A Bowl of Stupid With a Side of Crazy

Where do we start?

It's bad enough a conference that could decide the economic fate of participating nations still continues despite record cold temperatures, Al Gore being publicly embarrassed and Climate-gate but to include Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabe? I thought the point was to legitimise the conference? What does it say when these tyrants are given a free reign?

Climate "activists" deface a Canadian flag because of the oil sands in Alberta. The total area of the oil sands in Alberta stretch 140,000 square kilometres with about 500 square kilometres of land disturbed by oil sands surface mining activity, are estimated to produce173 billion barrels of oil and make up "about five per cent of Canada’s overall greenhouse gas emissions and less than one-tenth of one per cent of the world’s emissions". China, apparently, has soaring greenhouse emissions with "more than 400,000 people die every year as a result of air pollution, an estimated 190 million people drink water so contaminated that it makes them sick and 40 per cent of its land mass is affected by soil erosion. Indeed, the Chinese desert is expanding at a rate of 1900 square miles per year and is already encroaching on Beijing". Yet China hasn't faced the scathing vitriol Canada has. I suppose it's easier to attack a Western country than cut off an arm of the Sinoctopus.



(China in all its smoggy glory)

As for the flag defacers, grow up. You're not going to walk in minus forty degree Celsius temperatures and we all know it. How many resources have you consumed with your ridiculous stunt?

An eight year old boy in Massachusetts was suspended from school and ordered to undergo psychological testing before returning to school after he drew a crucifix.

From the article:

An eight-year-old Massachusetts boy was suspended from school and ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation after drawing a figure of Jesus Christ nailed to the cross.

The second-grader drew the crucifix after his teacher asked children to sketch something they associated with Christmas. But the boy's father said he then got a call from the elementary school informing him that his son had created a violent drawing.

"When she told me he needed to be psychologically evaluated, I thought she was playing," the boy's father told the Taunton Daily Gazette.

The drawing in question shows Jesus on a cross with Xs in place of his eyes to symbolize death.

The man, who asked for his name not to be published to protect the child, said his son gets specialized reading and speech instruction at school, and has never shown any tendency toward violence.

"He's never been suspended. He's eight years old. They overreacted," he said.

The child drew the picture shortly after taking a family trip to see the Christmas display at the National Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette, a Christian retreat site in Attleboro, Mass.

Toni Saunders, a non-profit educational consultant, said the boy's father reached out to her for help after trying to have his son moved to another school because "he's traumatized by everything that has happened.

"I've had kids suspended for idiotic things before, but I've never had to deal with anything like this," Ms. Saunders said.

In my time teaching, I've seen kids draw reindeer instead of cars, put ink their mouths, sing songs, dance when there is no music and behave when presented a cookie or sticker. I've also seen kids with anger issues. I've seen kids blithely rattle off the garbage they watch on TV because their parents are too lazy to monitor their watching habits or even engage them in another activity altogether. Never once would anyone suggest these children needed help. Did it not occur to the teacher to quietly ask the boy why he drew what he did or go out on a limb and make a cognitive connection between Christ on the Cross and the Christ-Child in a manger (not that we're allowed to discuss any of these things)? Did it not occur to the teacher that the over-reaction was more harmful than helpful?

I believe this in my bones: there are people who are so desperate for attention that they would drag people down to get it.

Religious charitable groups could be forced to choose between abandoning their values or going out of business if an Ontario Human Rights Tribunal decision is not overturned, an Ontario Divisional Court was told yesterday.

An Ontario tribunal ruled that Christian Horizons had no right to fire a woman after she entered into a homosexual relationship. I'm sure this woman is proud of herself. While she gets to luxuriate in a bath of her own self-pity, a charity which helps the disabled could shut its doors forever. She knew the rules going in and could make any decision with her life but no matter- it's better to pout, whine and destroy religious charities. Where should the needy go? To the government? Nowhere? Thanks for the selfishness. If spoiled individuals or special-interest groups take away the rights of private groups, how does it benefit anyone?

Don't forget to write to Santa!