Remembrance Day Event Cancelled

[Shwa]

Can't the boys wear skirts too, or is the uniform policy sexist?

No, they can't. Its a Roman Catholic school board, not the US military.

[bush_cheney2004]

No, they can't. Its a Roman Catholic school board, not the US military.

So much for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms! I hope these guys still aren't getting government funding for religion based schools.

[Shwa]

So much for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms! I hope these guys still aren't getting government funding for religion based schools.

Why would you "hope" that especially since it is a protected right in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

[guyser]

From what I heard,( no links), it was cancelled as 'some' students at the school who are from war torn countries were increasingly uncomfortable with the guns and tanks thing.

There never was any tanks at school, so who knows the true reasons.

[Boges]

From what I heard,( no links), it was cancelled as 'some' students at the school who are from war torn countries were increasingly uncomfortable with the guns and tanks thing.

There never was any tanks at school, so who knows the true reasons.

Even if that's true, it's no reason to cancel a Remembrance Day event that's been going on for almost 20 years.

[bush_cheney2004]

No wonder G.I. Joe sales are so much lower in Ottawa. Can't have any guns...not even little wuttle toys ones.

[Wilber]

Can't the boys wear skirts too, or is the uniform policy sexist?

Could this mean Highland regiments would be excluded from ceremonies as well?

[Wilber]

The Sun needed to fulfill it's outrage component, I guess. But I'm guessing here... I don't "know" why they published this. Just like nobody "knows" that Political Correctness had anything to do with this decision, versus plain old bureaucratic posterior covering.

I'm not sure where that molehill went, and what's this mountain ?

A very large proportion of "bureaucratic posterior covering" is a direct response to political correctness. "Politicaly Correct" is one of the most frightening phrases in the English language.

[Michael Hardner]

Come on now Michael, there is no need for that. Besides, everyone knows that to accurately restate Shady's 'points' you would have to start with your index finger moving up and down between your lips and make a babbling noise.

I'm being facetious but, let's face it, these little outrage bombs that are lobbed in the press are just more noise. As for 'wussification' or whatever, it's another vague lament made by those who can't accept the changing times, IMO. You're still free to raise your children the way you want, within the limits of child abuse laws.

[Michael Hardner]

A very large proportion of "bureaucratic posterior covering" is a direct response to political correctness. "Politicaly Correct" is one of the most frightening phrases in the English language.

So the original meaning of the term will degenerate and it will come to mean any kind of political inoculation against controversy.

[bush_cheney2004]

... You're still free to raise your children the way you want, within the limits of child abuse laws.

Maybe...if they can survive the abortion laws!

[Boges]

I'm being facetious but, let's face it, these little outrage bombs that are lobbed in the press are just more noise. As for 'wussification' or whatever, it's another vague lament made by those who can't accept the changing times, IMO. You're still free to raise your children the way you want, within the limits of child abuse laws.

So hold on a second. A newspaper reports a story and now radio is discussing said story. It's getting a reaction from people.

Are you saying the Sun has no business reporting this story? Or they are being sensationalist in reporting this story? It happened, didn't it?

It's a debate to be had. Why would school administrators be so dogmatic to the point to saying even de-activated guns are not allowed at a school? Do you really think it's glorifying violence anymore than say a Call of Duty game.

[Shwa]

Could this mean Highland regiments would be excluded from ceremonies as well?

What "ceremonies?"

[Shwa]

So hold on a second. A newspaper reports a story and now radio is discussing said story. It's getting a reaction from people.

Are you saying the Sun has no business reporting this story? Or they are being sensationalist in reporting this story? It happened, didn't it?

It's a debate to be had. Why would school administrators be so dogmatic to the point to saying even de-activated guns are not allowed at a school? Do you really think it's glorifying violence anymore than say a Call of Duty game.

What does "glorifying violence" have to do with it? Did you "hear" something new or are you turning PC too?

[Wilber]

So the original meaning of the term will degenerate and it will come to mean any kind of political inoculation against controversy.

Already has.

[Shady]

You're right. We should arm children - maybe not with guys, but with brass knuckles, small billyclubs and boa knives in order to make them all more manly.

I believe I have accurately restated your point here.

Ah, the ol'Hardner false choice. So allowing WWII replica arms for a Rememerance Day display is just like arming children with brass knuckles and knives? How are you still the moderator of this forum?

/facepalm

[Boges]

What does "glorifying violence" have to do with it? Did you "hear" something new or are you turning PC too?

So why else would they ban historical guns?

They aren't an immediate threat to the students. It's not like one of them is going to go rogue pick one up and start mowing students down.

[Boges]

No wonder G.I. Joe sales are so much lower in Ottawa. Can't have any guns...not even little wuttle toys ones.

