After watching what has occurred in Colorado in the aftermath of marijuana legalization, some people in Canada are calling for legalization. They claim the drug is harmless and not highly addictive. They claim it is not a gateway to harder drugs. They claim that legalizing it will not cause an influx of users. They also claim it will greatly benefit society by allowing the government to collect taxes on the sale of it.
To claim marijuana is harmless is like saying smoking tobacco is harmless. We know smoking can lead to cancer including cancer in individuals who don't smoke themselves but are exposed to the smoke from other people's cigarettes. I don't know if smoking marijuana can lead to cancer like cigarettes but marijuana does alter your brain. Any substance that alters the way you perceive things or the way you think is dangerous. And how does long term marijuana use affect brain functions?
According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse website (http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana), marijuana affects brain development and if used heavily by youth it can affect thinking and memory for a long time or even permanently. "But youth won't be allowed to buy it," the pro-legalization camp counters. Really? How many of you know kids who started smoking cigarettes in their teens, or drinking alcohol, or using illegal drugs? I knew of kids that did and I grew up in a sheltered small town where most youth avoided those substances. Do you really think a teen won't find a way to get marijuana? They are getting it now and it isn't even legal yet. There were children in Colorado who took marijuana from their parents or grandparents and tried to sell it at school and they weren't even teenagers yet. According to a Denver Post article from November 2013 ( http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24501596/pot-problems-colorado-schools-increase-legalization) school officials are seeing an increase of infractions involving marijuana among students of middle and high schools. Colorado law prohibits marijuana for anyone under twenty-one. Just because the law says they can't have it doesn't mean a determined youth won't be able to get it.
The National Institute on Drug Abuse website also states that heart rates increase immediately after smoking marijuana and that smokers have an increased risk of heart attack especially if they are older or already have heart issues. Using marijuana also causes mental health issues. It can cause an increase in problems for those with certain mental illnesses like schizophrenia and long-term use can lead to psychosis. And don't even get me started on what it can do to a baby if the mom uses it while pregnant. We already have so many babies affected by alcohol and drugs while in utero do we really need to add to the problem?
Some claim that the police no longer want to enforce laws regarding possession and I understand why an officer does not want to go through the time and paperwork to arrest someone with one joint but that doesn't mean it should be legalized. I think they can come up with some kind of alternate way to deal with this kind of infraction without legalizing marijuana.
And what about the hazards imposed on others by marijuana smokers. Does secondhand marijuana smoke cause problems for those who happen to inhale it? I'm not sure but it is proven that driving while high from marijuana increases your chances of being in a collision and that can certainly have a negative impact on the other drivers on the road. The National Institute on Drug Abuse website states that marijuana mixed with alcohol increases impairment more than either substance on it's own. Can you imagine the danger posed by someone who goes to a party, has a few beers, smokes a joint or two and then decides to drive home?
In conclusion, I believe the dangers of marijuana use far outweigh any perceived benefits claimed by the pro-legalization supporters. Legalization will open up a Pandora's box that we will not be able to close again.
Tuesday, 20 May 2014
Saturday, 19 April 2014
What Are Your Kids Really Learning?--A Letter to Parents
Dear Parents,
This is not a letter to tell you how to be a better parent but simply an observation I've made over the past month that is worth thinking about. Some of my children are involved in dance and they love it. The oldest of these attended an out of town festival at the end of March. It was a good experience and she really enjoyed it. Some things that occurred at this festival prompted me to write this letter.
The first day of the festival my daughter's lyrical class performed. Due to the small size of the festival, there were different age and dance levels being adjudicated together. I have no problem with that as long as the adjudicator appears to be keeping that in mind when comparing the numbers. However, as my daughter and some of her friends were congratulating the other dancers, the kids from one of the other studios completely ignored them. Few things seem more rude to me than not acknowledging someone when they offer their congratulations. A smile, a nod, a simple thank you or even a reciprocation of congratulations is all it takes. You don't have to become best buddies afterwards. I don't know if this is a result of teacher instruction or some kind of competition mindset but it's a dance festival not the world championships.
