So if parents of kids 12 and under get the money...that would mean busboobs must think 13 year olds are mature enough to fend for themselves and are capable little human beings, unless its decisions around names/pronouns/etc in which case they are not at all capable and cannot be trusted.
So which is it?
And also, if you’re a minor who’s over 13, don’t you dare question the government or else mom will give you a good spank.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751
The Oilers won't finish 14th in the West forever.
Eventually a couple of expansion teams will be added which will nestle the Oilers into 16th.
This story has gained a lot of traction over the last several hours. I’ve seen it plastered all over social media today, including the kid’s response from Reddit. I don’t think this is gonna just go away like Smith wants.
Also, the press needs to do their job and really hold the UCP’s feet to the fire on this one.
The press is owned by US Republicans, they're going to bury this.
We need a cooperative citizen owned media outlet, does CP want to get the ball rolling on it?
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
The Following User Says Thank You to GranteedEV For This Useful Post:
As to the comment itself, I am not normally one to be an alarmist about speech, but it seems to me a much more problematic issue than what can be brought to an end by a seemingly fake 'apology' posted on 'X' and the Premier stating that therefore the matter is closed.
The Executive Director, Premier's Southern Alberta Office while engaged in the cutting off of clearly protected speech under section 2 of the Charter declared to an identified individual high school student:
Then after Evan continues to pose his question seeking it to be answered even though his mic has been cut off, the highly placed government official said to the teenager in front of the assembled public...and being published to the internet:
There is no real way around the fact that a government official who reports only to the Chief of Staff of the Premier and then the Premier herself, publicly declared that because he did not agree with the manner in which the kid was exercising his right to free speech, he ought to be subjected to a criminal domestic assault by his own parents.
Any thoughts on how this student could pursue remedy for this situation, and what the remedy might look like? Any suggestions on case law that might be relevant here?
Enforcement – section 24
Enforcement of guaranteed rights and freedoms
24. (1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.
I think the UCP are going to find out in a hurry that while the general public doesn’t really get all that bent out of shape over a private business using their own money to bust a union during a dispute, tax payers aren’t going to be as thrilled about spending their hard earned money on it. Especially those who don’t have any kids in school that aren’t getting a dime out of it.
I think the UCP are going to find out in a hurry that while the general public doesn’t really get all that bent out of shape over a private business using their own money to bust a union during a dispute, tax payers aren’t going to be as thrilled about spending their hard earned money on it. Especially those who don’t have any kids in school that aren’t getting a dime out of it.
Looks like you were right about needing a strike fund…..
I think people will accept the math of the government paying for care in lieu of education as reasonable. All they need to say is we are disbursing about half of the savings from the strike from those most affected. For the people without kids the net savings message will resonate.
