Life's busy, read it when you're ready!

Create a free account to save articles for later, keep track of past articles you’ve read, and receive exclusive access to all RP resources.

Search thousands of RP articles

Articles, news, and reviews that celebrate God's truth.

Get Articles Delivered!

Articles, news, and reviews that celebrate God's truth. delivered direct to your Inbox!



News

Saturday Selections – April 27, 2024

Click the titles below to go to the linked articles...

Strawman and other logical fallacies

Here's a fun way to get our kids to really understand how logical fallacies can be used – deliberately or not – to misdirect and confuse discussions. Watch below, and click the title above for a list of fallacies (including the strawman) you can work with.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Brett Pike (@classicallearner)

Horribly neglected patient "chooses" euthanasia

A quadriplegic Quebec man, stuck on an emergency room stretcher for four days, developed a bed sore so bad it left bone exposed. After being denied even the bed he needed, Normand Meunier then "chose" to be euthanized. Having doctors murder patients is portrayed as compassion. What it really is, is cheap and easy.

"Even the compassion of the wicked is cruel" (Prov. 12:10b).

Are you financially literate? 5 questions to find out

Christians are called to be good stewards of what God gives us but it isn't harder for some than others. Here's 5 questions to help you figure out where you are at.

Why is teen anxiety on the rise?

The author of Why is my Teenager Feeling Like This? shares 4 thoughts...

Caring for the adopted child

Our kids' frustrating misbehaviors will often be a matter of déjà vu for parents who recognize they acted similarly when they were kids. But adoptive parents can face the additional challenge of dealing with behaviors they haven't seen before, perhaps because of their children's very different history, or physiological repercussions that might have come from having an alcohol- or drug-addicted birth mom. So how can adoptive parents be sensitive to their child's different needs, without succumbing to the temptation of just excusing bad behavior? Two biblical counselors offer some helpful biblical advice.

Global warming isn't making weather more extreme

If you listen to David Suzuki, Al Gore, or Greta Thunburg, you'd have every reason to believe that global warming was causing an increasing number of, and severity of, droughts, floods, hurricanes, and forest fires. But a new study by the Fraser Institute says, it simply isn't so.

Click on the title above for their report, or watch the video below for Dr. Judith Curry's take. And for why we might consider them both more credible than their more mainstream critics, see my "Catastrophic Global Warming? A brief biblical case for skepticism."

News

Oregon abandons decriminalizing hard drugs

“America’s most radical experiment with drug decriminalization has ended, after more than three years of painful results,” The Atlantic reported in early April. Increased overdose deaths and “chaos in the streets” has the state of Oregon going back to criminalizing hard drugs. When the state decided to decriminalize drugs in 2020, 59 percent of voters supported it. Decriminalization advocates wanted to focus on a strategy of reducing the harm that drugs cause to users. Over $260 million was spent on services to help make this a reality. Three years later, 64 percent now want to go back, with support particularly strong among African American and Hispanic Oregonians. The New York Times reported that a wide range of officials supported a rollback in policy, citing surging homelessness, street protests, “an exodus of downtown businesses, record numbers of homicides, the rapid spread of fentanyl and soaring overdose deaths.” British Columbia followed Oregon’s lead by decriminalizing many hard drugs in 2023. Adults in possession of heroin, fentanyl, crack, meth, ecstasy, and some other hard drugs, so long as they are for personal use, will not be charged. This is an experiment being run until 2026. The province’s NDP government is already being criticized by mayors of smaller cities in the province who are reporting public disorder similar to what’s been experienced in Oregon. Yet BC is pressing on with its experiment. An underlying motivation for decriminalizing hard drugs and providing “safe supply” of drugs, even at the taxpayers’ expense, is the belief that drug problems will lessen if we ditch the stigma associated with drug use. If we stop treating it as shameful and immoral, then, so the argument goes, more people might seek treatment. But as Romans 7 teaches us, the law plays an important role “in order that sin might be recognized as sin.” Secular society may succeed in changing its laws to reduce the stigma of sin, but as we’re seeing in Oregon, making sin seem less sinful isn’t the answer. That will only serve to hold sinners in bondage further. What is needed is something that the law can never accomplish. “Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!” (Romans 7:24-25)....