I wonder if it'll actually reach a point where boys won't be able to play with toy guns anymore

I did. Generations past have.

For the vast majority of kids it's a harmless way to grow up, it's just good fun.

But then again they have violent video games to fill that void now.

Edited November 3, 2011 by Boges

[Wilber]

So why else would they ban historical guns?

They aren't an immediate threat to the students. It's not like one of them is going to go rogue pick one up and start mowing students down.

Revisionist history. Admitting wars are fought with guns is tantamount to "glorifying violence".

[bush_cheney2004]

I wonder if it'll actually reach a point where boys won't be able to play with toy guns anymore

I did. Generations past have.

I sure did...the desire and satisfaction derived from an air rifle is immortalized in a famous Xmas movie. Guns matter, and they take on many forms in real life or for play. They are "cultural" in many respects and deserve more protection, not contempt. Why...there should be a National Firearms Day!

[Shwa]

So why else would they ban historical guns?

They aren't an immediate threat to the students. It's not like one of them is going to go rogue pick one up and start mowing students down.

No, but the upsetting-kids-from-war-torn-countries was a decent excuse, why haven't you focused on that one yet?

How do you feel about that as a reason?

However, I think the likely reason is that until a recent committee meeting, no one every gave it any thought and thus have never prepared for the inevitable: when some smug, over-the-top social engineering committee member told them to adhere to the letter of the law (no guns!!!) or they would seek to take the issue to an internal panel of higher ups and cause a lot of ruckus, thereby causing those who never thought about it and never prepared for it, a lot of pressure and stress. Thinking it wasn't worth it, and realizing that the social engineering type could cost maybe one or maybe two sleepless nights, they caved and just said, 'ok, whatever. any consequences will blow over soon enough anyways. before we know it, it'll be Christmas. BTW, no Christmas trees in schools this year too.'

And it might not have been just one smug social engineer either, it could been, maybe two or three with one of them holding a grudge against someone on the unprepared side and wanted to rub it in their faces. One of them might have been a Muslim from a war torn country (I mean, aren't they all?) and added that at the tail end of the decision document to confuse people who really want to know why.

Just guessin'

And thus, the decision was made.

[Boges]

No, but the upsetting-kids-from-war-torn-countries was a decent excuse, why haven't you focused on that one yet?

How do you feel about that as a reason?

However, I think the likely reason is that until a recent committee meeting, no one every gave it any thought and thus have never prepared for the inevitable: when some smug, over-the-top social engineering committee member told them to adhere to the letter of the law (no guns!!!) or they would seek to take the issue to an internal panel of higher ups and cause a lot of ruckus, thereby causing those who never thought about it and never prepared for it, a lot of pressure and stress. Thinking it wasn't worth it, and realizing that the social engineering type could cost maybe one or maybe two sleepless nights, they caved and just said, 'ok, whatever. any consequences will blow over soon enough anyways. before we know it, it'll be Christmas. BTW, no Christmas trees in schools this year too.'

And it might not have been just one smug social engineer either, it could been, maybe two or three with one of them holding a grudge against someone on the unprepared side and wanted to rub it in their faces. One of them might have been a Muslim from a war torn country (I mean, aren't they all?) and added that at the tail end of the decision document to confuse people who really want to know why.

Just guessin'

And thus, the decision was made.

And you think that's cool?

I don't think the wartorn country excuse is a decent one actually. It's the job of the school to educate the student why we remember the wars Canada has been involved with any why the consensus is they were nobel ventures.

Canada wouldn't be the country it is if we hadn't fought the wars we have.

Edited November 3, 2011 by Boges

[bush_cheney2004]

....Canada wouldn't be the country it is if we hadn't fought the wars we have.

Shhhhhhhh....the new revisionist history teaches that Canada only has peackeepers...and they do it with only butter knives!

[Black Dog]

Ah, the ol'Hardner false choice. So allowing WWII replica arms for a Rememerance Day display is just like arming children with brass knuckles and knives? How are you still the moderator of this forum?

/facepalm

Because you had a lock on the forum idiot position.

Dude isn't even a moderator.

Anyhoos...I'm still not sure I see the educational value here. These are kids reared on violent movies and videogames, they aren't going to have a reaction from getting to handle a Lee Enfield that goes much deeper than "Whoah a gun! Cool!" They'd probably get more out of a conversation with a vet.

[Rue]

Could this mean Highland regiments would be excluded from ceremonies as well?

Yes of course. Bagpipes are traumatizing. Also so are men who have

hairy legs and wear kilts.

Multi-culturalism is fine as long as it has nothing to do with the heritage

and legacy of people who died for this country, then its insensitive.