Friday, August 25, 2006

Why do we need a Federal Status of Women group?

After reading a number of blogs, and looking at the federal Status of Women site I have to ask myself what purpose they serve in this day and age? Now I understand that the general consensus will be that this is a funnel for radical feminists, and this may be true, but I am asking what rights (or lack thereof) Women in Canada are missing that men have.

SWC says on their site; "(SWC) is the federal government agency which promotes gender equality, and the full participation of women in the economic, social, cultural and political life of the country", but the last time I checked women had as many rights as men if they choose to take advantage of them. However there are those out there that choose a higher calling to better our social situation in Canada by staying home to raise their own children instead of leaving this vital task to strangers or creating more latchkey children. Our society has developed to value financial prosperity of the individual over a sound social structure with children raised with values passed on by their parents. Instead the value society is passing on to them is that they are not important unless they have lots of money, thereby perpetuating the cycle by reinforcing this in further generations. Ultimately this will be the downfall of society, because it favours the individual over what is best for society.

While I was reading the blogs and the website I pondered the Idea of true equality in the workplace, and instead of favouring minorities and women like now lets ad two simple questions to job applications. "Are you married?" and "Are you the primary wage earner in your family?" Let's start to put the jobs back where they belong, with the person that brings in the income to support themselves or their family. Let's start to see the people in need get the jobs they need instead of not being hired because a minority has applied for the same job (I include women in this because the need for such an organization must mean that they are in need of special attention for some reason or another). Or maybe we should encourage true equality by giving jobs to the most qualified individual, which would force applicants to have the appropriate high quality training for the job whether they be man OR woman (which lets face facts would only strengthen Canada's economy as a whole).

True equality would be seeing the value in the woman (or man) that stays home to raise their children, instead of valuing the amount of money or prestige a job or position might seem to hold. When we value the proper raising of children with morals and values, that's when we have a strong and productive society. Children ARE our future, they will be the ones running the Country when we are too old to do so.

I ask you to consider this; Are we raising your children in a manner that makes you comfortable with how they will be when they are in charge?
This is what the stay at home parents out there do. Your job may be important to you, but are you contributing anything to future generations like raising a proper child does?

We've forgotten how important "Mom" (or Dad in some unique cases) is, her job may not be glamorous or notable but it is more important than anyone else. She (He) is the one that passes on the most teaching to us at the most critical stage of our lives.

I had intended this to be a simple critique of what I see to be a useless Federal tax burden, but instead it turned into a commentary on the social ramification of the agenda they are promoting. I only hope the damage is reversible when it is finally realized. We need a return to family values, and that of caring about your neighbor. As I have stated before if we all followed one rule we would have a wonderful world to live in, and that is simply "love thy neighor as thyself".

Below is a list of blogs and the link to SWC. Make up your own mind on the situation, but be informed before you do.


Lifesite News service

Big Blue Wave

Relapsed catholic

Family Matters

Small dead animals

Angry in the Great White North

Status of Women Canada

Monday, August 14, 2006

"Our place in the Universe"

As I watched a program on TLC where scientists were presenting their theories of future events, one thought seemed to come to the forefront and that was what our role or place do we have in the universe. It may be true that "some" of the science fiction of today will become science fact for future generations, what and how remains to be seen. Do we really have any place in the universe as aggressive and violent as humans are? Scientists look into the future and don't see more intelligent life, but life forms they equate to prehistoric man (or less). This seems like a more inflated view of humanity than we should have, if there is life out there how do we know they are not avoiding us because of our violent and overly aggressive nature? Or might there not be a spectrum of life from bacteria or microbial right up to even more intelligent than us? But the question remains, what is our place in the universe.

So then what is our place in the universe? We have no way to travel through it (making it to the moon and back doesn't really count when you take into account how vast the universe is), we cannot affect or change anything in it. I will go even further to a truth that hits home: none of us can even change one other person, the only real power for change we have is to change ourselves, and most of the time people don't even use that. (This does not mean we can't be the catalyst for change in others, but it is not us that makes the change, it is that persons will and capacity that changes themselves.)