Assorted

That I may declare it boldly

Therefore, take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand firm. Stand therefore, having fastened on the belt of truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and, as shoes for your feet, having put on the readiness given by the gospel of peace. In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one; and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, praying at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication. To that end, keep alert with all perseverance, making supplication for all the saints, and also for me, that words may be given to me in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the Gospel, for which I am an ambassador in chains that I may declare it boldly, as I ought to speak. – Ephesians 6:13-20 **** When I was a baby my mom dressed me, often in clothes which she herself had made. Gifted with creativity, she knitted sweaters, booties, skirts, jumpers (and you name it) – all for me. Later on, my oldest sister was given the task of helping me and I still remember sitting on the baby dresser, feet dangling over the edge, as she washed my face, chose my clothes and carefully decked me out like a precious doll before she took me down to breakfast. How blessed I was! Care, clothes and food – all provided for me before I even understood what great provisions these were. And later, after breakfast was finished, my Father would add to the list of benefits by awarding me with an unequaled present, the reading of the Bible. As I grew older, I learned how to dress myself. And so I did. Putting on undershirts, underpants, socks, skirts, tops, dresses, etc., all grew into skilled appareling techniques which I mastered with growing ease. As my Father kept on reading the Bible to all of us gathered around the table, I was continually instructed in the wearing of an armor. Although there were no mail accoutrements hidden under the dining room table, and no chain link vests hanging in the hall closet, nevertheless, I slowly imbibed the knowledge that I needed to be girded by this protection. 80,000 conversations Although it is somewhat of an impossible statistic, it has been calculated that the average person will meet approximately ten thousand persons in his lifetime. That is mind boggling! These people will not be intimate acquaintances. Rather, they will be people whom we meet once, perhaps twice, in our lifetime and then probably only in a casual way. Nevertheless, they will pass through our lives – in shops, at malls, on streets, on buses, in classrooms, at baseball games or in restaurants. Ten thousand folks, each with a beating heart and a living soul! Ten thousand people! Enough to populate a small town! When I was first married, I had to walk through the downtown streets of Hamilton each day to get to my place of work. No matter what the weather had in mind, sunshine, snow, rain or wind, every morning I would pass a woman at approximately the same spot. She was a thin, middle-aged lady with dark hair tied back in a severe bun. The woman always avoided my gaze and would never look at me directly. I began to say “hello” to her, but she never responded. I tried “good-morning” and “good day” and, after a few weeks, it began to be a sort of game for me. Will she react to me today? Will she smile back at me? What shall I do this morning to catch her attention? In the end, after about eight months, just before we moved from Hamilton to Guelph, she smiled back. And then, I never saw her again. ***** One piece of data I read posits the thought that if you have conversations with three new people each day for 73 years, an average life span, the number of conversations you would have during your lifetime would be 80,000. That's a lot of conversations! And this number of people are as many as would fill an Olympic stadium! Time to clear your throat, or rather, time to think about putting on the armor. Once, many years ago, my husband and I stayed in a small motel in Whitney, Ontario, a town bordering Algonquin Park. We were there for a few days of holidays and enjoyed ourselves immensely. The three children we had at that point were being looked after by family and we reveled in sleeping late and in long nature hikes. Next to our little motel was a small trading post with a lady proprietor. She was a very sociable woman and whenever we stopped in to make a purchase, she talked incessantly and enthusiastically about the beauty of the park and about the delight she took in the wildlife around her store. She also went out of her way to show us some of the unique artifacts displayed in her shop. Friendly, good-natured and personable, she made us feel special. On the morning we left to drive back home, we stopped in to say good-bye. After briefly chatting, another customer arrived and we slowly faded into the background towards the door. Behind us, the woman chattered away to the newcomer. And then she swore. Her voice had turned raucous, loud and exclamatory, puncturing the air. We went on our way. I distinctly remember that it was raining hard outside. My husband had the windshield wipers of the car going quickly. Back and forth they went, as if they were trying to wipe out the memory of that swear word. We never saw the woman again. What sort of letter are you? We are letters. Paul tells us this in 2 Corinthians 3. We are letters which are read. When people are more intimately involved with us, they are more likely to read us more carefully (and between the lines), than those who know us only a little bit. Yet all the people who pass us, and that includes strangers who only see us for a moment or two, will scan us to some extent. And what will they read? When I was in business college, there was a girl in my class. Her name was Ellie. She was a quiet girl with an appealing roundish face and glossy, bobbed, reddish-brown hair falling sleekly about her cheeks. Ellie gave the impression of vulnerability. Her large, brown eyes observed the world questioningly above a multitude of freckles. During one of those first days of school, we both chanced to be going down the elevator at lunch hour and somehow ended up eating lunch together in a local park. Ellie boarded in the downtown Hamilton YWCA. She had a room there and invited me to see it. Her family lived on a farm, too far away for her to travel back and forth every night, she told me. I thought nothing of it until a few weeks later, when it became obvious to me, naive though I was, that Ellie was pregnant. It was difficult to broach the subject, but I did. Ellie cried and told me that she had been adopted and that her adoptive brother was the father. She loved the baby growing within her, but her parents had told her that she could only come back home if she would give up the baby for adoption. Both empathetic and horrified after her revelation, I promised to help her. I was a Christian, I told her, and Christians always help others. It was a Friday and I went home full of plans, immediately contacting two local pastors to ask if they could help me find a solution to Ellie's problem. Neither was particularly enthusiastic and, thinking back on it now, I cannot really blame them. Although my eagerness to help knew no bounds, the information I had was scanty. When I came back to school that following Monday, Ellie was not in class. Walking to the YWCA during lunch hour, I discovered that Ellie had disappeared. No one at the desk was willing to give me her address. I never saw her again. ***** If you go shopping, it is inevitable that you will pass a great many people whom you will never see again during your lifetime. It is unlikely that you will hold a conversation with each and every one of these people. But the sheer breadth and width of the scope of individual lives who intersect with you for only the space of a moment is mind-boggling. It can make you conceive of yourself as part of a huge multitude; it can make you conclude that you are immensely small; and it can make you regard God as incredible beyond comprehension. For He knows the minds and hearts of all – every step, every thought, and every hair on their heads. Go out into the world, He said. We tend to hide behind devices now – we speak to a lot of people on these devices, without actually really speaking to them – and feel good because people respond to our trivial questions and remarks. There is a need for people to belong – the need to build up a facade of relationships – the need to look as if we are not alone. The sad truth is that most people don't know how to belong any longer. If there is any sort of pandemic in the world which is in dire need of a vaccine, it is the pandemic of perceived friendships with inanimate cellphones. It is a deafness, an inability to interact, and a numbed knowledge of what real fellowship actually means. Detached and indifferent, many have lost the wisdom of how to live in community, of how to love your neighbor as yourself. Catholic conversation A number of years ago, I accompanied my husband to Montreal where he had to attend several meetings. While he was participating in his conference, it was my privilege to wander through the streets of Montreal. It cost me five dollars to get into the Notre-Dame Basilica. And thinking about it, maybe the five dollars went to a wrong cause and I should have resisted the desire to see the insides of this monumental structure. But I didn't. I handed my ten-dollar bill over to a man behind a dark desk, a man who was neither friendly nor gracious and, after receiving my change, I pushed open the heavy, creaking door to the Basilica's sanctuary. An overwhelming smell of wax assailed me almost immediately upon entering. Electric light bulbs were hidden away high up on the ceiling or inside niches; and rows upon rows of flickering sweet-smelling candles were situated under every pillar. I made my way past these little flames with the wooden boxes in front of them, every one of them inviting poor, unsuspecting supplicants to put their dollars and dimes to bad use. Side aisles were flanked by stained glass windows. Haloed statues overshadowed these aisles every few steps. I strolled towards the front of the massive church. An English guide was stationed next to the first few pews, where she was giving a group of non-French tourists a brief history of the Basilica. The friendly, short-haired guide motioned to me that I should sit down with the rest of the group in those first few pews. She asked us, "Did you know that the Notre-Dame used to be just a small chapel?" The huge ceiling above our heads almost belied this fact, and we all stared up at the vast space above our heads because the guide made a sweeping upward motion with her arm. "Yes," she continued, "and by the way, my name is Gabrielle, you know, like the angel." This evoked chuckles. "Now we will just go around and everyone else can say their name and where they come from." There were people sitting next to me from Norway, from BC, from Michigan and California. "You know," the little guide went on, "you are in a place where many famous people have been." We did not respond but looked at her expectantly. We knew she would tell us who else had been there. And she did. "In 1873, Sir George Cartier's funeral was held here. And in the year 2000, Pierre Elliott Trudeau's funeral took place here as well. And in 1994, Celine Dion was married in this very church. The truth is that one hundred or more marriages and approximately one hundred and twenty baptisms are celebrated here every year. We have a special chapel attached to the Basilica. It is the Sacré-Coeur (Sacred Heart) Chapel, also known as the wedding chapel." We took all this information in silently. "And then, of course, in 1984, the Pope, that is, John Paul II, visited. He raised the status of Notre-Dame from church to basilica. He did this because of the church's historic, architectural and artistic value. It is very beautiful, do you not think so?" Heads nodded. Who could deny the architectural immensity of this place? A stooping figure hung on the cross straight overhead, surrounded by what I presumed to be the apostles. But above the cross was another representation – that of Mary being crowned by God. The guide was not long in pointing this out. "Mary has first place here," she said. "It is, after all, her church. That is why," and she motioned upwards again with her arm, "the ceiling is blue. Blue is her color, you know." We all gazed up once more. It was true. The magnificent ceiling was a sky-blue. The guide continued to recite a litany of cultural events which regularly took place in the Basilica and how the Montreal Symphony Orchestra had performed there several times. Then, after telling us we were free to walk around and browse, she excused herself and left us on our own. I never saw her nor any of that group again. A key conversation But then there is this story. A long time ago, a traveler reached the fork of an old Roman road. It was about suppertime and he, being quite weary, sat down. In the west, he could see a mountain and to the north was the city which today is called Nablus. There was a well nearby. In the present time, that well is surrounded by the walls of a convent, but at that moment it was quite out in the open. It was a deep well, almost 100 feet deep. The traveler was thirsty and when a woman appeared, a stranger, carrying a water-pitcher on her shoulder, he spoke to her. She had walked some ten minutes from the nearby city to get to the well and she was alone. "Give me a drink," the stranger said. His accent and pronunciation immediately told the woman that he was not native born to the area but that he was Jewish. And she was also quite aware that Jews were usually not of a kindly disposition towards people from her area. As a matter of fact, they wouldn't even use the same cutlery or drink from the same vessels. She was therefore puzzled by his request. "How is it that you," she countered his question, "a Jew, ask a drink of me, a Samaritan?" The stranger merely looked at her and then made use of her curiosity to further the conversation. He said, "If you knew the gift of God, and Who it is that said to you, 'Give me a drink,' you would have been the one to ask Him, and He would have given you living water." She said to Him, "Sir, you have no rope-bucket, and the well is deep; where do you get that living water? Surely, you are not greater, are you, than our father Jacob who gave us this well and he himself drank from it, and so did his sons and his flocks." To the west of the woman, Gerizim, the mountain of blessing, stood. And to the northeast of Gerizim stood Ebal, the mountain of the curse. And the stranger said to her, "Whoever drinks this water will thirst again; but whoever drinks the water that I shall give him will in no way be thirsty again forever, for that water which I shall give him will become in him a spring of water that keeps on bubbling up unto everlasting life." The woman, who had walked ten minutes in order to get to the well and who had to walk ten minutes down and back each day in order to satisfy her physical needs, immediately yearned for this water of which the stranger spoke. "Sir, give me this water," she pleaded, "that I may not get thirsty or have to keep on coming so far to draw water." The stranger responded, "Go, call your husband and come back here." Impressed by his friendliness, and by His interest in her life, the woman, who was usually avoided by the people of her town, responded. In offering the woman a few moment of His time, a moment which led to a taste of eternity, Jesus begins to quench her inner thirst. Spurgeon commented that Christ has different doors for entering into different people’s souls. Into some, He enters by the way of understanding; into many, by the way of the affections; to some, He comes by the way of fear; to others, by the way of hope; and to this woman He came by the way of her conscience. All sorts of conversations to be had After Jesus' encounter with the Samaritan woman, He told His disciples that the fields were white with harvest. He intimates that there are numerous multitudes ready for them to meet. He declares that there are countless people ready to be spoken to, ready to be brought into the kingdom of God. By knowing Him and by wearing the “so very useful” armor He gives us to wear, we also are able to meet with, speak to and listen to at least some of the host of villagers, innkeepers, musicians, businessmen, housewives, gender-lost and value-lost people we will meet on our way. Jesus never saw the Samaritan woman again. Or did He?...

