News]
Teachers Forced To Warn Parents Of Gay Material
Alberta is amending its Human Rights Act with a provision that will force school teachers to exclude any student whose parents object to the acknowledgement of sexual orientation in classroom discussions. Failure to pull a student from such a discussion—even ones that arise from student questions—could result in a human rights complaint.
This new provision is similar to Bill 208, a failed private member’s bill headed by Ted Morton, which would have forced teachers to issue warning slips to parents before discussing same-sex marriage in class.
What a novel idea, though! Barring students from hearing or discussing any information that parents disagree with. As if the Debate Club wasn’t uninteresting enough.
What Is With The Alberta Government?
Well, this is getting bizarre! Wednesday’s silly little story about the Alberta government defining same-sex couples as “benefit partners” instead of “spouses” in their employee benefit plan is causing more of a stir than expected.
Same-sex marriage is a legal reality in Canada, but Alberta’s gay government workers are being categorized differently. It should be a no-brainer to remedy this and move on—or so you’d think.
Lloyd Snelgrove, an Alberta cabinet minister and president of the treasury board, is continuing to defend the separate-but-equal treatment in the benefit plan, saying that the government’s benefit plan shouldn’t be used to “drive social change” and that anyone who has a problem with it should go to the Human Rights Commission instead of the plan’s source.
“Drive social change?” Same-sex marriage has been legal in Alberta since 2005; the change already happened. Surely this is just a matter of updating the books to keep consistent. But even Alberta’s premier, Ed Stelmach, has now come out against calling same-sex spouses “spouses” in the plan: “The benefits are the same,” he said during Wednesday’s question period, “and that’s the most important thing.”
It’s true: The benefits are the same—just like the water that leads to separate drinking fountains come from the same pipes, but something’s still not right. It’s a cliché, but one apparently requires repeating: Separate but equal is not equal. The Alberta government should just acknowledge reality, update the darn plan, and move on to something more important.
Alberta Defines Gay Spouses As “Benefits Partners”
Gay government workers in Alberta are not allowed to list a same-sex partner as a “spouse” in their benefits package, according to a government booklet.
Scott Mair, a former government employee, said in a radio interview that the government only permits same-sex spouses to be defined as “benefit partners” instead of “spouses,” and that because of the difference, same-sex couples cannot register or update their spouses’ benefits online.
Astonishingly, Lloyd Snelgrove, an Alberta Cabinet minister and president of the Treasury Board, called the double-standard “fine,” and that he had “no intention of changing the definition of spouse to include people in same-sex marriages.”
An interesting stance, since the federal parliament already did that in 2005. I guess Lloyd overturned it when we weren’t looking. You’re a sly one, Lloyd!
Alberta Fixes The Economy: No More Gender Reassignment Funding
The province of Alberta has completely eliminated all forms of gender reassignment surgery from its public health care, cloaked as a cost-saving measure to improve the economy. The surgery, which was recommended to about twelve Albertans per year, can demonstrably improve the lives of transgendered individuals at virtually no cost to the health care system.
Already, the move has sparked outrage and confusion among the transgendered community, and has some MLAs—including a Conservative backbencher—seeking answers. The move seems a tad ideological, considering the negligible cost of the services, and that the province only recently eliminated health care premiums at a cost of over a billion dollars.
Ontario had also tried de-listing gender re-assignment surgery from its public health care system, but was forced to re-introduce it by the Human Rights Commission ten years later.
- Tory MLA questions delisting of sex changes [Edmonton Journal]
- Oprah expresses interest in Canadian sex-change surgery decision [Canada.com]
Alberta To Join Century
Alberta will amend their provincial human rights legislation to explicitly protect gays from discrimination.
Culture Minister, Lindsay Blackett, who just last month said that updating the province’s human rights legislation to include gays would be a “knee-jerk response,” has apparently jerked his knee, giving him ample recovery time to draft up the much-needed legislation.
Alberta was the only province in Canada to not include gays in their human rights laws, despite a decade-old Supreme Court ruling requiring it.
Charitable Status Revoked From Gay Drop-In Centre
The Pride Centre of Edmonton, a non-profit organisation featuring senior’s drop-in activities, a library, mentorship program, clothing bank and youth shelter, is in serious trouble. The centre, which relies entirely on donations, had its charitable status revoked in 2004 after being declared a political organisation by the federal government.
Jocylan McDonnell, one of the Price Centre’s board members, said that they have made a significant effort to be non-partisan. Still, despite relocating twice and replacing their board and administrators, it is now ineligable to issue tax receipts.
