The vulnerable LGBT are simply the human fodder for the larger objective. A single ‘choice’ in education, and a state controlled ‘family’.
In order to understand, why the family is under attack by our government, and why a single state school system is seen to be the ‘fix’ for the ‘problem,’ one must understand how Karl Marx saw the family.
The family was seen by Marx as the prop for capitalism, and the key ‘instructor’ for passing on the capitalist mindset. Consciously or subconsciously. If the state were to become the primary instructor, then the capitalist idea of inheritance and personal ownership could be weeded out during the formative years.
(See bottom for brief summary)
Another morning at the Court of Queen’s Bench, although cold and windy, at least this time it wasn’t a snow storm. For the 40-50 people who showed in the court room at 9am, it was brief event. Justice Tilleman brought the court to order, introductions were made, and the Justice informed us that his written decision was to be handed out. He dismissed the appeal, and the court was adjourned.
There was a flurry of activity afterwards, as many had questions as to why it was so short. Even some of the reporters noted how brief the proceedings were. I know all of you are eager to here the details, and I apologize that I could not have written this sooner, but I too had to get back to work.
The main arguments that were addressed were:
Justice Tilleman began with a brief statement of background on the appeal, and discussed the nature of the appeal. In paragraph  he states that we were seeking clarification on the procedures for a petition. In  he notes some of the allegations regarding the behaviour of the board leading up to the submitting of the petition, but explains that they are outside the scope of the appeal, and mentions that although outside the scope, it does not mean that relief can not be sought via another avenue. (referencing argument 4)
In the final paragraph of the nature of the appeal , the Justice makes note of the fact that the petition that was submitted to the Board of SD76 can be amended to correct the deficiencies that were outlined by the Secretary. This means that we do not have to start again from scratch. Paragraph  is what allows us to collect 110 new signatures, and correct the 259. Since March 10th, we have collected 194 new signatures, and corrected 75 of those containing only a postal code. That means we only need to correct another 100 postal code signatures, or collect 100 new. I say we shoot for at least 144 to be on the safe side. If we can get 12 people to volunteer to collect 1 sheet each, we will have our goal. If they collect 2 sheets (24 signatures per person), we will be well within a safe buffer. You can download the petition sheets here.
In part IV. the Justice goes on to explain the standard of review. Both parties agreed on the standard of review, and so in this summary, I will skip over that part. The full text of Justice Tilleman’s decision can be found here.
In part V. the Justice analyzes the 3 remaining arguments. The first being the 25% condition. In paragraph  he explains that it would offend basic notions of fairness to expect the secretary to assist the petitioner in identifying the schools to which the signatories belonged. To do so would overlap the duties of the petitioner and the neutral decision maker. This is a fair point to be made. The Justice then explains in  that a second petition submitted (by Sheldon Johnston) 2 days later, had clearly outlined school and parent information. Mr. Johnston had informed me that he received the formatting for his petition from the Secretary. That petition was also rejected.
The second contention that Justice Tilleman’s deals with is the signatures with only a postal code. It was dealt with in paragraphs [37-48]. In which, the Justice states that it is a reasonable interpretation that postal codes are all that is need to identify if a signatory is an elector in Medicine Hat, and that it is relevant that the Lethbridge School Board allowed it. It was his judgment though that it could not be applied to all districts, and one School Board is not subject to the decision of another. He also noted, that although the intent of the law was to establish if a signatory was an elector, the wording of the law required a “postal address,” and the Secretary is bound to follow the wording. He therefor made the judgment that it was reasonable to exclude the 259 signatures.
The Final argument Justice Tilleman addressed was the 110. He noted that (we) the applicant did not contest this, only that the Secretary would not provide us with details in a timely fashion. (paragraph [13 & 14])
Based on these determinations, Justice Tilleman dismissed the appeal. No costs were awarded, or discussed.
This was not an unexpected ruling. Although the appeal was dismissed, sufficient avenues were provided that allows us to complete the petition and have our committee, in a reasonable time frame. (And no costs were awarded.)
Here is the complete text of the press release that was sent to CHAT Radio, CJCY, and Praise FM.
Last October, a large number of concerned residents of Medicine Hat
submitted a petition to have a committee formed that would give
non-binding recommendation on the implementation of SD76’s Policy 621 & 622.
That petition was rejected, without being evaluated for all criteria
outlined in the School Act, and a number of signatures were deemed
disqualified by the Secretary of the Board.
Details were requested on the disqualified signatures and the Secretary
refused to provide them. Jeremy Williamson, who had submitted the
petition, then filed for appeal, on behalf of the signatories, with the
Court of Queens bench, asking that the Secretary’s decision be
overturned, as is the process outlined in the School Act.