The other thing I observed is that the aforementioned dance studio liked to put a whole bunch of younger dancers in with a few older star dancers and then compete in a lower age and level category while showcasing the star dancers. That's not to say their younger dancers weren't good but showcasing the great dancers all the time is not doing the other kids any good. One older boy would do a series of fouette turns or other such move while a bunch of younger girls would do simpler moves in the background. I was infinitely more impressed by a number from my daughter's studio that had five or six girls doing fouette turns at the same time and staying in sync, for the most part. The reason they could have choreography like that is because the girls were all at a similar skill level.
That is the thing that annoyed me the most, the obvious deception being perpetrated by the other studio in purposely putting their dancers together in such a way that they compete at a lower level and therefore have a better chance of "winning" against other kids who actually belong in the lower level.
I ask you parents: What are your kids really learning? When their dance studio or sports team pulls stunts like this what are the kids learning? Are they learning to do their best win or lose and to always be a good sport? Or are they learning that a little lying and deception are okay as long as you win? It's something to think about.
Sincerely,
Me
This is not a letter to tell you how to be a better parent but simply an observation I've made over the past month that is worth thinking about. Some of my children are involved in dance and they love it. The oldest of these attended an out of town festival at the end of March. It was a good experience and she really enjoyed it. Some things that occurred at this festival prompted me to write this letter.
The first day of the festival my daughter's lyrical class performed. Due to the small size of the festival, there were different age and dance levels being adjudicated together. I have no problem with that as long as the adjudicator appears to be keeping that in mind when comparing the numbers. However, as my daughter and some of her friends were congratulating the other dancers, the kids from one of the other studios completely ignored them. Few things seem more rude to me than not acknowledging someone when they offer their congratulations. A smile, a nod, a simple thank you or even a reciprocation of congratulations is all it takes. You don't have to become best buddies afterwards. I don't know if this is a result of teacher instruction or some kind of competition mindset but it's a dance festival not the world championships.
The other thing I observed is that the aforementioned dance studio liked to put a whole bunch of younger dancers in with a few older star dancers and then compete in a lower age and level category while showcasing the star dancers. That's not to say their younger dancers weren't good but showcasing the great dancers all the time is not doing the other kids any good. One older boy would do a series of fouette turns or other such move while a bunch of younger girls would do simpler moves in the background. I was infinitely more impressed by a number from my daughter's studio that had five or six girls doing fouette turns at the same time and staying in sync, for the most part. The reason they could have choreography like that is because the girls were all at a similar skill level.
That is the thing that annoyed me the most, the obvious deception being perpetrated by the other studio in purposely putting their dancers together in such a way that they compete at a lower level and therefore have a better chance of "winning" against other kids who actually belong in the lower level.
I ask you parents: What are your kids really learning? When their dance studio or sports team pulls stunts like this what are the kids learning? Are they learning to do their best win or lose and to always be a good sport? Or are they learning that a little lying and deception are okay as long as you win? It's something to think about.
Sincerely,
Me
Friday, 14 March 2014
Why this is what it is and the Putin Problem.
I realized today that I haven't posted anything since before Christmas. It's not for a lack of topics, believe me. I could talk about Vladimir Putin and how I don't trust a guy who manages to stay in power by becoming Prime Minister when his term as President is up and then as soon as the next election comes along, becomes President again. Obviously the guy likes being in charge or he wouldn't stick around so long. Makes me wonder if he's going to become a dictator. He's already trying to take over parts of the Ukraine under some of the flimsiest excuses I have encountered since learning about what led up to WWII in Social Studies.