News

One step forward, two steps back in Online Harms bill

What do pornography and hate speech have in common? Well, the federal government says they are both harmful. That’s why they’ve wrapped these issues up together in their recently announced Online Harms Act, otherwise known as Bill C-63. As the government’s news release stated, “Online harms have real world impact with tragic, even fatal, consequences.” As such, the government is of the mind that the responsibility for regulating all sorts of online harm falls to them. But the approach of the government in Bill C-63, though it contains some good content, is inadequate. BACKGROUND In June 2021, the federal government introduced hate speech legislation focused on hate propaganda, hate crime, and hate speech. The bill was widely criticized, including in ARPA Canada’s analysis, and failed to advance prior to the fall 2021 election. Nonetheless, the Liberal party campaigned in part on a promise to bring forward similar legislation within 100 days of re-election. Over two years have passed since the last federal election. In the meantime, the government pursued a consultation and an expert panel on the topic of online harms. Based on these and feedback from stakeholders, the government has now tabled legislation combatting online harm more broadly. Bill C-63 defines seven types of “harmful content”: a) intimate content communicated without consent; b) content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor; c) content that induces a child to harm themselves; d) content used to bully a child; e) content that foments hatred; f) content that incites violence; and g) content that incites violent extremism or terrorism. The hate speech elements of Bill C-63 are problematic for Canadians’ freedom of expression. We will address those further on. But though the bill could be improved, it is a step in the right direction on the issue of child sexual exploitation. DIGITAL SAFETY OVERSIGHT If passed, part 1 of the Online Harms Act will create a new Digital Safety Commission to help develop online safety standards, promote online safety, and administer and enforce the Online Harms Act. A Digital Safety Ombudsperson will also be appointed to advocate for and support online users. The Commission will hold online providers accountable and, along with the Ombudsperson, provide an avenue for victims of online harm to bring forward complaints. Finally, a Digital Safety Office will be established to support the Commission and Ombudsperson. The Commission and Ombudsperson will have a mandate to address any of the seven categories of harm listed above. But their primary focus, according to the bill, will be “content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor” and “intimate content communicated without consent.” Users can submit complaints or make other submissions about harmful content online, and the Commission is given power to investigate and issue compliance orders where necessary. Social media services are the primary target of the Online Harms Act. The Act defines “social media service” as: “a website or application that is accessible in Canada, the primary purpose of which is to facilitate interprovincial or international online communication among users of the website or application by enabling them to access and share content.” Further clarification is provided to include: an adult content service, namely a social media service that is focused on enabling its users to access and share pornographic content; and a live streaming service, namely a social media service that is focused on enabling its users to access and share content by live stream. Oversight will be based on the size of a social media service, including the number of users. So, at the very least, the Digital Safety Commission will regulate online harm not only on major social media sites including Facebook, X, and Instagram, but also on pornography sites and live streaming services. Some specifics are provided in Bill C-63, but the bill would grant the government broad powers to enact regulations to supplement the Act. The bill itself is unclear regarding the extent to which the Commission will address online harm besides pornography, such as hate speech. What we do know is that the Digital Safety Commission and Ombudsman will oversee the removal of “online harms” but will not punish individuals who post or share harmful content. DUTIES OF OPERATORS Three duties laid out in Bill C-63 apply to any operator of a regulated social media service – for example, Facebook or Pornhub. The Act lists three overarching duties that operators of social media services must adhere to. 1. Duty to act responsibly The duty to act responsibly includes: mitigating risks of exposure to harmful content, implementing tools that allow users to flag harmful content, designating an employee as a resource for users of the service, and ensuring that a digital safety plan is prepared. This duty relates to harmful content broadly. Although each category of “harmful content” is defined further in the Act, the operator is responsible to determine whether the content is harmful. While it’s important for the Commission to remove illegal pornography, challenges may arise with the Commission seeking to remove speech that a user has flagged as harmful.  2. Duty to protect children The meaning of the duty to protect children is not clearly defined. The bill notes that: “an operator must integrate into a regulated service that it operates any design features respecting the protection of children, such as age-appropriate design, that are provided for by regulations.” This could refer to age-appropriate designs in the sense that children are not drawn into harmful content; it could refer to warning labels on pornography sites, or it could potentially require some level of age-verification for children to access harmful content. These regulations, however, will be established by the Commission following the passage of the Online Harms Act. The Liberal government says that its Online Harms Act makes Bill S-210 unnecessary. Bill S-210 would require age-verification for access to online pornography. In its current form, however, the Online Harms Act does nothing to directly restrict minors’ access to pornography. It would allow minors to flag content as harmful and requires “age-appropriate design” but would not require pornography sites to refuse access to youth. As such, ARPA will continue to advocate for the passage of Bill S-210 to restrict access to pornography and hold pornography sites accountable.  3. Duty to make certain content inaccessible Finally, Bill C-63 will make social media companies responsible for making certain content inaccessible on their platforms. This section is primarily focused on content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor and intimate content communicated without consent. ARPA has lauded provincial efforts in British Columbia and Manitoba to crack down on such content in the past year. If such content is flagged on a site and deemed to be harmful, the operators must make it inaccessible within 24 hours and keep it inaccessible. In 2020, Pornhub was credibly accused of hosting videos featuring minors. Additionally, many women noted that they had requested Pornhub to remove non-consensual videos of themselves and that Pornhub had failed to do so. At the time, ARPA Canada submitted a brief to the Committee studying sexual exploitation on Pornhub. Our first recommendation was that pornography platforms must be required to verify age and consent before uploading content. Second, we recommended that victims must have means for immediate legal recourse to have content removed from the internet. This duty to make content inaccessible will provide some recourse for victims to flag content and have it removed quickly. Further, the Commission will provide accountability to ensure the removal of certain content and that it remains inaccessible. The Act creates a new bureaucratic agency for this purpose rather than holding companies accountable through the Criminal Code. The Criminal Code is arguably a stronger deterrent. For example, Bill C-270, scheduled for second reading in the House of Commons in April 2024, would make it a criminal offence to create or distribute pornographic material without first confirming that any person depicted was over 18 years of age and gave express consent to the content. Bill C-270 would amend the Criminal Code to further protect vulnerable people. Instead of criminal penalties, the Online Harms Act would institute financial penalties for failure to comply with the legislation. Of course, given the sheer volume of online traffic and social media content and the procedural demands of enforcing criminal laws, a strong argument can be made that criminal prohibitions alone are insufficient to deal with the problem. But if new government agencies with oversight powers are to be established, it’s crucial that the limits of their powers are clearly and carefully defined and that they are held accountable to them. THE GOOD NEWS… This first part of the Online Harms Act contains some important attempts to combat online pornography and child sexual exploitation. As Reformed Christians, we understand that a lot of people are using online platforms to promote things that are a direct violation of God’s intention for flourishing in human relationships. This bill certainly doesn’t correct all those wrongs, but it at least recognizes that there is improvement needed for how these platforms are used to ensure vulnerable Canadians are protected. Most Canadians support requiring social media companies to remove child pornography or non-consensual pornography. In a largely unregulated internet, many Canadians also support holding social media companies accountable for such content, especially companies that profit from pornography and sexual exploitation. Bill C-63 is the government’s attempt to bring some regulation to this area. … AND NOW THE BAD NEWS But while some of the problems addressed through the bill are objectively harmful, how do we avoid subjective definitions of harm? Bill C-63 raises serious questions about freedom of expression. Free speech is foundational to democracy. In Canada, it is one of our fundamental freedoms under section 2 of the Charter. Attempts to curtail speech in any way are often seen as an assault on liberty. Bill C-63 would amend the Criminal Code and the Canadian Human Rights Act to combat hate speech online. But the bill gives too much discretion to government actors to decide what constitutes hate speech. HARSHER FOR “HATE SPEECH” CRIMES The Criminal Code has several offences that fall under the colloquial term “hate speech.” The Code prohibits advocating genocide, publicly inciting hatred that is likely to lead to a breach of the peace, or willfully promoting hatred or antisemitism. The latter offence is potentially broader, but it also provides several defenses, including: the statement was true the statement was a good faith attempt to argue a religious view the statement was about an important public issue meriting discussion and the person reasonably believed the statement was true Bill C-63 would increase the maximum penalties for advocating genocide and inciting or promoting hatred or antisemitism. The maximum penalty for advocating genocide would increase to life in prison instead of five years. The bill would also raise the penalty for publicly inciting hatred or promoting hatred or antisemitism to five years instead of the current two. Bill C-63 defines “hatred” as “the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike.” It also clarifies that a statement does not incite or promote hatred “solely because it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends.” This clarification is better than nothing, but it inevitably relies on judges to determine the line between statements that are merely offensive or humiliating and those that generate emotions of vilification and detestation. ARPA Canada recently intervened in a criminal hate speech case involving Bill Whatcott. Whatcott was charged with criminal hate speech for handing out flyers at a pride parade warning about the health