Justice Tilleman heard the Appeal and Arguments on March 10th of this
year, and made note of the unprecedented crowd size in the court room.
The signatories of the petition consisted of more than 30 different
congregations and community groups in Medicine Hat, and spanned every
social, religious, and age of majority demographic including those who
identify as LGBTI.
On Thursday April 13, at 9am Justice Tilleman will be rendering his
verdict on the matter.
Mr. Williamson and the Concerned Parents of School District 76 invite
the public to attend and hear the Justice’s decision.
SD76 has asked that the case be dismissed and court fees be levied
against Mr. Williamson on the grounds that the appeal on behalf of 2034
concerned citizens is “frivolous and vexatious.”
Just got back today from a 7 hour back road trip from the Legislature. Juggling 3 children under 5. A crazy trip! So sorry James Wood from CHAT doesn’t understand when I told him I’d get back to him in a day or two. My family obligations are more important than his schedule! There is no way I’m having a conversation in sketchy cell service so that sentences are misinterpreted and misunderstood. Even though my husband called CHAT personally to inform them I was out of communication, they fictionally reported I was avoiding them. This is irresponsible and incompetent. Facts are the hallmark of good journalism. We live in a democracy where the exchange of ideas is supposed to be done with civility. I am happy to respond to competent journalists. Thank you to the many, many people supporting and praying for me and our parents. You are amazing!! Thank you!!
Today, “CHAT News Today” released an article (original has since been removed by CHAT, but I have a copy) [updated article] authored by James Wood. The main assertion of the article being that Mrs. Prince had somehow equated GSAs to the Residential Schools and Eugenics. This is a lie.
This is amateurish gutter journalism, and the facts do not fit the story. Any individual with a reading comprehension above the 2nd grade level can plainly see that Mrs. Prince was referring to how history has repeatedly shown that no government has the capability to replace the role of a parent, and that the Residential Schools and Eugenics are plain examples of government attempting to do so.
It was only in the comments, such as the one by Progress Alberta, an NDP front organization (Raj Pannu, former leader of the Alberta NDP sits on the advisory board), that that correlation was made. Note also that the comment was posted on April 11, while Mrs. Prince post was on April 4th.
The other commenter, who just ‘happened’ to see Mrs. Prince’s post 6 days after it was posted, is Lori Bauckman. You may remember her from a PC membership card ‘scandal‘ back in 2014. Mrs. Bauckman according to her Twitter profile is “Politics obsessed. Wife. Mother of two teens. Former Public School Trustee who believes it’s time for Alberta to have a single, publicly funded school system.” She expresses no lost love for the PCs or the Wild Rose. She also seems to advocate for a single forced education system.
The CHAT article has shown a complete lack of journalistic integrity, and although slightly re-worded from it’s original this morning, has not addressed the considerable political bias, and continues to report without having received any kind of a statement from Mrs. Prince. CHAT was informed by multiple individuals that she was in transit from Edmonton, and unable to respond right away.
Mrs. Prince’s message and the message of CPoSD76 has always been that parents are the first and primary care givers of our children, and that parents are the only ones with inalienable rights and authority over the children, barring proven neglect or abuse.
Maureen Prince has advocated for the protection of children with the Concerned Parents of SD76 for over a year now. She knows better than most just what the tyrannical agenda of the NDP education ministry is. I and the CPoSD76 stand with her unequivocally.
And you know what? I think you all need to watch this video again!
The message from Maureen Prince today was simple. Include Parents. This is critical to a democratic and successful society. The family is the very bedrock of any healthy society. It is attributed to Mahatma Gandhi that he said, “The measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members.”
Our children are our weakest members, and across Canada, right down to our local school boards, our society is seeking to exploit our children. Right now, procedures exist in Alberta schools that write out parents, and treat our children as property of the state. Here in Medicine Hat a teacher must report any child seen violating the districts ‘code of conduct’, no matter where it happens, or face disciplinary action. This expands a teachers fiduciary duty far beyond reason, or that of even a police officer. An authority schools don’t have, and should never have.
School District 76 drafted a motion last year for the ASBA that asked to have school districts assigned to children at birth. When asked what that looked like, the trustees could not provide the details. Education Minister David Eggen bullied out a command that schools MUST keep critical developmental information about our children secret from the parents. Information of a sexual nature. One of, if not THE most intimate aspect of a child’s life. Not allowed to tell parents. What other group likes to tell children to keep sexual topics secret? (Hint: Ask any victim of sexual abuse. There are windows on class room doors for a reason.)
