msj

Again, when the parents get the letter one day (if you believe the mother who claims her son got it to her on the 15th and her grade 5 daughter not at all) before the event there is a question of reasonable time. That is unreasonable for a person to get further information. It is not cultural since it deals with spirits and cleansing and sounds not that much different from the "cultural" (but really religious) practice of baptism. And, again, the ceremony is only "offensive" insofar that it bring religion into a secular setting where the kids and parents should have the right to allow for a proper amount of time to know what the event is about, when it is being scheduled, and what role the kid is playing in it. If the kid is observing then fine, if the kid is participating in it then wrong on secular grounds.

Why? Should grade 3 kids be talking about Trump? Or, rather, should their teachers be talking about Trump during math, reading, whatever?

1) We are not talking about where it takes place. We are talking about when. As in you do not send out a letter two days (really more like a day and a half, at best) before an event as the parent needs time to receive the letter, think about it, and instruct the child and/or communicate with the school about any actions that should be requested/taken etc.... 2) The date of the event was not present in the letter. That is pure incompetence. 3) In the story in the original link in the OP there is a quote where the school is admitting the letter is unclear and confusing so even they agree with me about how poorly this part was handled. 4) The participation in the religious ceremony was (or should be determined in court) to be against section 76 of the School Act and may even go further and prove to be unconstitutional. So the school is wrong for even holding the event in the way that they had the children participate in it rather than observe it.

Oh, and once again, folks: read the f&cking OP and the linky links contained within so we can have an informed discussion. This is getting tiresome.

Participation means taking part in the ceremony: the kids having their faces smudged as the burning sage washes over them to "cleanse" them and remove the "bad energy" etc etc... Just like if an Evangelical Christian brought in a big tub of holy water and started dunking the kids to "cleanse" them of their "sins." I wouldn't want my kid dunked in dirty, bacteria infested, "holy" water. Also wouldn't want my kid coming home smelling like sage. Marijuana, sure, fine, but not sage. [Please note I don't have kids]

Again: one can learn about cultures and religion without participating in the rituals. Hell, I have a Book of Catechism sitting on my bookshelf which clearly outlines all types of crazy Catholic practices that even my small accountant mind can understand without having had observed them nor participated in them.

When you live in the shadow it is best to be bigger than a runt.

The harm is that it opens the door to any and all religious practices to be forced upon children. As I have already stated, baptism is the better analogy here since it too is a cleansing ritual. One can easily learn about such rituals without ever having to participate in it.

Nope, reference is made to spirits and we're not talking vodka. My atheist parent having me circumcised as a baby is "cultural." Inspired by the stupidity of religion but still cultural. My mother feeling guilt when I tease her about my "mutilation" and "justifying" it by saying that I'm "cleaner" because of it [in an era of potable water and soap] is religious inspired indoctrinated justification.

The letter does not tell them when the religious ceremony is, or rather, was, going to take place. The parents had an unreasonable amount of time to decide, gather more information, and respond. The children were left with uninformed parents (due to time constraints imposed by the school) to then decide for themselves to participate in the ceremony, or not, while under duress (to make the decision as authority figures pressed them on to participate). This is clearly a case coercion and is deserving of a reprimand.

According to section 76 of the School Act in BC. For crying out loud people, it is in the original f^cking link in the original f^cking post.

Sure, other than the fact that one can find the letter and see that it wasn't all that clear. Just go to the OP and click on the linky button and scroll down and click on the other linky button. Or perhaps I can do it for you: https://www.jccf.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Servatius-v-SD70-EXHIBITS.pdf The bigger problem remains - it is the children who need to be spoken for by the parents and it is the teacher/principal who must safeguard the parents wishes by having a proper letter go out with a reasonable amount of time. Clearly not the case here once the facts are known. No this is not equivalent. Clearly when a parent consents for their child to leave the school to go to a religious place then it is implicitly obvious as to what may occur. Presumably the communication is explicitly better informed/timed than the case presented in the OP. A better example would be where an Evangelical organization came into the school, with little warning, and baptized each child. Similar nature as the smudge ceremony - it is a cleansing ritual. You and cybercoma can then argue how important it is for kids to be forced to participate in it as a learning experience while people like me call it out as unacceptable infringement of these kids Charter rights. So, no, race does not have to play a role here - it is clearly wrong on logical grounds.

