#opendebate

Maybe the teachers need to sit outside the headmaster’s office

If kids want to strike and learn to protest, shouldn’t we the public be able to see whether the children are being constructively taught both sides of the argument in class before they paint placards? CM has a strong feeling that only “one” side of the climate story is being pushed – the alarmist one. Skeptical kids should live in fear of detention.

Perhaps that should be the litmus test – if teachers are proud of getting kids to form such demonstrations, they should not be afraid to allow open access to what they’re teaching. Something tells me they wouldn’t dare because it would prove their own bias beyond doubt.

Here are three things CM would do:

Make the kids debate both sides of the argument in detail. Make them think. Research. Investigate.

Conduct an ethics class to show the countless lies, scandals and whistleblowers outing even government agencies on fabricating data. Kids know what happens when they lie. Perhaps they would grow up to be questioning about what bias they’re fed.

Do an economic feasibility study on renewables vs fossil fuels. Let students decide on whether investing their futures in renewables for zero outcome by 2100 makes sense. Teach them that renewables aren’t cheaper than fossil fuels for two reasons – first, fossil fuel prices are plummeting and second renewable calculations are based on 100% operating capacity which is unrealistic in the extreme. Put them at 20% and renewables are 5x more expensive relatively speaking.

If after thorough and rigorous debate the kids still believed they’re doomed then they can protest their little hearts out.

What it proves is that school faculties are pushing political agendas rather than education. We teach kids that lying is bad and there are consequences for doing so. Shouldn’t teachers be put on the naughty step for doing the same?

CM worries about their future indeed. Oh and it won’t be global warming that kills them. Their dreams have a far higher risk of being killed off through the activism peddled by their teachers. Say, have the teachers told the kids about those alarmists warning childbirth as a cause for future warming?

Karl Marx would be proud.

Who is bullying who?

91687A7F-8B64-492A-8C34-B7D6D4164A4E.jpeg

For all of the sanctimonious actions of the left can we be surprised by the surge of American citizens rushing to protect their constitutional rights? NRA members being labeled criminals and having blood on their hands by a bunch of kids shows how the loss of the lives of 17 youths has turned into a sick political circus. NRA members have not been responsible for any mass shoootings. Anyone with a pulse knows how sick mass shootings are. No one doubts the trauma caused. No one wants gun violence, least of all the NRA. It is never in their interests to have a shooting. Period.  Most people outside America can’t fathom why anyone needs a gun. Yet the adults corralling these kids are only too happy to back their martyrdom. They should know better than to use children this way.

Since the march on Washington we’ve seen defacto spokesman David Hogg be outed for lying where he was at the time of the shooting. He led the speeches, threw his defiant salute at the end and got the media’s praise. What wasn’t covered by the mainstream media was the fact that he hung up on the office of the White House in the middle of a call ahead of the event which showed his immaturity then allowed his fame to get the better of him by rattling off an expletive laden rant – “Sadly, that’s what we have to do with our government because our parents don’t know how to use a f***ing democracy so we have to do it.”

Hogg totally ignored the facts that could have prevented the tragedy. He glossed over the fact that automatic rifles account for less than 3% of firearm deaths. He overlooked the fact that 10% of schools in America have metal detectors and almost half have drug sniffer dogs. No words about the surge in single parent households and all of the psychological knock on effects of that. Of course it is the NRA’s fault as he aptly described them, “…The pathetic f***ers that want to keep killing our children, they could have blood from children splattered all over their faces and they wouldn’t take action because they all still see those dollar signs…”

Cuban flag bearing student Emma Gonzalez admitted she’d bullied the shooter Nikolas Cruz.  Yet adults around the world celebrate their bravery. The Democrats even had voter registration booths to take advantage of a day which was supposed to be about one thing – gun control. One Parkland survivor, Kyle Kashuv, showed how gun control is but a small part of the problem. In his view bullying of outcasts, single parent households and the 78 glaring oversights by the FBI and law enforcement over several years which might have prevented the tragedy are far bigger issues. Yet the media gives it next to no airtime.