I didn't really intend for this blog to be my take on current events but if I didn't write about things like that you would just see post after post about my kids. Don't get me wrong, I think my kids are wonderful but there are enough blogs out there about the joys and hardships of motherhood. That's just not my thing. I have always been a strongly opinionated person when it comes to politics and current events. I get that from my dad. In fact, my high school Social Studies teacher commented to my mom once about how obvious it was that politics and current events were discussed in our home. So you can thank, or blame, my upbringing for this blog.
Back to Putin, like I said I don't trust the guy. He didn't even crack a smile during the closing ceremony of the Sochi Olympics, at least not on camera. How can you not smile at the Olympics? Maybe he's just not the smiling type but it just seemed weird. Then all this stuff with the Crimean Peninsula occurred and I was not surprised. Those who think Russia is not a country to be wary of are very wrong. How many times did the UN Security Council try to take action over different things only to be vetoed by Russia? I can't believe Russia disagreed for any other reason than that it didn't suit their purposes to have the proposed action take place. Maybe the United States has done the same thing too but not recently that I've heard.
So what is the rest of the world supposed to do about this development? Are we just supposed to roll-over and let Russia have the Crimean Peninsula? Sure there is going to be a referendum over it where the people living there are going to vote on the issue but can we really trust that the election will be fair and honest. How do we know the election won't be rigged in Russia's favour? And if Russia gets the Crimean Peninsula then what? Will they next decide one part of the Ukraine is not enough and take over the whole thing? Is this scenario starting to sound familiar? If not, you need to go study the events that led up to WWII starting with the appeasement policy of other countries in regards to Hitler's actions before he decided to take over Poland.
Do I think we are headed into another World War? I don't know. I really hope not but at the same time we can't just let Russia waltz in and take over its neighbours.
I didn't really intend for this blog to be my take on current events but if I didn't write about things like that you would just see post after post about my kids. Don't get me wrong, I think my kids are wonderful but there are enough blogs out there about the joys and hardships of motherhood. That's just not my thing. I have always been a strongly opinionated person when it comes to politics and current events. I get that from my dad. In fact, my high school Social Studies teacher commented to my mom once about how obvious it was that politics and current events were discussed in our home. So you can thank, or blame, my upbringing for this blog.
Back to Putin, like I said I don't trust the guy. He didn't even crack a smile during the closing ceremony of the Sochi Olympics, at least not on camera. How can you not smile at the Olympics? Maybe he's just not the smiling type but it just seemed weird. Then all this stuff with the Crimean Peninsula occurred and I was not surprised. Those who think Russia is not a country to be wary of are very wrong. How many times did the UN Security Council try to take action over different things only to be vetoed by Russia? I can't believe Russia disagreed for any other reason than that it didn't suit their purposes to have the proposed action take place. Maybe the United States has done the same thing too but not recently that I've heard.
So what is the rest of the world supposed to do about this development? Are we just supposed to roll-over and let Russia have the Crimean Peninsula? Sure there is going to be a referendum over it where the people living there are going to vote on the issue but can we really trust that the election will be fair and honest. How do we know the election won't be rigged in Russia's favour? And if Russia gets the Crimean Peninsula then what? Will they next decide one part of the Ukraine is not enough and take over the whole thing? Is this scenario starting to sound familiar? If not, you need to go study the events that led up to WWII starting with the appeasement policy of other countries in regards to Hitler's actions before he decided to take over Poland.
Do I think we are headed into another World War? I don't know. I really hope not but at the same time we can't just let Russia waltz in and take over its neighbours.
Tuesday, 10 December 2013
The Consequences of a Litigation-happy Society
A twelve year old Ontario boy died last year due to a severe asthma attack at school. His inhaler was kept in the office and he was not allowed to carry a spare one. His teachers continually confiscated any inhalers he brought to school. He was only allowed the one inhaler in the office but what good did it do him on that fatal day?
I have a cousin who has suffered from severe asthma her entire life. She always had an inhaler on hand and whenever she started having the slightest trouble breathing she would use it. At school, at home or playing around the neighbourhood she always had it with her. This led to her losing it on occasion but she never went anywhere without an inhaler. I would often end up carrying it for her if she didn't have any pockets in her outfit but I didn't mind too much. It felt a little bulky in my pocket but it was life-saving medicine for her.