risks of engaging in homosexual relations. Prosecutors argued that Whatcott was promoting hatred against an identifiable group by condemning homosexual conduct. This is an example of a person being accused of hate speech for expressing his beliefs – his manner of expressing those beliefs, but also the content of his beliefs. NEW STAND-ALONE HATE CRIME OFFENCE The Criminal Code already makes hatred a factor in sentencing. So, for example, if you assault someone and there is conclusive evidence that your assault was motivated by racial hatred, that “aggravating factor” will likely mean a harsher sentence for you. But the offence is still assault, and the maximum penalties for assault still apply. Bill C-63, however, would add a new hate crime offence – any offence motivated by hatred – to the Criminal Code, and it may be punishable by life in prison. It would mean that any crime found to be motivated by hatred would count as two crimes. Consider an act of vandalism, for example. The crime of mischief (which includes damaging property) has a maximum penalty of 10 years. But, if you damaged property because of hatred toward a group defined by race, religion, or sexuality, you could face an additional criminal charge and potentially life in prison. ANTICIPATORY HATE CRIMES? Bill C-63 would permit a person to bring evidence before a court based on fear that someone will commit hate speech or a hate crime in the future. The court may then order the accused to “keep the peace and be of good behavior” for up to 12 months and subject that person to conditions including wearing an electronic monitoring device, curfews, house arrest, or abstaining from consuming drugs or alcohol. There are other circumstances in which people can go to court for fear that a crime will be committed – for example, if you have reason to believe that someone will damage your property, or cause you injury, or commit terrorism. However, challenges with unclear or subjective definitions of hatred will only be accentuated when determining if someone will commit hate speech or a hate crime. BRINGING BACK SECTION 13 This is the first time the government has tried to regulate hate speech. The former section 13 of the Canada Human Rights Act prohibited online communications that were “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” on the basis of their race, religion, sexuality, etc. As noted by Joseph Brean in the National Post, section 13 was passed in 1977, mainly in response to telephone hotlines that played racist messages. From there, the restrictions around hate speech were extended to the internet (telecommunications, including internet, falls under federal jurisdiction) until Parliament repealed section 13 in 2013. Joseph Brean writes that section 13 “was basically only ever used by one complainant, a lawyer named Richard Warman, who targeted white supremacists and neo-Nazis and never lost.” In fact, Warman brought forward 16 hate speech cases and won them all. A catalyst for the controversy over human rights hate speech provisions was a case involving journalist Ezra Levant. Levant faced a human rights complaint for publishing Danish cartoons of Muhammad in 2006. In response to being charged, Levant published a video of an interview with an investigator from the Alberta Human Rights Commission. Then in 2007, a complaint was brought against Maclean’s magazine for publishing an article by Mark Steyn that was critical of Islam. Such stories brought section 13 to public attention and revealed how human rights law was being used to quash officially disapproved political views. Bill C-63 would bring back a slightly revised section 13. The new section 13 states: “It is a discriminatory practice to communicate or cause to be communicated hate speech by means of the Internet or any other means of telecommunication in a context in which the hate speech is likely to foment detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.” A few exceptions apply. For example, this section would not apply to private communication or to social media services that are simply hosting content posted and shared by users. So, for example, if someone wanted to bring a complaint about an ARPA post on Facebook, that complaint could be brought against ARPA, but not against Facebook. If a person is found guilty of hate speech, the Human Rights Tribunal may order the offender to pay up to $20,000 to the victim, and up to $50,000 to the government. This possibility of financial benefit incentivizes people to bring forward hate speech complaints. British Columbia has a similar hate speech provision in its Human Rights Code. ARPA wrote about how that provision was interpreted and enforced to punish someone for saying that a “trans woman” is really a man. The Tribunal condemned a flyer in that case for “communicat rejection of diversity in the individual self-fulfillment of living in accordance with one’s own gender identity.” The Tribunal went on to reject the argument that the flyer was not intended to promote hatred or discrimination, “but only to ‘bring attention to what views as immoral behaviour, based on his religious belief as a Christian’.” Ultimately, the Tribunal argued that there was no difference between promoting hatred and bringing attention to what the defendant viewed as immoral behavior. NO DEFENSES FOR CHRISTIANS? As noted above, when it comes to the Criminal Code’s hate speech offences, there are several defenses available (truth, expressing a religious belief, and advancing public debate). These are important defenses that allow Canadians to say what they believe to be true and to express sincere religious beliefs. But the Canadian Human Rights Act offers no defenses. And complaints of hate speech in human rights law are far easier to bring and to prosecute than criminal charges. Criminal law requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. But under the Human Rights Act, statements that are likely (i.e. 51% chance, in Tribunal’s view) to cause detestation or vilification will be punishable. So, hate speech would be regulated in two different places, the Criminal Code and the Human Rights Act, the latter offering fewer procedural rights and a lower standard of proof. Bill C-63 clarifies that a statement is not detestation or vilification “solely because it expresses disdain or dislike or it discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends.” But again, the line between dislike and detestation is unclear. Human rights complaints are commonly submitted because of humiliation or offence, rather than any clear connection to detestation or vilification. Section 13 leaves too much room for subjective and ideologically motivated interpretations of what constitutes hate speech. The ideological bias that often manifests is a critical theory lens, which sees “privileged” groups like Christians as capable only of being oppressors/haters, while others are seen as “equity-seeking” groups. For example, in a 2003 case called Johnson v. Music World Ltd., a complaint was made against the writer of a song called “Kill the Christian.” A sample: Armies of darkness unite  Destroy their temples and churches with fire  Where in this world will you hide  Sentenced to death, the anointment of christ   Put you out of your misery  The death of prediction  Kill the christian  Kill the christian…dead!  The Tribunal noted that the content and tone appeared to be hateful. However, because the Tribunal thought Christians were not a vulnerable group, it decided this was not hate speech. By contrast, in a 2008 case called Lund v. Boissoin, a panel deemed a letter to the editor of a newspaper that was critical of homosexuality to be hate speech. The chair of the panel was the same person in both Johnson and Lund. Hate speech provisions are potentially problematic for Christians who seek to speak truth about various issues in our society. Think about conversion therapy laws that ban talking about biblical gender and sexuality in some settings, or bubble zone laws that prevent pro-life expression in designated areas. But beyond that, freedom of speech is also important for those with whom we may disagree. It is important to be able to have public dialogue on various public issues.    GOVERNMENT’S ROLE IN REGULATING SPEECH This all raises serious questions about whether the government should be regulating “hate speech” at all. After all, hate speech provisions in the Human Rights Act or the Criminal Code have led and could lead to inappropriate censorship. But government also has a legitimate role to play in protecting citizens from harm.  1. Reputational harm and safety from threats of violence Arguably the government’s role in protecting citizens from harm includes reputational harm. Imagine someone was spreading accusations in your town that everyone in your church practices child abuse, for example. That is an attack on your reputation as a group and as individual members of the group – which is damaging and could lead to other harms, possibly even violence. Speech can do real damage. But Jeremy Waldron, a prominent legal philosopher and a Christian, suggests that the best way to think about and enforce “hate speech” laws is as a prohibition on defaming or libeling a group, similar to how our law has long punished defaming or libeling an individual. Such a conception may help to rein in the scope of what we call “hate speech,” placing the focus on demonstrably false and damaging accusations, rather than on controversial points of view on matters relating to religion or sexuality, for example. Hatred is a sin against the 6th commandment, but the government cannot regulate or criminalize emotions per se or expressions of them, except insofar as they are expressed in and through criminal acts or by encouraging others to commit criminal acts. That’s why we rightly have provisions against advocating or inciting terrorism or genocide, or counseling or encouraging someone to commit assault, murder, or any other crime. When the law fails to set an objective standard, however, it is open to abuse – for example, by finding a biblical view of gender and sexuality to constitute hate speech. Regrettably, Bill C-63 opens up more room for subjectivity and ideologically based restrictions on speech. It does nothing to address the troubling interpretations of “hate speech” that we’ve seen in many cases in the past. And, by putting hate speech back into the Human Rights Act, the bill makes many more such abuses possible. We suspect it will result in restricting speech that is culturally unacceptable rather than objectively harmful.  2. Harm of pornography As discussed earlier, Bill C-63 does introduce some good restrictions when it comes to online pornography. In our view, laws restricting pornography are categorically different from laws restricting “hate speech,” because the former laws are not designed to or in danger of being applied to censor beliefs, opinions, or arguments. Restricting illegal pornography prevents objectively demonstrable harm. Pornography takes acts that ought to express love and marital union and displays them for consumption and the gratification of others. Much of it depicts degrading or violent behavior. Pornography’s harms, especially to children, are well documented. The argument is often made that pornography laws risk censoring artistic expression involving sexuality or nudity. But Canada is very far, both culturally and legally, from censoring art for that reason – and Bill C-63 wouldn’t do so. Its objectives as they relate to pornography are mainly to reduce the amount of child pornography and non-consensual pornography easily available online.  CONCLUSION While the Online Harms Act contains some good elements aimed at combatting online pornography, its proposed hate speech provisions are worrisome. Unfortunately, the federal government chose to deal with both issues in one piece of legislation – this should have been two separate bills. As Bill C-63 begins to progress through the House of Commons, we can continue to support Bills S-210 and C-270, private members’ bills which combat the online harms of pornography. Meanwhile, head to ARPACanada.org for action items related to the Online Harms Act. ...

