Albert’s Family Restaurant at Bonnie Doon Mall
Sunday, February 26, 2012
9:00am

We’ll have something with the SEA logo on the table, and will probably be at a table close to the front right, or in the back left.

The complaint submissions sent by Donna Hunter and three other Morinville parents have been accepted by the Alberta Human Rights Commission under Section 4 of the Alberta Human Rights Act. It was welcome news after the complaint submission sent by Donna Hunter and another Morinville parent under Section 11.1 of the AHRA was not accepted in January. The two parents have since requested a review of the AHRC director’s decision to decline the Section 11.1 complaints. The parents have not heard back yet on this request.

Read more here:
Standing up for the rights of Albertans: Morinville parents deserve respect for efforts to get education access by Paula Simons http://www.edmontonjournal.com/life/Standing+rights+Albertans/6174391/story.html

Human Rights Commission hears Morinville schools complaint by Matthew Bisson
http://www.inews880.com/Channels/Reg/LocalNews/story.aspx?ID=1657043

Human Rights Commission to investigate Morinville parents complaint by CTV Edmonton
http://edmonton.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20120218/EDM_morinville_120218/20120218/?hub=EdmontonHome

Section 4 of the AHRA states:

Discrimination re goods, services, accommodation, facilities

4 No person shall

(a) deny to any person or class of persons any goods,

services, accommodation or facilities that are customarily

available to the public, or

(b) discriminate against any person or class of persons with

respect to any goods, services, accommodation or

facilities that are customarily available to the public,

because of the race, religious beliefs, colour, gender, physical

disability, mental disability, ancestry, place of origin, marital

status, source of income, family status or sexual orientation of that

person or class of persons or of any other person or class of

persons.

The full Act can be found here: http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/A25P5.pdf

The complaint process

The Commission keeps all parties to a complaint informed during the complaint process and welcomes questions at any time. The complainant is the person who makes the complaint. The respondent is the person, organization, or association being complained about. Together they are called the “parties” to the complaint. A brief outline of the human rights complaint process is provided below. For more detailed information, please contact the Commission.

At any time during the complaint process, you may close your complaint by informing the Commission in writing.

Notifying the respondent

After the Commission accepts your complaint, we send a copy of the complaint (excluding your contact information) to the respondent. The respondent has 21 days from the date when they receive the copy of the complaint to respond to the Commission.

Sharing the response with the complainant

The Commission sends a copy of the response to the complainant.

Conciliation

Conciliation is a voluntary way of resolving differences. The Commission assigns a conciliator to try to help the parties resolve their differences. In most complaints, this is the first step after the complainant receives a copy of the response. If the parties resolve their differences, the complaint is closed. If the parties cannot resolve their differences, or if one or both of the parties decline conciliation, the complaint goes to the investigation step of the complaint process.

Investigation

At this step, the Commission assigns an investigator and informs the parties. The purpose of the investigation is to gather information related to the complaint, consult with the parties on the results of the investigation, and assess whether there is a reasonable basis to proceed with the complaint process.

Settlement

If the investigation shows that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with the complaint process, the Commission will ask the parties to reach a settlement.

Dismissal

If the investigation does not show that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with the complaint process, then the complaint is dismissed.

Discontinuance

The director of the Commission may discontinue a complaint if the director believes that the complainant has refused to accept a settlement offer that is fair and reasonable.

Appeals to the chief commissioner

If a complainant does not agree with a dismissal or discontinuance, the complainant can make a written appeal to the chief commissioner within 30 days of receiving the Notice of Dismissal or Notice of Discontinuance. For more information about the appeal process, see the Commission’s information sheet Complaint Process.

Referral to a human rights panel

In the event that there is a reasonable basis for the complaint but the parties are unable to settle, the director will refer the complaint to the chief commissioner, who appoints a human rights panel to hear the case. For more information about the human rights panel process, visit the Human Rights Complaints section of the Commission’s Web site or contact the Commission.

Source: http://www.albertahumanrights.ab.ca/documents/complaintform-guide.pdf

One couple challenged the mandatory classes in the courts, on the basis of their Charter rights.

According to the Supreme Court’s case summary, the parents have a problem with the course because of the “disruption caused by forced, premature contact with a series of beliefs that were mostly incompatible with those of the family, as well as the adverse effect on the religious faith of the members of this family.”

In other words, they didn’t want their children to know that other religions exist. Too bad, it’s Canada. The Supreme Court seems to think that too, and rejected the case:

Unless it can be found that any exposure of children to realities that differ from those in their family environment is unacceptable in light of the constitutional or quasi-constitutional protection conferred on freedom of religion, [the court] cannot conclude that the appellants have been able to prove their case.

Now, it’s just too bad that the class doesn’t explicitly include atheism.