I mention this because my cousin could have died had she not been allowed to always have her inhaler on hand. A member of the Ontario government has put forward a private member's bill to allow asthma-suffering students to carry a spare inhaler with them at school. Why does this even have to be legislated? Because we have become such a litigation-happy society that schools are faced with liability issues if somehow something bad happened as a result of a child carrying around his/her life-saving medication.
Society as a whole needs to stop looking for someone else to blame every time something bad/unforeseen happens. If your child takes someone else's medication whose fault is it really? Is it the fault of the school? the child who had the medication? his/her parents? The true answer, none of the above. It is your child's fault for getting into something that is not his/hers and if you didn't teach him/her not to touch other people's belongings without permission then you are to blame too.
It's time for the legal system to crack down on irresponsible lawsuits and throw out ones that a little common sense would tell you are absolutely ridiculous. The reason some of these lawsuits happen is because some lawyer sees a chance to make some money and the person suing wants someone to blame for something that may in fact be his/her own fault.
What is the result of all these frivolous lawsuits? Schools are so afraid of being held liable for things that they come up with policies that killed an innocent twelve year old boy. Shame on all you frivolous people whose lawsuits led to this sort of thing. I hope you are so proud of yourselves for making such a difference in this world that a little boy is no longer in it.
I have a cousin who has suffered from severe asthma her entire life. She always had an inhaler on hand and whenever she started having the slightest trouble breathing she would use it. At school, at home or playing around the neighbourhood she always had it with her. This led to her losing it on occasion but she never went anywhere without an inhaler. I would often end up carrying it for her if she didn't have any pockets in her outfit but I didn't mind too much. It felt a little bulky in my pocket but it was life-saving medicine for her.
I mention this because my cousin could have died had she not been allowed to always have her inhaler on hand. A member of the Ontario government has put forward a private member's bill to allow asthma-suffering students to carry a spare inhaler with them at school. Why does this even have to be legislated? Because we have become such a litigation-happy society that schools are faced with liability issues if somehow something bad happened as a result of a child carrying around his/her life-saving medication.
Society as a whole needs to stop looking for someone else to blame every time something bad/unforeseen happens. If your child takes someone else's medication whose fault is it really? Is it the fault of the school? the child who had the medication? his/her parents? The true answer, none of the above. It is your child's fault for getting into something that is not his/hers and if you didn't teach him/her not to touch other people's belongings without permission then you are to blame too.
It's time for the legal system to crack down on irresponsible lawsuits and throw out ones that a little common sense would tell you are absolutely ridiculous. The reason some of these lawsuits happen is because some lawyer sees a chance to make some money and the person suing wants someone to blame for something that may in fact be his/her own fault.
What is the result of all these frivolous lawsuits? Schools are so afraid of being held liable for things that they come up with policies that killed an innocent twelve year old boy. Shame on all you frivolous people whose lawsuits led to this sort of thing. I hope you are so proud of yourselves for making such a difference in this world that a little boy is no longer in it.
Friday, 18 October 2013
One More Day
If you could spend one day with anyone living or dead who would it be? Would you choose an amazing historical figure? Or a precious loved one lost too soon? Before March 2012 I probably would have chosen a great person from history, maybe Joan of Arc or one of the biblical prophets like Isaiah. What happened in March 2012 to change my mind? My father died from pancreatic cancer. He was the rock of our family, the one person everyone could go to for a listening ear, helping hand, or understanding heart. Family was everything to him and anyone marrying in was immediately included.
He would listen to me babble on, sometimes for over an hour, about anything and everything from current events and political issues to what my children were doing that day. If he was watching the television, he wouldn't say, "I'll call you back later," but would mute it and listen to whatever was the problem.