News

Saturday Selections – April 13, 2024

Click on the titles below to go to the linked articles... If people did everything as a trick shot Evolutionists have no explanation for the origin of life Christian chemist James Tours has been challenging "origin of life" researchers to put up or shut up. He has offered to take down all his published videos and never speak on the topic again, if only someone will show how they are making any real progress in explaining how life could come from non-life (as evolution would require). Tours did get a chance to debate, but under hilarious conditions. He agreed that after his 20-minute talk, that in the dinner discussions that followed, he would not talk at all unless asked a question, and if interrupted, he would stop talking. The linked article and video are not an easy read or watch, but even the gist of it underscores how the opposition isn't guided by the science, but by their ideology. Though the science shows that life can't come from non-life (scientists can't even create life on purpose, let alone explain how it could happen by chance), the scientific establishment still clings to the notion that it must have, because they need it to have done so to justify their rebellion against God. Euthanasia as a cost-saver for public healthcare Luc Van Gorp, head of Belgian's biggest health care fund, Christian (?!?) Mutualities is saying the quiet part out loud – they could save a lot of money if they murdered their old people. Once murder is medicine, it becomes quite the attractive treatment: cheaper and quicker than anything else. In related news, Belgium has lightened the penalties for "illegal euthanasia." It will no longer be treated as murder. They did it because if doctors had to fear getting charged with murder every time they murdered someone without following the approved procedures, then there might be less doctors willing to murder people. So one way to save lives here in Canada might be to ensure that "illegal euthanasia" is treated as murder. Maybe we can scare bloodthirsty, but self-preservation-seeking "doctors" from this line of business. How is our economy really doing?  The Fraser Institute argues that while Canada had one of the better expansions of its economy compared to other G7 countries, the real picture is horrible when you consider just how much the population increased. So they are pitching a better measure than just GDP – GDP adjusted for population. Big surprise for me here is that two Liberal PMs – Chretien and Martin – did better by this measure than the last two Conservatives. Atheist Richard Dawkins likes Christian culture Dawkins might be the world's most famous atheist, and he made news last week for praising Christian culture: "If I had to choose between Christianity and Islam, I’d choose Christianity every single time. It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion in a way that I think Islam is not." But as John Stonestreet notes, you can't have Christian fruit without the Root. The strange truth about the pill The birth control pill was embraced because it enabled sex outside of marriage by separating sex from conception. But as this BBC article highlights, the pill's nine different hormones come with side effects, some of which "have subtle 'masculinizing' effects." Identifying misinformation (5 min) In an online world awash with misinformation, here are three simple ways to identify what's not true. ...

News

Dominion Report: a free and solidly Christian news source for Canadians

The Dominion Report is a Canadian news website (DominionReport.ca) and newsletter that offers up a Christian perspective on the week’s events. It delivers that perspective via two- to six-paragraph introductions to articles they link to from other media outlets. If you’re familiar with RP’s weekly Saturday Selections column, it’s a lot like that, but the Dominion Report goes a little longer and has more of a specifically news focus. As an example, last week’s edition offered up: Canadians' beliefs on the Resurrection a conservative student forced out of a university election a Chinese military hacker who was allowed to become a Canadian permanent resident how Toronto auto thefts have doubled since 2021 and a few more “quick hits” They’ve been online since mid-2023, and their past 35+ weekly newsletters showcase what sort of Christian perspective they are offering. I don’t know if it is specifically Reformed, but it is certainly a conservative sort of Christian, and strongly pro-life, with writers regularly turning to Scripture for guidance. Importantly, it doesn’t seem to be over-torqued. WORLD magazine, one of the very best Christian publications, has as one of their slogans, “sensational facts, understated prose.” We live in pretty outrageous times, so we don’t need anyone to hype up the hysteria, and from what I’ve read, the Dominion Report presents the facts with a pretty level head. Check them out at DominionReport.ca, and if you like what you see, be sure to sign up for their weekly newsletter. (Their RSS feed is DominionReport.ca/feed and you can find out how to use it here)....