Further reading:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/02/16/supreme-court-canada-religion-education-challenge.html?cmp=rss

http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2011/05/18/supreme-court-should-support-quebec-religion-and-ethics-class/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2008/08/27/mtl-ethicscours0827.html

Recently on the SEA Facebook page there was some discussion about the Speech from the Throne made by Alberta’s Lieutenant Governor, Don Ethell.  There was criticism levelled at the Speech for what as I see as two main issues:  the content of the Speech itself and then about references made to God at the conclusion of the Speech.  It quickly became clear that I am in the minority as I see no fault with the Lieutenant Governor’s remarks and see no reason to criticize the man or office, at least in this case.  So, let me explain my reasoning on each issue.

Content
Regarding the content of the Speech, it is not the responsibility of the Lieutenant Governor.  He or she simply reads what is provided to them by the government of the day.  The content of the Speech is the sole responsibility of that government and most often of the Premier at the time. 

The Lieutenant Governor has no legislative role other than providing Royal Assent to bills passed by the Legislative Assembly.  They cannot introduce, endorse or criticize proposed legislation until and unless it comes before them after having been passed in the Legislative Assembly.  Even then, Royal Assent can only be withheld if the Lieutenant Governor deems the legislation to infringe on the rights of Albertans or intrudes upon Federal authority.

So, while there may very well be grounds to criticize the content of the Speech from the Throne, the responsibility for the content of this speech rests squarely with the current government of Alberta and Premier Redford, and not with the Lieutenant Governor.  More information about the role and duties of the Lieutenant Governor is available at www.lieutenantgovernor.ab.ca/141.htm.

God
As for the Lieutenant Governor’s remarks about God, the question is, are they appropriate?  At the close of the speech, he said, “May God bless you all. God bless Alberta. God bless Canada. God save the Queen.”

My answer is “yes”.  While I am certainly an atheist and wish that it wasn’t appropriate for the Lieutenant Governor to refer to God in an official capacity, my wish has no bearing on the reality of the situation.  So, why is it appropriate for him to have made such remarks?  There are several reasons and we need to look at them individually.

The Lieutenant Governor is the representative of Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth II.  As such, his authority derives from Her and it is the Lieutenant Governor’s obligation to discharge his duties in the way in which Her Majesty would.  In addition to being Queen, Elizabeth II holds a number of other titles, much as all her predecessors did.  In amongst these are two that are of significance to this issue:  Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

Elizabeth II is not merely the Head of State of Canada (and some small collection of islands off mainland Europe), but she holds the title of Supreme Governor of the Church of England.  Many folks imagine that the Archbishop of Canterbury is the head of the Church and is on equal footing with Pope Benedict XVI.  He is not, he is subordinate to Her Majesty and she is the equal of the Pope, at least in ecclesiastical matters. 

The title Defender of the Faith is a separate position and dates back to 1521 when it was conferred upon Henry VIII by Pope Leo X.  This simply reinforces Her Majesty’s position as having a religious role and authority.  Simply put, Elizabeth II is a religious leader as much as the head of any government so it is entirely appropriate for any of her representatives to speak of God at any time during the course of their duties.

Finally, we do not live in a secular nation.  There are certainly grounds for the claim to be made that we live in a “Christian nation”, far more so than the claim could be made in the United States.  Why do I say this?  The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html) opens with these words:

“Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:”

Notice that “God” is initially capitalized.  The authors of the Charter had a very specific god in mind and it isn’t Odin, Zeus, Quetzacoatl, Shiva or Gaia.  Let me make this point very clear, it is not just a passing government of the day that recognizes a god.  It is the very foundational documents of our nation that recognize the existence of a very specific God.

Now do I agree that this is the way things should be?  No.  I wish Her Majesty would divest herself of the titles Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England.  I wish our foundational documents were amended to remove any recognition of a god(s) or God.  But just like the fantasies of the religious, my wishes have no impact on the reality of the situation.  It will take work to change things.  So, are we all up to it?  That really is the question that matters.

I think that we have all seen some pretty spectacular over-reactions by Christians to some fairly inoffensive billboards and bus ads. So the question comes up, is it possible to run pro-atheism ads without offending fundies? Well, an atheist group in Scranton, Pennsylvania is trying to find out, by putting up the least offensive ad they could come up with, and waiting to see what kind of reaction they get.

http://m.examiner.com/atheism-in-philadelphia/atheist-bus-ad-to-put-christians-to-the-test

On Thursday November 24th, 2011, two friends and myself attended a talk that the churches on our base in CFB Cold Lake, AB were hosting at the base theatre. The company is called Creation Ministries International (CMI). We had been made aware of their talk a few days earlier with a flier in a friend’s mailbox. We decided to go, mainly to see what they were about, and maybe to ask questions. We spent the couple of nights leading up to the talk going over their website reading up on their topic of the talk. It is called Genesis: The Missing Piece of the Puzzle. We combed through our personal science books and the Bible. Also, we watched a video about the “great flood”.

