Wildrose party: socially conservative (Gay-Straight Alliances)

[ae118]

Considering the bill is about "encouragement" it would have been an excellent opportunity for the Wild Rose to demonstrate they can support open-minded social legislation that doesn't sacrifice individual rights. One they could even argue to their conservative base was "non-binding" if they needed a reason. To me it looks like a missed opportunity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by ae118

Considering the bill is about "encouragement" it would have been an excellent opportunity for the Wild Rose to demonstrate they can support open-minded social legislation that doesn't sacrifice individual rights. One they could even argue to their conservative base was "non-binding" if they needed a reason. To me it looks like a missed opportunity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except that once its voted in then it can usually be changed arbitrarily, or even with a PC majority government changes can be rammed through.

The cynic in me just basically states that this was a complete trap bill based on the number of PC's that didn't vote for it and requiring other party votes.

If the Wildrose voted for it because they have the stance that this is up to the individual school boards to manage and mandate then the Wildrose reason for voting it down is fairly sound.

To me this was all about getting heat off of the PC governments issues, it was a pretty clever strategy.

But I don't see a we hate gays movement here.

[Dion]

Wildrose Leader Danielle Smith said it was a free vote for her caucus and that they were persuaded by Johnson's arguments.

"I would have voted against the motion as well," said Smith. "This is very much an issue of local control, local autonomy for our school boards.

"There are already 40 gay-straight alliances in the schools, so the system appears to be working.

Asked if he would have personally voted in favour of the Liberal motion if he had been present, Hancock said he would have.

During question period, Mason urged Hancock to make the motion a government bill.

"Put your bills where your mouth is, Mr. Premier," said Mason. Hancock did not say whether he would.

http://www.timescolonist.com/alberta...otion-1.947348

[CaptainCrunch]

And I apologize in advance I misread and thought this was a conservative introduced bill. I was wrong it was a liberal introduced bill.

But the reasoning still stands, its in essence a bill about nothing. And Smith is right, with 40 gay straight alliances out there, it does seem like the system doesn't need government intervention at a provincial level.

[nik-]

If it was a trap bill, it sounds like the Wild Rose barrel rolled right into the trap.

[ae118]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

And I apologize in advance I misread and thought this was a conservative introduced bill. I was wrong it was a liberal introduced bill.

But the reasoning still stands, its in essence a bill about nothing. And Smith is right, with 40 gay straight alliances out there, it does seem like the system doesn't need government intervention at a provincial level.

Unless you can speak for what the culture is like at each school, I'm not sure that's an accurate analysis.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

But the reasoning still stands, its in essence a bill about nothing. And Smith is right, with 40 gay straight alliances out there, it does seem like the system doesn't need government intervention at a provincial level.

According to this list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ols_in_Alberta), there are hundreds and hundreds of high schools in Alberta. All of them have some combination of gay and straight students. 40 gay-straight alliances would seem to be appallingly low.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Yes, this motion clearly illustrates that 100% of WR MLA's are anti-gay while only 66% of PC MLA's are too.

Yep. I'll take 66% rotten over 100% rotten. And there are two other parties who are 0% rotten (on this issue).

Originally Posted by GGG

My argument has nothing to do with the content of the bill. It is very simply that if a bill has not authority to compell anyone to do anything then that bill should not be written, discussed, voted on, or passed. The government should not waste its limited time on platitudes.

Just a theory, but perhaps Hehr did this as a non-binding motion because opposition parties only have limited opportunities to introduce legislation?

If it passes as a non-binding motion, it indicates the political will may exist to make a binding resolution later if the school boards do not comply voluntarily.

[CaptainCrunch]

Can you show me where any applications have been denied? And which school boards have denied an application?

At this point this bill isn't about school environments its encouraging boards to allow for the set up of these alliances.

So until someone can show me where school boards are shooting these down, I don't know that this bill has anything to do with what your talking about.

I'm not trying to be a snark, but shouldn't the school staff be responsible for the school environment, the boards be in charge of school and staff conduct and environment?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Makarov

According to this list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ols_in_Alberta), there are hundreds and hundreds of high schools in Alberta. All of them have some combination of gay and straight students. 40 gay-straight alliances would seem to be appallingly low.

How many students have applied for these, how many have been denied.

Out of the 40 what are the number of different boards that have approved since I think there are about 56 school districts?

[nik-]

When it comes to a program which has apparently made an incredible difference, "leaving it up to the school board" isn't necessarily the right answer. Sometimes people need to be dragged into the right decision.

[DuffMan]

I wish the WR didn't remind me so much of the GOP down south, and the PC's didn't remind me so much of a party that has been in power too long and gotten too comfortable and entitled.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

But the reasoning still stands, its in essence a bill about nothing. And Smith is right, with 40 gay straight alliances out there, it does seem like the system doesn't need government intervention at a provincial level.