News

Saturday Selections – Mar. 30, 2024

Rich Mullins: Creed (4 min) Rich Mullins riffing off of the Apostles' Creed. How C.S. Lewis predicted the pronoun push... ...and in a passage in The Horse and His Boy, he taught us how to respond. Bug zappers might do more harm than good Sick of mosquitos? Your bug zapper might be the problem. A couple decades back two universities tested how many mosquitos actually get zapped and found that of the approximately 24,000 bugs their zappers killed, just 39 were mosquitos. Less than o.2 percent! The rest included bugs that actually eat mosquitoes, which means the bug zappers might actually be making your mosquito problems worse. The Road to Socialism and Back Again – a free e-book This free e-book charts the fall and rise of Poland's economy, stagnating for decades under centralized communist management, then quadrupling once some freedoms were returned. It's history we need to share. However, while this notes that socialism doesn't work, it doesn't dig into what God says about the why: that a centralized economy doesn't work because it lacks humility (a distant leader knows how to run all our lives better than us?), it fosters envy over what the rich have (breaking the 10th Commandment), it requires men to be angels (working hard with no thought of gain for themselves), and in eliminating private property, it violates the 8th Commandment. No wonder then that it doesn't work. Christians aren't ready to argue against AI-generated porn When it comes to pornography, Christians will point out the harm it does to "performers," highlighting the dark, dark side of porn production. It is dark, so that argument is certainly valid. But that the performers are harmed isn't the foundational reason pornography is wicked – the underlying problem is that porn conflicts with God's plan for sexuality. And now, with the advent of AI-generated, actorless films, talking about the harm done to the actors, rather than mentioning anything about God, won't work as an objection anymore. The conclusion to the linked article is both spot on, and really, really sad, because it makes it seem as if talking about God is the very last thing any Christian would want to do in the culture wars. But is that true? "This will be uncomfortable, because it will force Christians to make moral arguments that appear irredeemably at odds with the secular society. The benefits of emphasizing things like exploitation is that such concepts resonate with non-Christian audiences. There’s nothing wrong with seeking this common ground, but the reality is that we’re not going to have that ground at all very soon. The arguments against consuming or licensing pornography that will matter in the age of AI will be moralistic arguments: arguments rooted in the goodness of embodied sexuality in the context of marriage, and the destruction that occurs to hearts and emotions by feasting on a fake version of sex that collapses us inward. 'This is somebody’s child' will have to become, 'You are somebody’s child.' "Here will be a good stress test for Christian moral theology. Western Christians can articulate a vision of life that makes sense in a radically fractured, technologically isolated context. But that vision requires helping people get beyond the 'Does it harm anyone' framework, not simply appropriating the question. So it seems very likely that Christians will have to bring God into the discussion. When there’s no one to exploit, there is still God to offend. When there is no one to be trafficked, there is still God who sees. And when there is no one to stand over your shoulder to intervene or care, there is still God who saves." Pre-natal screening: should we do it? Some prenatal testing – specifically the sort that is called "invasive" – comes with a risk for the unborn, and so Christians should question why we'd want to get such a test at such a cost. As the article above and video below explain, "non-invasive" tests come with a different sort of "risk" for the unborn... though not when conducted by pro-life Christians. ...

Internet

3 things we need to tell our kids about ChatGPT

ChatGPT and the many other new AI text generators might strike parents as problematic, since kids are now able to turn to this tool and, with just a few prompts, churn out their homework. Need a 600-word essay on the biblical perspective on why abortion is wrong? ChatGPT can output it in less time than it’ll take most students to type the request. Isn’t that cheating? Yes, if the teacher wanted students to write it on their own. But it also isn’t hard to imagine how teachers could also incorporate AI tools into lessons on not only writing, but editing and analysis. How good is the AI essay? Where is it weak, and what might it be missing? Did the opening grab you? Would its argument be more powerful as a dialogue? What other prompts could we use to tighten it up?  AI possibilities are enormous but yes, ChatGPT does also open up new temptations for kids to shirk the work they are supposed to be doing on their own. That means that we, as parents, are going to have to remind and reinforce to our kids a few important points: 1) God loves a hard-won C. Or to put it another way, God doesn’t care about your marks: if you get a low grade but tried hard, great, but He hates an ill-gotten A. And your parents think the very same. 2) Cheating hurts you (Prov. 10:2). A basketball player might be able to build a robot that shoots better than he does, but it isn’t going to help him learn how to shoot. If an assignment is intended to help a student learn to write, getting someone or something to write it cheats the student out of what they could have learned. Cheating is also a matter of character – if you’ll cheat on something as little as an essay, what kind of person are you becoming? You do become what you do. 3) Knowing how to write remains an important skill even in the era of AI, because of all the skills a student has to learn to be able to write like: research, organizing thoughts, and learning to discern truth from error and stronger points from weaker ones. That’ll help you write an essay, but also choose a career, and even assess who you might want to marry....

Internet

Technology in Reformed schools

With great technological innovation comes great responsibility. In an era where the digital landscape transforms the way we live, learn, and connect, Reformed Christian schools stand at the intersection, navigating the delicate balance between embracing innovation and upholding their Bible-based values. The integration of various technologies – whether computers, YouTube videos, cell phones, iPads, or the hot-button topic of Artificial Intelligence (AI) – is forcing a profound question upon Reformed Christian education: How can we ensure that the transformative potential of technology aligns with and honors our Christian worldview? Are these tools mere distractions, pulling our focus away from the godly values our schools want to foster, or can these technologies be harnessed to deepen the connection between students and their Christian identity? As the debate rages on between an impulse to retreat from technology entirely and the temptation to embrace it wholeheartedly, Reformed Christians have some complex decisions to make about how we will use technology in our classrooms. Survey says  To try to get an understanding of what’s happening in Reformed schools across Canada, I asked 20 of them to participate in a survey exploring their approaches to screen time, technology policies, and the broader digital landscape within their educational environments. The participating schools ranged from elementary to high school and consisted of Canadian Reformed, United Reformed, and confessionally Reformed (but not associated with a specific church) schools. Of the contacted schools, 12 schools responded. Questions ranged from yes or no questions to also allowing principals and school administrators to expand their answers in anonymous anecdotes. I also spoke with school principals who were willing to share more about their experiences. Among our survey respondents, the majority (92%) have specific policies regarding the use of technology in the classroom or on school property. It’s encouraging to know that most schools are recognizing a need to regulate the technology being used on campus. Most schools had guidelines for “Computer Usage Policy” for devices owned by the school as well as an “Acceptable use of personal devices policy.” One school said no phones at all Marc Slingerland is the principal at Calvin Christian School, a K-12 school in Coalhurst, Alberta. Slingerland said that his school has tried a few approaches with different rules for personal devices in different grade levels. Across the board, they had a no-phone policy, “no phones allowed to be seen or in class.” However, they found that for older students in grades 11 and 12, some parents felt more comfortable with them bringing phones to school knowing that they would be driving to the campus. Taking this into consideration, the policy was changed to allow for grades 11 and 12 to use phones during breaks in the foyer. The hardest part was that this became a long haul of policing students – Slingerland says they have now reverted to the original plan. “There’s a set time and a set place at which it’s allowed. It’s constantly policing the boundaries and if they’re just going to the locker to get a book, they can easily quickly just check it. So, we actually went back. This is now our second year with no student devices on school property at all.” When to introduce? When it came to the introduction of school computer labs or school iPads into classrooms, the prevalent sentiment was that the early stages of a student's development may be better navigated without the intrusion of technology. Paul Wagenaar is the principal at Jordan Christian School, a K-12 school in Lincoln, Ontario. When it comes to the younger grades, Wagenaar says that it’s rare for their school to introduce digital tech to students under grade 5. “We intentionally keep technology out of the classroom in the early years as much as possible. The extent of the technology would be that each classroom does have a projector. Once in a while, there will be a video or something that will be shown to the students. But no use of iPads, or any electronic device in our classrooms up until grade four.” Regarding the survey, most schools (with elementary-aged students) said that it’s between grade 3 and grade 5, that they start introducing technology like computers or laptops. “The exposure to technology in younger grades is limited to the teacher's laptop and projector,” one principal said. Benefits in older grades When it comes to older grades (grades 8 to 12), some schools pair each student with their own iPad or laptop just for their own personal use. This type of “1-to-1” approach aims to enhance the educational experience by embedding technology into the curriculum. This allows teachers to foster personalized learning, and prepare students for the digital demands of the modern world. Jordan Christian School has taken this approach in their high school. Their principal shared that each student has an Edsbee account, which is a web-based K-12 learning platform for teachers to upload assignments, and mark grades and attendance. The teacher will then enforce when the laptops should stay closed during lessons, and when the laptops can be used. Wagenaar says that he has found this useful in preparing students for post-secondary endeavors. “We feel that they need to be prepared for the world in which they live as well. So I think the benefit of students having their own device is that in those four years, they really learn it well, and they're well prepared for college or university or the workforce.” While some schools take the 1-to-1 approach, others opt for the use of computer labs or Chromebook carts. “The portable laptop cart has made student access to and use of technology much more convenient, with more opportunity than a standalone computer lab,” said one principal. In terms of technology tools deemed helpful, the respondents highlighted a variety of platforms and applications such as Kahoot, Google Classroom, Google Docs, and educational apps like IXL and Scratch Jr. Conversely, some tools, like YouTube, were identified as unhelpful due to potential distractions and inappropriate content. Interestingly, 75% of schools also said they have dealt with emerging technologies like AI in the classroom, including instances of students using AI to complete homework assignments. Filters and firewalls  A large challenge in having digital devices in classrooms is the ability to monitor students, and keep them from getting into trouble online. All schools said that they use online security safeguards and firewalls to protect students from inappropriate websites and distractions (i.e., computer games). For many schools, it's up to the teacher to enforce policies on how to use digital devices in class. Some principals voiced that they turn the screens on an angle so that the teacher can see what's happening on the screen. One survey respondent mentioned that they use an app called “GAT Shield” which gives teachers access to see all of their students on their own devices. “Teachers can also lock webpages, close tabs, push websites, and send out individual or class-wide messages. Additionally, we have filters set up using some of their presets and our own to flag explicit material, inappropriate language, violent images – weapons, etc.,” this respondent noted. “When a student has tried to access this material, it sends a link/screenshot to the teacher and account administrator's emails.” In some of the specific policy guidelines, if students use devices in a way that violates school policy it can lead to the device’s confiscation for a period of time. Years of research  With firewalls in place blocking video and audio streaming apps like YouTube and Spotify, it can help to combat distractions – yet distractions to videos or inappropriate online content are not the only things Christian classrooms should be aware of. In 2020, researchers and professors David I. Smith, Kara Sevensma, Marjorie Terpstra, and Steven McMullen put together a three-year study on the use of technology in Christian schools titled Digital Life Together: The Challenge of Technology for Christian Schools. This comprehensive study relied on a variety of research methods from documentary video, interviews with students, staff, and teachers, as well as focus groups. Two of the authors, Marjorie Terpstra and David Smith, are researchers at Calvin University's education department. Something notable they found in their research was students' openness to talk about their online shopping habits during class. Smith noted: “The most common form of distraction was going shopping. It wasn't playing games. It wasn't social media because that was mostly filtered out by the school. It's really quite a recent thing.” He mentions that distractions have always been a thing with or without technology in the class. Whether it’s passing paper notes or a student hiding the book he’s reading under his desk, it's not a new phenomenon. But, online shopping in class is something all too new. During one of the student interviews for the book, Smith mentions a student who was proactively open with her shopping habits… in Bible class. She shared: “It's great because in Bible class, you can take notes faster and you can get the assignments written faster, and then while the teacher's talking, you've got time to go shopping.” Smith says that parents and educators need to be aware of this online shopping phenomenon because this consumerism mindset is often something that is tossed under the rug: “Access to sexual material online, access to the wrong views about sex, some worry about cyberbullying and violence and violent material and so on. Very little worry about shopping, right? Because that's not something that the Western middle-class Christians worry about very much, we're as gung ho about that as everybody else.” Smith says that as Christians, we need to be counter-cultural in not succumbing to the world's ideas of “spending time lusting after consumer goods.” Parents and teachers need to change their mindset to acknowledge these discrepancies by teaching students to be discerning with their online habits. Christian education should be designed to equip students for the real world Overall, in conducting this survey with Reformed schools it's evident that technology in the class is something that we cannot run from. Instead we should be teaching students to use it well. Terpstra alludes to an important truth, that Christian education is an opportunity for students to grow in community with one another, learning how to live and make choices. “They get to enact their faith right now. It's not like you are in school so that someday when you grow up, you can enact your faith, but technology and other choices that we can make can help them to be Christians right now.”...

