So be it, Alberta.

So you’ve gone and reelected your UCP to a second term in power tonight.

I’m not from Alberta, never lived there, but I can’t help but feel some disappointment for large swaths of your province.

Your government, headed by a science/medical professional skeptic who has pledged to undermine public healthcare is bolstered with a fresh mandate to burn the thing down.

By tapping into an undercurrent of distrust of the feds, wilful ignorance of constitutional law means another predictable clash with Justin Trudeau. A clash the UCP will almost certainly lose…then blame on the corruption of the eastern elite.

Nothing really changes. But the people will suffer. The Alberta healthcare system is in crisis too. But their solution is to attack the front line workers trying to get the job done. There’s profound consequences to this policy direction.

When it comes to oil and gas, as an industry, I fear for Alberta. They should be adapting now, not fighting against the winds of change. Electric vehicle manufacturing is on the way up; and the requirement to do so is a federal mandate. Not that it matters, it’s a change made by a vehicle manufacturing industry which will have a devastating impact to the oil patch.. because their government lives in denial. So now Alberta will put even more eggs into this basket. Must be nice when the price of oil is so high. This trend doesn’t last forever, by the way.

But, who am I to tell the Alberta voter they’re wrong? I won’t. You’ll get to discover that. One painful step at a time.

My2bits

The coming vaccination mandates are a good thing. Finally.

To be clear, that in the free nations of the world, no government can force you to take a medication against your will. But they can inversely make life hard if you ‘choose’ not to.

This might sound heavy handed or unfair, but a government – who derives its authority to govern by the people who elect it – are required to keep safe those under its care and protection to the best of its ability.

This means that although they cannot force a pill down your gullet or a needle in your arm, they can require that in order to travel or participate in certain optional, economic based activities – you need to choose to be vaccinated. This isn’t to punish those unvaccinated, its to protect those who are – and those who cannot be vaccinated by means of medical exemption.

I understand how we got here. Governments of the world have been playing the nice guy trying to encourage folks to get their vaccines when they’re available; and to a large extent they have been successful. But we’re not yet at a high enough vaccine coverage to see a large scale herd immunity as the hesitancy and rejection of modern science is enough to poke holes in this effort. Through these holes, this disease caused by Covid19 is allowed to thrive and mutate into more sinister versions of itself.

These are as a result of some selfish thinking and I am personally tired of playing nice about it.

I recognize that vaccines aren’t perfect, some in fact have suffered from ‘vaccine injuries’ from the available covid19 vaccines and regrettably some have died – whether the vaccines themselves are to blame is unproven as yet. But the numbers of people who have endured some adverse reactions to covid19 vaccines pale in comparison to those who suffer and die at the hands of covid19 who were never vaccinated.

But a related argument against seat belts can be made here. A seat belt, worn correctly, may cause its own injury in a car accident – even contribute to a fatality. Though the scientific research and engineering that went into seat belts proved that their usage safe infinitely more lives than without. And, as you could have guessed, there was an equivalent blowback in the early 1980’s when seat belt laws made them mandatory – by the same sorts who would now argue that government shouldn’t require vaccines for the same reason.

There are those who hide behind a flawed interpretation of laws and constitutional rights to assert that government is over-reaching badly here. If government is doing anything poorly here, its communicating their intent.

Government has every right to ban smoking in public buildings for example. Smoking rights’ advocates will argue that this infringes on a persons medical condition – addiction. No. One can ingest nicotine without lighting up a smoke – and besides, its the right of the non-smoker who is subject to second hand smoke against their choice (workplace, public area, etc) that government is responding to.

So it must be with vaccines and vaccine mandates. They’re not to punish those who willingly choose to flout globally accepted science – its to protect those who are doing their part to keep safe. Its not about you, its about all of us – and we constitute a majority.

I take particular offense at those who invoke ‘faith’ as a reason to reject medical advice and science. Do you realize how hypocritical this is? If you accept in your faith that humanity was created in the image of our creator, then all knowledge and science has flowed from this creation was made possible by His hands.

God (or whatever your faith deems The Creator to be) gave us the tools and ability to look beyond primal needs. This is how humanity got itself to the moon, built high tech phones, high speed rails, ships, cars, planes, etc. All of it was enabled by that spark of life ‘in the beginning’.

But, you do you. Hide behind your selective interpretation of your faith. So be consistent about it at least. Go home and empty out your medicine cabinet – including your shelves of vitamins and supplements. No pain medications for you; no heart medicine, no insulin or whatever. If you believe that we’re protected by the Blood of our Savior and the natural immunity we’re born with, then throw everything else away.

While you’re at it, no cell phones, no TV, no technology beyond the tools and tech you can personally build with your hands – since all of it came from the various scientific discoveries that you have rejected.

For those arguing that the potential for vaccine mandates is equivalent to the onset of fascism and Nazi-style gas chambers (etc), that is the most absurd spin I have ever seen. Worse, it trivializes into a stupid talking point the real suffering by ethnic and religious groups who have been targeted in the past for state sponsored harassment and murder.

Look, I know there many who are apprehensive and downright scared about covid19 – and the vaccines designed to provide protection against it. You are not alone – and your fears are well heard.

All I can say to you is that the fastest way back to a normal life is to adhere to social distancing and masking rules as they’re needed and to obtain your vaccine when its available to you.

Hesitancy and rejection of vaccines will keep a large pool of unprotected people out there which serve as a fertile ground for covid19 to remain among us – and mutate into more sinister versions of itself…not to mention that we’ll continue to remain in a disruptive cycle of lock-downs and restrictions the longer this drawn out.

The sooner you join us and get your vaccine, the sooner you can help protect yourself, your family and your community – and the sooner you give covid19 no room left to grow.

My2bits

Serious question for the legal community

Considering free speech guarantees in the constitution, which is the First Amendment of the USA constitution and 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada, there are limits to the above freedoms.

Both countries place limits on what you can advocate, such as Canada’s criminal code sanctions on Hate Speech. And no where do you have the right to yell “fire” in a crowded theatre.

These limits have faced legal tests of their own in the supreme courts and have been validated over the years.

So my question for legal experts, can laws be passed that outlaws and criminalize any advocacy that runs opposite to public health orders? I mean if to yell “fire” in a theatre can get you a serious fine (or worse if your actions caused injury or death), then shouldn’t that apply to those opposing vaccinations? Flouting ‘stay-in-place’ orders?

We’re not talking about those who argue that earth is flat or that the moon landings were faked in a Hollywood studio. Making these arguments based on conspiracy theories is inconsequential; nobody can be harmed by how flat you feel the earth is. You might be called stupid or an idiot, but that’s your argument to make.

Those who argue against life saving medical advice and established science have a profound impact that could cost lives. That, in my opinion, is no different than the asshole who yells “fire” in a crowded theatre.

You have every right to follow whatever faith you wish; stand on your soapbox and bang the drum for (or against) whatever political cause or party you wish…and as repugnant as those views may be, I support your right to have them.

But I do not support you having the right to argue against life saving medical advice because *you* feel that it goes against your personally held beliefs.

In my belief system, I accept that we are all created in his (God’s) image. To me, that means that everything that exists today as we know it flows from this design. Including the medical science we have gleaned from years of experience and education. If we, human animals, were not intended to discover things and generally *advance*, then we’d be no different than any other mammal prowling the earth on instinct alone.

It’s not my place to judge how you interpret the articles of your faith, but if in the free practice of your faith you put my community, my family, and myself at grave risk by your actions, then your actions are akin to calling fire in that crowded theatre.

And there should be a law against it.

My2bits