If something was going wonky with one of our vehicles I would always phone him, tell him what was happening, and hear his suggestions before heading off to the mechanic. If we needed a new vehicle he would find it for us. In February we traded in the last minivan he found for us. It was a bittersweet moment as we really needed a newer van but there was another connection to my father that had to be given up. It may seem strange to someone else, especially if they aren't the sentimental type but it meant a little something to me. I didn't cry or anything like that but I did think of my dad as I got out of that van for the last time.
Seeing my dad's lawn and garden being carefully tended by others was a little strange. Sitting in my sister's house last summer, which is next-door to my parents' house, I would often expect to see my dad walk out the back door and head across the lawn to move a sprinkler or do some gardening.
I miss him most when I really need advice on something. He could always calm me down when I was getting too upset and he always had some advice even if it was simply to search out the answer myself because he didn't have a clue. So if I was magically given one day with anyone, I would choose my dad. I would tell him what we were all up to and give him a huge hug. But most of all I would tell him goodbye because in the end I never really got that chance. Why not I love you? Because I told him that every time I talked to him after his diagnosis was determined to be terminal. I will never have to regret that my final words to him were something stupid or angry. My father always knew I loved him and I always knew he loved me.
I know that when I leave this life I will see my father again so wishing for one more day with him in this life seems a little stupid but I don't care. I would give anything to see him one last time for a hug and goodbyes. I love you, Dad!
He would listen to me babble on, sometimes for over an hour, about anything and everything from current events and political issues to what my children were doing that day. If he was watching the television, he wouldn't say, "I'll call you back later," but would mute it and listen to whatever was the problem.
If something was going wonky with one of our vehicles I would always phone him, tell him what was happening, and hear his suggestions before heading off to the mechanic. If we needed a new vehicle he would find it for us. In February we traded in the last minivan he found for us. It was a bittersweet moment as we really needed a newer van but there was another connection to my father that had to be given up. It may seem strange to someone else, especially if they aren't the sentimental type but it meant a little something to me. I didn't cry or anything like that but I did think of my dad as I got out of that van for the last time.
Seeing my dad's lawn and garden being carefully tended by others was a little strange. Sitting in my sister's house last summer, which is next-door to my parents' house, I would often expect to see my dad walk out the back door and head across the lawn to move a sprinkler or do some gardening.
I miss him most when I really need advice on something. He could always calm me down when I was getting too upset and he always had some advice even if it was simply to search out the answer myself because he didn't have a clue. So if I was magically given one day with anyone, I would choose my dad. I would tell him what we were all up to and give him a huge hug. But most of all I would tell him goodbye because in the end I never really got that chance. Why not I love you? Because I told him that every time I talked to him after his diagnosis was determined to be terminal. I will never have to regret that my final words to him were something stupid or angry. My father always knew I loved him and I always knew he loved me.
I know that when I leave this life I will see my father again so wishing for one more day with him in this life seems a little stupid but I don't care. I would give anything to see him one last time for a hug and goodbyes. I love you, Dad!
Wednesday, 9 October 2013
Morality
I think too many people in the world today are confusing legal with moral. What is the difference? Legal means allowed by law. Moral refers to what is right and good. Aren't all things allowed by law moral? Not in the eyes of God. Yes, I am a religious person and as my blog states, "I Just Want to be Me." I will not hide the fact that I am religious. Nor will I hide the fact that I belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
I wiser person than me recently stated, "Man's laws cannot make moral what God has declared immoral." (Dallin H. Oaks Semiannual General Conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. October 5, 2013) In other words, something that is legal isn't necessarily right or good. Take abortion for example.