News

More Canadians are “Alberta bound”

“It’s good to be Alberta bound” sang Canadian folk legend Gordon Lightfoot. Looking at Statistics Canada’s Quarterly Demographic Estimates, many Canadians are taking this to heart. 45,194 moved in from other provinces in 2023 alone, more than to any other province. The two factors being cited by the mainstream media are Alberta’s “more favourable” tax environment and lower housing prices. These factors are very real, as Alberta doesn’t have a provincial sales tax nor a land transfer tax. The average sale price of a home in Alberta has gone up in the past year, but is still well under $500,000 (compared with $957,000 in BC and $853,000 in Ontario). Albertans also make more money per week, on average, compared to all other provinces. But Alberta has had lower home prices and lower taxes for many years. So, what accounts for the recent exodus from places like BC and Manitoba? One clue may be found when we look at shifting population trends in the US, where Republican states (known as “red states”) have seen a significant increase in population in recent years. The fastest-growing states from 2022 to 2023 were South Carolina, Florida, Texas, Idaho, and North Carolina, all of which voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020. Although Canada is very different than the United States, Alberta has been led by the United Conservative Party government since 2019. Both their past Premier Jason Kenney and their current Premier Danielle Smith are known throughout Canada as being more supportive of freedom and smaller government compared to other Canadian provinces. When people feel unable to change their political environment, a common outcome is to “vote with your feet” by leaving the environment and going to a location that is more desirable. In this respect, Canada may not be so different from the US after all....

News, Sexuality

Leaked documents show “gender medicine” is neither science nor medicine

Leaked internal files from WPATH, the world’s leading transgender medical association, reveal doctors openly acknowledging patients’ regrets, painful complications, and life-threatening conditions resulting from the double mastectomies and genital amputations and mutilations involved in transgender “medicine.” The World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH) created standards for such “procedures” that have been adopted by doctors around the globe (including many in Canada). Significantly, WPATH is also a vocal advocate for “gender transitioning” of minors. Mia Hughes is a women’s rights advocate who curated the recently released 250-page leaked report. She summarized some of the alarming findings: “WPATH-affiliated health-care providers advocate for the destruction of healthy reproductive systems, the amputation of healthy breasts and the surgical removal of healthy genitals as the first and only line of treatment for minors and mentally ill people with gender dysphoria, eschewing any attempt to reconcile the patient with his or her birth sex.” The documents reveal that WPATH-affiliated healthcare providers endorse irreversible and damaging interventions, such as hormone treatments and surgeries, even in cases where minors may not fully comprehend the long-term implications. Videos from leaked Zoom calls show doctors openly admitting that children have little to no understanding of what they are consenting to. One doctor even stated that they are “explaining things to people who haven’t even taken biology in high school.” Doctors within WPATH have also stated they are aware of severe complications, including cancer, resulting from these interventions. One doctor shared that a 16-year-old female patient had developed cancerous tumors with an oncologist and surgeon confirming this was a result of the prescribed hormones. Moreover, the documents reveal there is a disregard for the psychological and emotional struggles of patients, with clinicians dismissing concerns and proceeding with treatments despite serious mental health issues. We are regularly urged to “trust the science,” but the gender debate shows how twisted the world’s “science” can become. But for those with eyes to see, reality aligns with God’s Word, that we are designed to be “male and female in His image.” For more, see Matt Walsh's podcast below about the leaked documents and the origins of WPATH. ...