These kinds of actions are part of a pattern. The future for Alberta can be seen as close as Ontario, and their Bill 89. The protections for our children are being stripped away and the parents are being shut out. The ‘state’ is seeking to take possession and control of our children. Where have we seen that in history, and how did it turn out?
Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, and Mao’s China. All of which seized control of the children’s education, shut the parents out, and indoctrinated them into horrible murderous ideologies. But those are all examples from far off lands, so lets look to something closer to home. Let’s remember the residential schools.
The residential schools did exactly what the Alberta NDP and Ontario Liberals are trying to do now. They seized control of aboriginal children, stuck them in forced government sanctioned education, and removed all parental oversight and protection from sexual predators. I guess our government subscribes to the “do the same thing over and over again until you get the result you want,” perception of reality. A year ago, I even mentioned the parallel with the residential schools to the Board of SD76, but I guess they couldn’t see it.
But I’m not an aboriginal, nor have I lived through the trauma that was so many of the residential schools, so don’t take my word for it, hear from someone who lived it. Hear why family needs to be included.
Yet, here we are. Trying to educate our educators on why their educational plan is flawed, and will lead to the harm of our children. Here we are being called bigots and etc-phobics. I’ve been asked today what is so concerning? Well the state seizing our kids, and putting them at risk is pretty concerning. There is some great irony that the Alberta legislature was talking about the hard fought battle of Vimy Ridge, to stop tyranny, on the same day that a parent had to remind the government to not tyrannically exclude parents from the education and care of their children.
Include parents. Such a simple phrase. Who knew it would represent the feelings of so many parents and children in our city, province and beyond.
With the NDP controlled Alberta Education, implementing actions to remove parents from their role as primary care givers, parents had a problem.
In cities all over the province, Parents were leaping into action. Contacting school boards, administrators and teachers. Parents showed up to school board meetings like never before. Peaceful rallies had thousands in attendance.
Finding themselves threatened and coerced, school boards seldom gave parents opportunity to express concerns or impact policy or procedures.
A few brave school boards stood up to Mr. Eggen and his new policies only to find themselves in the crosshairs of his wrath.
A few cities managed to get thousands of signatures to demand a meeting with their school boards in hopes of making recommendations that would be more student/parent friendly.
Our city had a petition of over 2,000 names asking for a formation of a committee to make recommendations addressing these policies and procedures. When it was found insufficient, we took it to appeals court, hoping some of the excluded signatures would be found valid. Or that we met a secondary criteria, in the school act.
We await the Judge’s decision this Thursday.
So, what role do these simple buttons play? With a circle of children, surrounding the words “Include Parents” what does it have to do with this political paradox?
They represent, that all children need their parents. Children, by very definition, need parents to protect, guide and care for them. By law we are responsible to direct the education of our children and their day to day activities, including extracurricular activities.
But, our voices, and the law, have been ignored and belittled. So, the button is a visual declaration, that can’t be silenced.
We will stand in solidarity, to safeguard our children. We will not abandon them. We will not let AB Education make life altering choices for them. They are our children, not the governments!
Regrettably, there are some incompetent parents. We recognize and understand that. Fortunately, we have in place, services to help students and families in those circumstances. Child Welfare, Social Services, Foster Care and Police are some of the resources for these students.
We wish that every child, struggling with any issue, would have the joy of his parent enfolding him in arms of comfort. That together, child and parent could walk the path resolving life’s difficulties. To those children without that, we wish you success and joy as you walk a difficult path.
Life is hard, parents help us navigate it.
And so my friends, this is a love story. The love of parents for their children.
Well, Friday and Saturday the CPoSD76 held a yard sale, to raise funds for court costs, and help us with future endeavures. We asked families to drop off their gently used items, and boy, did they ever. Just look at how much stuff concerned families dropped off!
For the 2 hours we were open on Friday, and all day on Saturday plus over time, there was a constant stream of people to see what we had for sale. Many more residents of Medicine Hat became aware of just what was happening with their local School District 76. Awareness is the chief struggle we have.
Parents for instance are just not aware that SD76 has set procedures under policy 621 & 622 that create new ‘problem’ children within the district through vague definitions on various ‘phobias’. That the district has established that they can impress their idea of morality and ethics upon the children in the schools, beyond that of the law, and in some cases, against that which the parents wish to instill.
Most concerning is that the district has established in those same procedures that a child can be monitored while not at school, and if an infraction of school policy/ethics/morals occurs outside school hours, no matter the location, that the child can be disciplined for that infraction. Worse still, they have written into procedures for administration and teachers, that if they see such an infraction, they must report it, or be subject to disciplinary action themselves.