As Montreal Simon poignantly notes, gay seniors in particular have had to endure a lot—much more than younger generations can imagine—and they don’t often have access to the peer support that today’s youth does. A Gay senior’s drop-in centre is a place where they can socialize safely and openly, but Edmonton’s is at risk while harmful, vocal, and politically active anti-gay organisations such as Focus on the Family Canada and REAL Women of Canada are still permitted to accept tax deductable donations.
Something’s awry, don’t you think?
Unless… that crafty senior’s centre is up to something that we don’t know about yet; something sinister…
Alberta Still Dragging Feet On Gay Rights
Alberta is the only province in Canada that does not explicitly include protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation in its human rights code. This, despite a ten-year-old Supreme Court ruling stating that provinces must not exclude gays and lesbians from their human rights legislations.
Rachel Notley, an Alberta MLA, has now brought the matter up in the legislature, calling out the government for its embarrassingly slow response to the court ruling. “Why,” she asked, “does the government continue to give a wink-wink, nudge-nudge to homophobes and gay-bashers by refusing to include sexual orientation in our human rights code?”
Great question, Rachel.
Just last year, Premier Ed Stelmach said that the human rights code would not be updated to include sexual orientation in that legislative session, calling the process “complicated.” Now, Lindsay Blackett, the Minister responsible for the human rights code and the first black cabinet minister in Alberta, has said the same thing for this legislative session, announcing that updating the human rights code would be a “knee-jerk response:”
We do not make changes to legislation… or make amendments to any particular body just because of the whim of one particular individual in this House.
I guess avoiding a knee-jerk response justifies a plain ol’ jerk response. Isn’t politics just the classiest?
Here’s the thing: this issue is not just the wishes of one lone MLA—it’s the wishes of the Supreme Court of Canada, and Alberta has no excuse for letting this go unattended since 1999, when Rosie O’Donnell hosted the Grammys that debuted Ricky Martin—and only one of them was suspected of being gay.
So, yeah, if updating the human rights code is truly complicated and requires cascading updates, then say so—say unabashedly that it was a mistake to ignore it, that you’re on the case now, and that it will be in place soon. But, frankly, I don’t think it’s complicated, especially since the courts must already interpret the human rights code as if sexual orientation were present. Alberta has a long history of institutionalized homophobia by the government, and dragging their feet on updating the human rights code—while continuing to introduce homophobic legislation—gives me reason to suspect that they’re just being… What’s the most recognizable word for it?
Let’s say: “Alberta-governmenty.”
- Alberta accused of ignoring gay rights [Edmonton SUN]
- MLA wants gay rights protected [iNews 880]
Calgary Most Hateful City in Canada
Calgary has topped the list of the most hate crimes committed per capita of any city Canada, according to a report released by Statistics Canada this week. The study also noted that gays are more likely to be the victims of violent hate crimes nationwide than any other minority group.
Neither statistic comes as any surprise. Alberta is home to several individuals who seem to have nothing better to do than publicly voice their distaste for gay people.
Off the top of my head: This week, Stephen Boisson is appealing a human rights ruling that made him apologise for a hateful letter that may have incited a violent anti-gay attack; Last year, Bishop Fred Henry called same-sex marriage a worse betrayal of children than the Catholic Church’s sex scandals, refused to give communion wafers to politicians that supported equal marriage rights, and separately said that gays are as evil as prostitutes and adulterers; Rob Anders, MP for Calgary West, crafted pamphlets linking same-sex marriage with violent gun crimes and crystal meth usage—and mailed them to another constituently entirely; Ted Morton introduced legislation that would have forced teachers to stop all discussions of same-sex marriage unless each student received written parental permission; Ralph Klien used the obscure Notwithstanding Clause to outlaw same-sex marriage in the province before the federal law took hold; Bill Whatcott based an entire mayoral campaign (seriously!) on countering homosexuality, while Calgary Mayor Dave Bronconnier announced in a mayoral debate that he doesn’t “condone” gay people; and Craig Chandler had his Tory nomination revoked because of anti-gay hate speech published on his website.
With such passionate and unnecessary rhetoric in the province, it’s no wonder that some people get the idea that it’s OK to react violently to gay people. Alberta’s biggest city now has three times the national average of actual hate crimes.
- Hate Crimes Have Soared In Calgary [EON]
- Calgary highest in hate crimes [Metro Calgary]