Or perhaps some school boards are more welcoming to GSAs than others are. A provincial mandate would ensure that students everywhere in Alberta would have administration support if they wanted to form a GSA; it wouldn't be a privilege reserved only for those students lucky enough to live in an area that allows these groups. I'm not sure if this is still the case, but Catholic schools, for example, have banned Gay-Straight Alliances in the past.

[CaptainCrunch]

Maybe maybe not, but I'm not seeing where there's proof of something is happening that is saying that the school boards need to be dragged.

If the bill had including information about applications and denials then I would certainly say absolutely.

But to label a party as some evil homophobia entity because of this is wrong, the answer that Smith gave to me is the correct one until there is evidence to the contrary that school boards are turning these gay straight alliances down with extreme vigor and prejudice.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

I wish the WR didn't remind me so much of the GOP down south, and the PC's didn't remind me so much of a party that has been in power too long and gotten too comfortable and entitled.

Holy christ, your comparison is weird? I see the GOP as a whole other level. They would basically look at the Wildrose snort and call them namby pamby pinko socialists.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

How many students have applied for these, how many have been denied.

Out of the 40 what are the number of different boards that have approved since I think there are about 56 school districts?

Fair questions, but I would ask why we have to wait for a problem before the government takes action? Why not do something proactive for a change?

A bill like this would seem to also have the benefit of simply encouraging more students to apply to create such alliances.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Maybe maybe not, but I'm not seeing where there's proof of something is happening that is saying that the school boards need to be dragged.

If the bill had including information about applications and denials then I would certainly say absolutely.

But to label a party as some evil homophobia entity because of this is wrong, the answer that Smith gave to me is the correct one until there is evidence to the contrary that school boards are turning these gay straight alliances down with extreme vigor and prejudice.

From Flash Waken's post

Key findings:

In schools with gay-straight alliances implemented three or more years ago:
The odds of homophobic discrimination and suicidal thoughts were reduced by more than half among lesbian, gay, bisexual boys and girls compared to schools with no GSA.
There were also significantly lower odds of sexual orientation discrimination for heterosexual boys and girls.
Heterosexual boys were half as likely to attempt suicide as those in schools without GSAs.

In schools where anti-homophobic policies have been in place for more than three years:
The odds of suicidal thoughts and attempts for gay and bisexual boys were more than 70 per cent lower. Suicide attempts among lesbian and bisexual girls were two-thirds lower.
Heterosexual boys had 27 per cent lower odds of suicidal thoughts than heterosexual boys in schools without such policies.

I think those numbers are at the point where if the schools aren't doing it by choice, they get pushed into it.

Shame on the PC members that voted against it too.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Or perhaps some school boards are more welcoming to GSAs than others are. A provincial mandate would ensure that students everywhere in Alberta would have administration support if they wanted to form a GSA; it wouldn't be a privilege reserved only for those students lucky enough to live in an area that allows these groups. I'm not sure if this is still the case, but Catholic schools, for example, have banned Gay-Straight Alliances in the past.

Probably, but again, the bill introduction was short of anything validating and didn't show that the boards needed to have that power moved to a provincial level.

This has less to do with a party being social conservative and more with a bill being introduced in a manner that leaves a lot to be desired.

[Senator Clay Davis]

You can count me among those who can't understand why, particularly with a non-binding motion, the Wildrose didn't take a free chance to look more moderate. Instead they decided to reinforce what the 55-60% of the population who will likely never vote for them already believes. If the political answer is "don't offend the base", I always find that argument incredibly bizarre for a right wing party. The Wildrose base is voting for the Wildrose no matter what. There is absolutely no scenario where they won't (well there is...a more right wing party comes along). If the Wildrose supported this, their base isn't voting PC or Liberal all of a sudden. They need more moderate votes. So given the chance to possibly make it seem like they aren't social regressive, they pass on that chance the appease the base. I really don't get it.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by nik-

From Flash Waken's post



I think those numbers are at the point where if the schools aren't doing it by choice, they get pushed into it.

Shame on the PC members that voted against it too.

That's not answering my question, though. How many applications to boards, which boards and how many denials.

The stats that are being posted in the clip go more to individual services within the school the approving alliances.

Anyways, I can see where I'm going to very soon be clipped with the bad guy role here.

But lets seperate the items.

Can school environments be terrible on gay students? Absolutely, we know there is bullying in schools we know that there is mistreatment of gays. But the repair of that goes to school actions, discipline, educational opportunities.

Are boards rejecting Gay/Straight Alliances? is it systemic with certain boards? do we need to have a body to oversea schoolboards to audit them on rejections vs approvals. Nothing was presented with this bill that points in that direction. I'm not asking for those answers to be a jerk, but to understand if boards are going out of the way to reject these alliances then yeah how do we fix it and does the government need to be involved?

That's the question and that's why the vote went the way it probably did, not because these people are lake of fire gay hating gun toting #######s, but because the bill presented in its current fashion was long on hope and balloons and short on ay factual backup.