Take cyber bullying stats from the Association of Psychological Science in the US. In 2015 more than 16,000 young people were absent from school daily because of bullying. 83% of young people say cyber bullying has a negative impact on their self-esteem. 30% of young people have gone on to self-harm as a result of cyberbullying. 10% of young people have attempted to commit suicide as a result of cyberbullying. People who have been bullied are at greatest risk for health problems in adulthood, over six times more likely to be diagnosed with a serious illness, smoke regularly, or develop a psychiatric disorder compared to those not involved in bullying. In the US alone, suicides per 100,000 head of population since 2000 are up 38% according to WHO.

There is no problem with protesting under the guise of free speech provided it is done respectfully and with fact. This whole episode completely dismisses the dead kids and pushes an activist agenda. The media is just as shameful. One can be pretty certain that if the NRA was able to have reasoned debates on solutions a far better outcome would occur than openly outing innocent civilians as silent killers.

The idea of possessing a gun is irrational to CM but the growing trend of trying to shut down open debate, free speech and demonization if innocent people is a growing trend around the world.

Forcing voters to become eunuchs by slicing off their free speech

IMG_0862.JPG

Kiss your free speech good-bye. Australia is going straight down the slippery slope of Canada in seeking to shut down the expression of open legitimate debate. Labor Senator Louise Pratt broke down today after explaining the horrid episode of receiving an anti-same sex marriage (SSM) pamphlet when going to the shops with her 3yr-old son and his three fathers. Instead of refuting the content of the anti-SSM pamphlet with facts (and her own experience) she chose to break down and claim how she could not bear reliving the content. Yes, she played a victim. She got a consoling hug from a Greens senator. By her own admission she said that the “no” campaigners have already lost the argument and will lose the vote. If that is the case then why the tears? Get on the front foot and defend your beliefs Senator Pratt rather than run to the bosom of totalitarian protections. If the plebiscite is carried the “No” campaigners will accept democracy.

Now we will have emergency laws that will prosecute someone who expresses a legitimate opinion with fines of up to $12,600. Who decides what constitutes hurting someone’s feelings? The PM only last week said that “we can rely on the wisdom and decency of the Australian people to decide on same sex marriage.” Three days later these same people will be muzzled. Why do we need people policing citizens for holding legitimate beliefs? We can be sure that if pro-SSM people abuse Anti-SSM then nothing will happen. We already have a gay Fairfax journalist who spoke of hate-f*cking politicians who didn’t support SSM to drive out their homophobia. I would bet that he wouldn’t get charged under this new law. It only applies to the dinosaurs and their antiquated backward thinking. Activists tried to get a doctor struck off the register for holding a belief in traditional marriage. Archbishops have been dragged before courts and hotels threatened if they allow anti-SSM meetings to take place.

Shame on the Conservatives to roll over so easily on this subject. The sad reality is that most people made up their minds way before the vote has even taken place. I don’t need WordPress to adorn my blog page with rainbow flag backed buttons and I do not need Subway to tell me to vote SSM when I buy a sandwich. I don’t need Qantas to give me an acceptance ring and I certainly don’t need tax dollars squandered on one side of the debate only. I couldn’t care less with those who want to virtue signal with their Facebook avatars with “I’m voting yes”. Good for you. None of that peer pressure would convince me in anyway on which way I would vote. The beauty of a polling booth is that you can vote how you like. Yet this day and age is all about vilifying non compliance to activism

Yet our government shows its cowardice and even worse, contempt for the public. In an attempt to gag free speech people will be told what they can and can’t say. Holding beliefs which are perfectly acceptable on rational grounds will be policed and removed from the Newspeak dictionary. I am sure the Australian Human Rights Commission is rubbing its hands with glee to take more control of the nanny state.

Not supporting SSM doesn’t make one a homophobe but that is how the activists seek to mock and ridicule non-conformity. Ramrodding gender fluidity and cross dressing in kindergarten and primary schools is just another shift in removing the ability to protect traditional values. In the majority of cases, the best outcome for children is to have their biological mother and father as parents. It shouldn’t be seen as hateful to think like that.

Once again, bit by bit freedoms are being removed. California is looking to introduce laws to prosecute people for using the wrong pronoun. Do we seriously need the judicial system to be clogging up the courts with such petty matters? Canada’s M-103 and Ontario’s M-89. More laws to shut people up. It is appalling. Free speech is an absolute unalienable right. Just because one might not agree with another doesn’t make it hate speech. Yet our laws will ensure that anything outside of the newspeak dictionary will get people prosecuted.

People ask me why I left the Liberal Party of Australia. I say, “I didn’t leave them, they left me!”