News

Saturday Selections – Mar. 16, 2024

Click on the titles below to go to the linked articles... If $50/hr is a good minimum wage why not $100... or $1,000? (9 min) A Californian legislator recently proposed raising the minimum wage to $50/hr, or approximately $100,000 US/year (or roughly $135,00 Canadian). And, as the video below shares, Batman himself thinks it's a great idea. But if $50/hr is good, why not $100/hr... or $1000? These minimum wage proponents and transgenderism activists share one thing in common: both believe that wishing can make it so. But simply declaring everyone worth a certain wage doesn't change reality. Older employees, still skilled but slower than they once might have been, and lower skilled or inexperienced workers aren't going to be able to bring $50/hr in value to their employers. That means this minimum wage is going to price them right out of the labor market. And that's true of every minimum wage, no matter how well intentioned – they declares a minimum value for labor, and anyone who can't meet it, or can't meet it yet, is legislated out of any chance at a job. Childless China: coercive population plan implodes "Kenneth Emde of Minnesota, who came of age during the Swinging Sixties, recently explained why he is childless today. 'I was a college student when I read Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb,' he said in a letter published by the Wall Street Journal. 'I took it to heart and now have no grandchildren, but 50 years later the population has increased to eight billion without dire consequences. I was gullible and stupid.'” This is a secular piece, so it doesn't make the case for how Emde could have known better. He needed to listen to the real Expert, who says in His Word that children are a blessing, not a curse. On the cost of business subsidies, and the trouble with electric cars The Fraser Institute was busy this past week, issuing two eye-opening reports. The first was on the $52 billion Canadian governments spent on corporate welfare in 2022. We can't agree on much in this country, but can we at least agree not to take money from some companies to prop up other companies? From 2007 to 2019, PEI, Quebec, and Manitoba spent all or nearly all of their corporate income tax revenue on business subsidies! The second report was on the impossibility of meeting the new electrical demands that will come if all new cars from 2035 onward have to be electrical. We'd need the equivalent of 10 new dams, each of which, if history serves, would take 10 years to plan, another 10 years to build, and cost $16 billion each. So what happens if we have the cars but not the electricity? March 16 is the 4th anniversary of "15 days to slow the spread" In this look back a professor explains how he got fired from Harvard for refusing to be vaccinated (he'd already had COVID), and got fired from the CDC for being too pro-vaccine. Dissenting opinions, whatever the direction, weren't allowed and that came with a cost. "Sweden was the only major Western country that rejected school closures and other lockdowns in favor of concentrating on the elderly, and the final verdict is now in. Led by an intelligent social democrat prime minister (a welder), Sweden had the lowest excess mortality among major European countries during the pandemic, and less than half that of the United States. Sweden’s Covid deaths were below average, and it avoided collateral mortality caused by lockdowns." When the pope isn't Catholic This is a lament from Canada's pro-life and mostly Roman Catholic media outlet LifeSiteNews, highlighting the ways the pope is targeting established Catholic doctrine. Roman Catholics dealing with a corrupt pope face a situation a little like Martin Luther, who wasn't looking to start a new church but was left with no choice once he was kicked out. We can pray that when orthodox Roman Catholics are kicked out of today's Roman Catholic Church, they'll finally stop putting their trust in this institution. Bluey: the beach (7 min) Our family just learned about a cute Australian dog named Bluey, and so far we are about 20 episodes into the first season. Our kids are older than the target audience, but the whole family is enjoying the accents, the energetic (and generally respectful) kids, and the super fun dad (mom ain't bad either). This is a current show, so I was wondering if it would take a turn for the weird some time soon. But so far so good, and from what I could read online, it does seem pretty solid. We found it on DVD from our local library, but some episodes can be watched for free online. This one will play everywhere except, unfortunately, Bluey's native land. ...

News

Christian healthcare workers taking province to court over vaccinations

In the fall of 2021, Hilary Vandergugten was working as a charge nurse in the emergency department of a hospital in the Fraser Valley when British Columbia (BC) health authorities ordered all healthcare workers to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Vandergugten wasn’t willing, and like many in her position, lost her job. Two-and-half years later, Vandergugten is still unable to work as a nurse in BC. She can, however, practice just south of the border in the US. “There is an obvious nursing shortage and doctor shortage in our province, but seems to completely ignore that,” said Vandergugten. The BC Ministry of Health reports that almost 2,500 healthcare workers lost their jobs after refusing to get vaccinated, and that doesn’t take into account healthcare workers who opted for early retirement, so the loss of healthcare workers could be quite a bit higher. When Vandergugten refused to get vaccinated she was initially ordered to go on unpaid leave on Oct. 26, 2021. While on leave, Vandergugten went to her family doctor to get lab work done to prove that she had immunity from the virus, as she had already had COVID-19. However, her lab work was not accepted, and on Feb. 3, 2022, Vandergugten was officially terminated from her position at Langley Hospital. Challenging the courts  During this time of uncertainty, Vandergugten started meeting with “the Ark,” a fellowship of Christian healthcare workers who also lost their jobs due to vaccine orders. This fellowship joined a judicial court challenge started by doctors who had lost their privileges to practice in any hospital or government owned clinics. “We as nurses started to get together in the Lower Mainland here in Greater Vancouver, just a bunch of Christian nurses that had all found each other in this process. We just started getting together, supporting each other and praying and then became involved with this court challenge.” During this time, Vandergugten said that many court challenge opportunities came up, whether it be suing the union or the health authority. Yet, she says none of them aligned with the group's Christian values. They then were asked to join a case that resonated with them, challenging Dr. Bonnie Henry, BC’s provincial health officer, stating that her mandates were extreme and that she overused her emergency powers. Vandergugten’s name was put on the affidavit, the legal document that served as the evidence for the case. The courts heard their case for judicial review in November and December of 2023, and they are currently waiting to hear a decision. The decision date was set for the end of February, but they now understand that the courts can delay until the end of June. Vandergugten notes: “Lots of people at church are asking about it and praying for a favorable ruling. I will say to them, ‘You know what, if there is an extension that also is in God's timing and God's timing is perfect.’” Winning the case wouldn't automatically reinstate their jobs right away, but it could set a precedent for going forward with challenging their jobs. “There's still a battle that we need to win. This is just one case. For us to actually get our jobs back and be reinstated to the jobs that we were in, is still a far way off.” Crazy anti-vaxxer  Vandergugten says that for her, the decision to not get vaccinated was not what the mainstream media deemed as “crazy anti-vaxxers.” Prior to the vaccine, she worked for months in the emergency department at the peak of the pandemic. Once the vaccine came out, Vandergugten started seeing a rise in what she wondered were potential vaccine injuries. “Working on the frontline in the emergency department, there was an increase of early miscarriages and vascular injuries, strokes or blood clots or macular eye injuries. I knew that right away, that's a vaccine injury.” She says that it was disheartening to see this up close, especially when she felt any sort of disposition would mark you as a conspiracy theorist. “It’s hard to sort out actually. It’s hard to validate for yourself, when you see what's happening in front of you daily at work, and try to have conversations with colleagues who refused to engage. People accused me that I was being crazy and making stuff up.” Spiritual and relational growth in times of grief  Hilary and her husband Sprout. As challenging as this time has been, Vandergugten has found peace through solely relying on Christ. “It has been very beautiful, right? Like, you rely daily, you know, for emotional support, for spiritual support that He will heal those holes, but also that will open my eyes to others that are hurting, right?” She says that one of the greatest gifts to come out of this has been the connections made with other Christian healthcare workers through “the Ark” group. In addition to praying for each other, they have created work opportunities. No longer able to work in care homes because of their vaccine status, many people will reach out to “the Ark” group to find home care jobs for those who lost their jobs. She said some people will ask for unvaccinated nurses to take care of their loved ones instead of sending them to a nursing home. “This has been an unbelievably beautiful gift of just strong Christian women, not all of the Reformed faith – there are Mennonites and Pentecostals. But it’s just this beautiful gift from God that we can be together and pray for each other and encourage each other. And all of us have said our faith has become so much stronger.” In addition to her spiritual growth, Vandergugten says that this adversity has strengthened her marriage. She is grateful for her husband's support in leading her family through this difficult time, and for his ability to defend and protect her. She mentioned how she didn’t have the “traditional” type of marriage – she had always worked even if only part-time. This led her to let go and let her husband lead. “My marriage has become stronger because of it. It has been beautiful for our marriage, defending his wife repeatedly. My husband has this line, saying the collateral damage of COVID has been beautiful.” Times of uncertainty lead to new opportunities  Once Vandergugten and her sisters, also nurses, were fired, they thought they would prepare for the long haul so, they began the process of studying to get their American licenses. They have since passed these examinations and now have the ability to work south of the border.  “We wrote our NCLEXs and got our American licenses. I actually work in Washington State, which is about an hour and 15 minutes from my home.” To continue to hold a nursing license, a nurse needs to maintain a certain amount of hours. Vandergugten is grateful to be able to continue getting hours, because if BC health authorities do ever open up the restrictions for unvaccinated nurses, she’ll be able to return. She fears others will be ineligible to practice due to a lack of hours. Although this work is a blessing, at times, Vandergugten also finds it painful. “It's beautiful that I'm able to work there, that I'm able to be back doing what I love to do and have done for 28 years,” she said. “It's just painful that I have to cross the border and leave our healthcare system, with it being so short of so many nurses.” Why bother? Vandergugten says that she received some pushback from others questioning why she would even fight something like this. She says that we still live in a country with a democratic judicial system so we should exercise our rights. “We actually still live in a democracy, you've got elected people, who are making laws and rulings that affect the people, the common people like us, and then we have a judicial system that holds the elected people accountable,” she said. “We need to continue to honor this process and use it because otherwise we are not in a democratic society and I'm not acting like a citizen of a democracy, rather, I'm acting like I'm a subservient part of a totalitarian government. Right? And those are some of those fundamental freedoms that people forget. We shouldn't be afraid to exercise that.”...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14