Still though, besides making residents aware of what some of the concerns of the CPoSD76 are, the yard sale also brought awareness about this Thursday’s court decision on the petition that they brought to the Board of SD76. The CPoSD76 have been struggling for over a year to have their concerns heard by the Board, but have been met with continual road blocks. So much so, that they had to appeal the rejection of their petition. The first appeal of it’s kind in Canadian History. Justice Tilleman will in fact on Thursday be setting precedence for any future case like ours.
The Justice will also be giving clarifications on a numbers of aspects of the School Act. One clarification that the Justice gave on March 10th was that the petition can be amended with the requisite number of signatures needed to meet the criteria of the School Act, contrary to the assertion of the Secretary of the Board who stated we must resubmit a new petition (Ie. Recollect all 2000 signatures).
This was a relief to us, as the original collection was a significant amount of work, and consisted of more than 40 volunteers collecting. So, with the statements from the Justice, we set out to collect the 110 shortfall, and to correct the addresses of the 269 that only had postal codes.
We have volunteers tirelessly looking up the addresses as best they can, as they do not have access to postal information, electoral role calls, or school registration lists. The Yard Sale alone provided 78 new signatures, and with several other volunteers yet to hand in there collections, (the numbers are good,) we expect to far exceed the 110 required. Who knows, we may have enough, that we don’t even need to bother with fixing the addresses of the 269!
Beyond the signatures, the yard sale was ultimately about raising funds for court costs. Although the appeal was self represented, there were a number of costs associated with the case. Including the initial filing, sworn affidavits, and consulting fees.
Although not exuberant, they are a concern for a working father with a family to raise. Throughout this process several individuals indicated that they wanted to help, and some already had, but we wanted to give the broader community the opportunity to be engaged, and show that there are many in the community who are concerned with what is happening in our school district, province, and country. (As if 2034 signatures on a petition wasn’t enough of an indication.)
In fact, the district has not gotten this fact, as not only does a father of two have to worry about his own court costs, but the School Board has asked the Justice to make him pay for their court costs.
In the words of the Secretary, the precedent setting appeal on behalf of 2034 signatories is “frivolous and vexatious,” and the appellant should pay for daring to question the Board, and making them work to evaluate the petition. But that is OK, because our children are worth any cost, and parents will never back down from protecting their own from dangerous and oppressive policy.
And you know what? With only one week’s notice, residents of Medicine Hat showed this to be true, as the massive amount of donations in items for the yard sale, the purchase by others at the yard sale, and with the financial donations towards our efforts. In fact, between sales and donations, a total of $1721.90 was raised for court costs. Not bad for one weekend. Innumerable thanks to all those that bought from our yard sale, and donated to costs. You have no idea how encouraging this is to us. A special thanks to Crossroads Church for letting us use their facility for the yard sale. Could not have hoped for a better location!
So what of all the items that didn’t sell? The majority of the clothing items have already been donated to refugees via the Dream Center, and the remaining items are slated to be dropped of at the local Salvation Army thrift store later this week, to benefit the local community. There was just so much given by generous families, we didn’t have time to sell it all, nor would we have needed to. This was an incredible showing of the generosity of the residents of Medicine Hat, their concern for their children, for those people new to Canada, and those that are struggling in these difficult economic times.
This is an older story, but so many think that as a ‘separate’ school they will not be affected.
I am putting out a call to all those who ride and are able to appear in front of the Medicine Hat Court of Queens Bench: Thursday @8:30 am. To show your support of the Concerned Parents of SD76… If you want to stand up for parents and kids this is a great opportunity be show solidarity!
This is a group of Parents that have tried for over a year to have a meeting with the School Board concerning Procedure changes that were done behind closed doors in a private session..and for over a year have been denied!
The parents have had to take the School Board before the Court to insist that 2000 signatures that were gathered COUNT as voices of parents who want to talk.
NOW.. This Thursday Parents, and those who are willing to stand for the parents to be granted the RIGHT to meet and address their concerns to the SD76, will be gathering outside the Court Of Queen’s Bench in Medicine Hat.
Paid Activists have shown up before and like to intimidate supporters and create fear and chaos.
I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THIS HAPPEN HERE.
School is out that day, so there will be parents who will bring their children.
THIS IS WHERE YOU FOLKS COME IN
Your sheer presence will ANNOUNCE to those who would want to disrupt or bully, that such actions will NOT be tolerated.
If there is ONE thing those who ride command…IT IS RESPECT!
It says to those attending;
There will be NO Bullying
There will be NO intimidation
We have your back and we are watching!
We are currently working on reserving a chunk of parking for all of you who Ride down.
I am hoping we can make this happen! Please let me know if you are able to attend so I can get an approximate count for parking purposes.