Many people think abortion is okay since it's a woman's body it should be her choice whether to allow a pregnancy to continue. In fact, abortion is far too common in some places where boys are favored over girls. Morally, abortion in all but a few extraordinary circumstances is wrong. As for the argument that it is the woman's choice she made her choice when she had sex, knowing that sex can often result in pregnancy. What about rape/incest victims? Well, that falls into the extraordinary circumstances category that I mentioned earlier. Gordon B. Hinckley in an October 1998 General Conference address stated: Abortion is an ugly thing, a debasing thing, a thing which inevitably brings remorse and sorrow and regret. While we denounce it, we make allowance in such circumstances as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have serious defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. (Nov.1998 Ensign)
He goes on to state that such circumstances are rare. I found a website that listed some stats on rape pregnancies. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8765248 I was surprised to see that only 50% of the women studied chose to abort the baby. Some had spontaneous abortions which I believe means miscarriage but many chose to allow the pregnancy to continue. These women chose to either keep the baby or place it for adoption. I was surprised at how many chose to keep the baby.
So if a woman who was forced to have sex can decide to let her baby live, why can't a woman who willingly had sex? Legal does not mean moral. I think it's time people stopped confusing the two.
So if a woman who was forced to have sex can decide to let her baby live, why can't a woman who willingly had sex? Legal does not mean moral. I think it's time people stopped confusing the two.
Saturday, 5 October 2013
Mountains Out of Molehills
Why are people so determined to make mountains out of molehills? I don't know if we are all guilty of it but I know I have been on occasion. Looking back, I feel like such an idiot for worrying about a minor detail that meant nothing in the grand scheme of things. What I don't understand is why some people look at something that has been around for ages and say to themselves, "I think that's offensive. I'm going to lobby the government to do something about it."
What I am referring to is a group of women in Canada who want to change the lyrics to O Canada from "in all thy sons command" to "in all of us command" thereby making it more gender neutral. I have read comments on this subject through social media and while I understand that O Canada has had some minor lyric changes in the past why should this be changed just because a group of women decided to complain about it. Do these women represent the majority of Canadian women? I have serious doubts about it since there has never been a huge public outcry or protests over it.
I feel that there are much larger issues facing women than the lyrics to O Canada. There are women who are struggling to feed and house themselves and their families. There are women who have suffered horrible abuse from those who should have loved them. There are women in this world denied an education simply because they are women. And there are those who are not even given the chance to draw breath let alone grow to become women because they are aborted in favor of male children.
Why can't the women who are so concerned with something so minor focus their energy and influence towards these issues? I am so disappointed to find that in a world full of bigger issues they have chosen something so petty and are trying to get the Canadian government to focus on it too when there are far more pressing matters that need to be addressed. To these women I say: Quit wasting your time and find a real issue to worry about.
I am tired of petty little molehills being turned into insurmountable mountains. There are enough mountains in this world that we must conquer. Leave the molehills to the moles and try to make the world a better place, especially for those women who have been given an Everest to climb.
What I am referring to is a group of women in Canada who want to change the lyrics to O Canada from "in all thy sons command" to "in all of us command" thereby making it more gender neutral. I have read comments on this subject through social media and while I understand that O Canada has had some minor lyric changes in the past why should this be changed just because a group of women decided to complain about it. Do these women represent the majority of Canadian women? I have serious doubts about it since there has never been a huge public outcry or protests over it.
I feel that there are much larger issues facing women than the lyrics to O Canada. There are women who are struggling to feed and house themselves and their families. There are women who have suffered horrible abuse from those who should have loved them. There are women in this world denied an education simply because they are women. And there are those who are not even given the chance to draw breath let alone grow to become women because they are aborted in favor of male children.
Why can't the women who are so concerned with something so minor focus their energy and influence towards these issues? I am so disappointed to find that in a world full of bigger issues they have chosen something so petty and are trying to get the Canadian government to focus on it too when there are far more pressing matters that need to be addressed. To these women I say: Quit wasting your time and find a real issue to worry about.
I am tired of petty little molehills being turned into insurmountable mountains. There are enough mountains in this world that we must conquer. Leave the molehills to the moles and try to make the world a better place, especially for those women who have been given an Everest to climb.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)