So what is our place in the universe? A better question may be "do we need a place in the universal community", or even to ask ourselves "why do we need to feel we have a place in the universe". The one little place we do have in the universe, earth, is a mess. Maybe we should stop looking out and start looking in at our own planet with everything that is happening and ask "Do we deserve a place in the universal community?".

If we can't get it right for everyone here on earth, do we really need to subject the universe to how wrong we have gotten it?

I'm going to give you one simple guideline, if everyone used it, it would change the world we live in now to a eutopia.

"Love thy neighbor as thyself". The Bible, Mark 12: verse 30.

We do have a guideline for life, change, and even happiness, the problem is that society has fostered an attitude of selfishness and when you couple this with the aggressive and violent tendencies of mankind you get the world we have today. What we need is to come back to a lifestyle that considers the next person before ourselves, and the satisfaction from those actions would be more rewarding than even getting your own way.

What is our place in the universe? Maybe it is to help and love our fellow man. That would be a truly noble place.

This was much longer than I planned, but I hope it makes you ponder your place in our world and how much better of we would all be if we followed the precepts of the Bible.

Wednesday, August 02, 2006

Cape Breton U vs Professor David Mullan.

Seems a little like David and Goliath doesn't it, but that's what we have to face now because homosexual activists are far more raucous than those of us who accept traditional morality. So I've written a letter to the University which I have posted below. (To see Professor Mullan's site go here; Professor David Mullan or his other site at Professor David Mulan.)

This has become a fight to save the freedom of speech, but why is there even a question? If it is allowable to have and speak the opinion that homosexuality is right, why is it not allowable to have and speak the opinion to the contrary? Well I will tell you why;
Homosexuals know their lifestyle is wrong and therefore need social acceptance to justify their immoral acts, and anyone who reminds them that they are wrong must be silenced so they can minimize the conviction they feel which nags them in their souls.

This is a very basic explanation, but it covers the base reasoning behind the homosexual mindset against free speech.

Here is my letter to Cape Breton University;


Dear President of Cape Breton University,

I am writing in response to your actions against Professor Mullan, and I hope you will take the time to read and consider my views.

I feel that the most egregious error in this whole matter was that this was not in fact an issue concerning "Human rights", and therefore the University was unjust in their application of any penalties. The professor was not inciting a riot to take away a homosexual’s right to have unnatural sexual relations, he was merely stating his opinion that the act is immoral, unnatural and simply wrong. The University has instead succumbed to the pressure placed on them by proponents of this lifestyle, and obviously they felt it would be easier to quiet the professor rather than the militant homosexual activists. To take this action you are saying that it is wrong for Professor Mullan to even think this way, and are trying to force a strict framework of thought on him instead of allowing him to be an individual with the freedom for his own thoughts and beliefs.

It does not matter whether a few (or even every student on campus) disagree with Professor Mullan, the University should back up what is a human right (the freedom of thoughts, beliefs and speech), in the same way which this benefit is extended to homosexuals trying to foster support for their lifestyle! Homosexuals are calling foul and "intolerance" at the mention of anything that does not support their beliefs, but this itself has turned into intolerance for the freedom of the rest of society to think or speak anything contrary to them. This is a slippery slope that is especially dangerous for a public institution of higher learning to tread down, the ramifications to the institute’s ability to foster ideas and maintain open discussions on all topics is unknown but could be devastating.

To be fair the University must asses this matter based on what a human rights issue is, and not just because a few raucous activists have made an uncomfortable situation for it by crying wolf. To be a “Human Right” it must apply to ALL humanity, and not simply to one group or faction that perceives themselves persecuted. To allow homosexuals to say that there lifestyle is acceptable on campus, you must also allow the opposite opinion equally.