Having re-read the link in the OP I will point out that the school district has even admitted that there was "confusion" as to it being mandatory or optional to participate in. On top of that, if you follow the link within the link to the legal documents you see the letter to the parents is dated September 14, 2015 and the religious ceremony took place on September, 16. The letter did not even indicate when the ceremony was going to take place. Completely incompetent and the principal deserves a reprimand for this. As to whether participation was coerced or not - even if it was optional, how many children have the guts to opt out of something in front of their teacher and their peers? That's why religious indoctrination is so successful in the first place.

We have more clout with the US - our largest trading partner. We will not be some tiny country next door to them. If we do the immigration right it smooths out our demographic problems. I doubt immigration harms our society/economy and think it is of at least a small net benefit as we generally are getting some of the best and brightest from around the world (with global networking connections) into our country.

Excellent question and lets see if you get an answer.

The timing will be an issue, I'm sure, as one would hope that a parent would be allowed a certain amount of time to be informed and make a decision about this type of thing. But then, it should not have happened at all - there is no room for children participating in any religious ceremony in a school setting PERIOD. (unless it is a religious school for which the parents presumably send their kid to for that very purpose).

Again, there is a difference between forcing kids to participate in a religious ritual and learning about it or observing it. Hell, if one wants to observe baptism then one could just watch the ending of The Godfather.

The point about urban sprawl is simple: we can easily fit 30 million people into the lower part of BC. Easily 40 million across the lower parts of Ontario and across Quebec. Can also easily fit 30 million elsewhere in the country. And technology should reduce the light pollution issue as we make that a priority. As for comparing our population to the US - they are our neighbour and largest trading partner. With increased globalization (excluding any Trump effect as being a temporary blip) I expect it makes more sense for us to work towards a bigger population base so that our clout with them will continue.

Um, no, when debt rises so do assets. It is your lack of understanding such a simple accounting equation that bothers me - otherwise you seem like a swell enough person.

My fear is Christianity. They are going to jump on this and say "see, they are doing it so we get to do it to." Hence my comment about bigots gonna bigot - I am very bigoted towards Abrahamic religions all of which can go stuff themselves.

I think it would be fine for the students to observe the ceremony. But learning about a culture/relgious practice does not require participation and often does not even require observation. Muslims like to use a prayer rug and point themselves towards Meccas foolishly in a Euclidian way, for example. I think most kids can understand such things without actually doing it.

Participating in it is discouraged because otherwise teachers/schools abuse it. It's a simple case of zero tolerance. Yes, that often leads to poor policy but in this instance it doesn't. It allows kids to still learn about it as an outsider. These are children for f^cks sake. They are not adults who usually have more experience and not as malleable.

They can learn in different ways than participating in it. After all, what better way to learn about Christianity than reciting the Lords' Prayer over and over again and learning the Bible with the help of a priest/pastor, amirite???!!!

I agree, bigots are gonna bigot. But there is substance to this issue so the rest of us should step up and adopt the proper stance and ensure that religous crap like this does not happen in any school whether it is the alleged "good guys" (i.e christians) or the alleged "bad guys" (anyone/everyone else with the occassional exception of Judaism depending on whether or not the christians are okay with them or not). As for this being a molehill - I don't want the Lords' Prayer being repeated in the classroom so it is only fair that any other group also does not have such a "petty" thing allowed there too.

I hope she wins and the school respects secular policy. Although I think it is a good idea to learn various cultural/religous ideas and practices it is another thing entirely to partake in it. Just as I would be horrified if these kids were asked to recite the "Lord's prayer" I find it terrible that they participated in this ritual rather than learned about it. I was in Thailand in 2014 just in a tour group. We were asked to participate in a Buddhist ritual. My wife and everyone else participated and I politely refused. Of course, all of us being adults this was not a big deal although later I did explain to some that I am a "militant atheist" so they had a sense of true feelings towards religious crap. In a school situation where you have authority figures (teachers/principals/religious figures present) and impressionable children then it is a terrible idea to involve the students. If they want to get involved then they can do it on their own time with the assistance of their parents/indoctrinators. .