I'd like to elaborate on the issue here too. Some like to pull out the 'libertatrian' card to defend the Wildrose here on this.
What's more 'Libertarian':
- Students asking to establish Gay-Striaght Alliance clubs in schools, that require minimal to zero resources getting shut down by some school boards
- A government motion that suggests school boards permit student-led and initiated requests to establish said clubs. (Notice how it's a non-binding motion that doesn't mandate anything, and also notice how it doesn't suggest that the school boards have to actively set these clubs up themselves). The motion only recommends that school boards be receptive to grassroots student initiatives of this nature. In the world according to this motion there will be GSR clubs where they are demanded, and no GSR clubs where they are not.
Which stance is more 'live and let live' and which one is more draconian?
|