Bill 44

[jillybean74]

Dear Minister Blackett, Minister Hancock, and Premier Stelmach

I am very much opposed to the inclusion of Section 11.1 in the recently proposed Bill 44, which allow a parent to invoke a human rights complaint if he/she doesn't agree with classroom teachings concerning religion or sexual orientation. This will have an extremely negative impact on

Comments

[mort_q]

Hear hear!

[mort_q]

This should be posted on edmonton, and the like, should it not?

Hmm

[andrew_the_oga]

Good luck with that.

Re: Hmm

[jillybean74]

The only hope is to flood all the redneck government officials with letters.

It's embarassing to be the Texas of Canada.

So I went and looked...

[andrew_the_oga]

...and the part that struck me were the words, "without academic penalty."

I'm fine if religious people want to keep their kids home to avoid polluting their minds with anything that might conflict with the pollution they receive at home. Such children will be competing with my children for ever-scarcer post-secondary spots, and if religious parents want to academically handicap their children, I think we should perhaps even encourage them in that choice!

But if children so excluded aren't to be tested thereafter on material objectionable to their parents (implied by "without academic penalty," I'd suggest) it's a problem for me. It implies that my children have more material to be responsible for, not less.

Hmmm.

Re: So I went and looked...

[jillybean74]

Yeah... it's a pretty stupid law all around. Many of the consequences haven't been well thought out, including that one. Not that I think that being responsible for (real) knowledge is a burden, but it introduces a double standard.

My main problem isn't even the provision to remove a child from class (that can be done already under the School Act). It's the Human Rights Commission angle. It scares the shit out of me that someone can launch a human rights complaint over it. I agree with Ezra, therefore with Paula.