By the time of the talk, we felt quite confident that we had enough information to answer any of their questions. I had even received an email from Dr. Michael Shermer (The Believing Brain, Skeptic Magazine) with an excellent question (Sadly, we never got to ask his question).

The speaker was Calvin Smith, A very polite and charismatic individual. He remained consistent to CMI’s beliefs. He said they were Christian apologetics that defend the Bible against science. He made it clear that atheists are the enemy. His talk was a PowerPoint presentation that very much centered on the fact that they, as Christians, must take the Bible as true through and through. If not, then Jesus died for no reason, and their whole belief structure would crumble. He gave no evidence to any truth behind the stories in the Bible. Any science he “refuted” was dealt with briefly, usually by changing the subject or saying that believing that would mean the Bible was wrong. He spent a bit of time using quotes from Richard Dawkins and bashing him, and also pigeonholing atheists in the same old “Atheism is a religion, they have no morals, etc…” way.

At the end of his presentation, he opened the floor up for a Q&A session (5 questions). I was able to ask a very brief question centered on Leviticus and the Bible’s many contradictions.

Mr. Smith came up to us after the talk. We spent the next two hours in an informal debate, with 80% of his arguments being reduced to the conversation stopper word…faith. Mr. Smith would ask me questions, mainly moral based, which were easy enough to answer using studies done by scientists like Michael Shermer, and Paul Zak. His knowledge of real science was pretty poor when asked specific questions (To his merit, he admitted when he was out of his league). I will admit, that I am no scientific genius (or genius of any sort) and some of his questions I had to answer with “I don’t know”. Many of the arguments became circular almost to the point of frustration.

They have another talk on the same topic coming up in Edmonton on 11 March 2012 at the River City Church at 6pm. This is a great opportunity to see what many Christians and those who are not scientifically literate are being told is science, and to ask questions.

Questions that the CMI had listed on their flier before the talk (grammar theirs):

Creationist Talk
Does God exist?
What about Evolution?
Was Darwin right?
How can a loving God allow suffering & death?
What about the age of the Earth?
Do dating methods prove the earth is millions of years old?
Who was Cain’s wife?
How did Noah fit all the animals into the Ark?
Was there really a worldwide flood?
Does any real scientists believe in creation?
Are there missing links?
Can a day mean millions of years?
What about Natural Selection?
Where did the different races come from?
What about distant Starlight?
Are UFO’s real?
Did God use Evolution?
The similarities between human & monkey DNA?
What about the Ice Age?
Were Adam & Eve real people?
Who cares what I believe about origins?
Don’t fossils take millions of years to form?
What about Dinosaurs?

Resources used for researching the talk

• www.Creation.com
• Used their belief and talk specific pages
  - creation.com/genesis-the-missing-piece-of-the-puzzle
  - creation.com/about-us#what_we_believe
• You Tube
• Calvin Smith, Richard Fangrad, and Dr. Emil Silvestru “Noah’s Flood” www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRBubkg5O-s”
• Paul Zak “Trust, morality, and oxytocin” www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAdlU2ETjU
• Richard Dawkins
• The Magic of Reality
• The Greatest Show on Earth
• Michael Shermer
• The Believing Brain
• Bill Bryson
• A Short History of Nearly Everything
• Penn & Teller’s Bullshit
• Pretty much any episode on religion
• The Bible
• My awesome fiancée (A real live scientist!)
• Common sense, critical thinking, and a few pints!

***NOTE LOCATION CHANGE***

Tuesday, 7 February 2012, 7:00pm – 9:30pm

Room 7, 6th Floor, Stanley A Milner Library, 7 Sir Winston Churchill Square, Edmonton, Alberta.

Centennial Room (library basement), Stanley A Milner Library, 7 Sir Winston Churchill Square, Edmonton, Alberta.

It’s the Society of Edmonton Atheists monthly roundtable, first Tuesday of every month starting at 7 p.m!

This month we will be having a much more interactive roundtable discussion. Everyone is encouraged to bring a story that they have heard, or read about, or have had happen to them that involves a religious fundamentalist saying or doing something completely ludicrous. We will all take turns telling our stories and then at the end of the night we will vote on which one we think is best and the person that told that story will win a prize.

**PLEASE NOTE** – This month we are meeting in the basement of the library and not in our usual room. The name of the meeting room is “The Centennial Room”

Drinks at Elephant and Castle afterwards at 9:00 pm-ish

Upcoming round-tables (mark your calendars!):

6 March 2012: “History of Religious Holidays”

3 April 2012: SEA Annual General Meeting

1 May 2012: “Religion’s role in Addictions’ Support”

5 June 2012: “What atheists can learn from religion”

All are welcome to both events! See you there!

Facebook RSVP here

http://www.edmontonatheists.ca/

info@edmontonatheists.ca

http://albertaprimetime.com/Headlines.aspx?pd=3276

I was a theistic-type ‘metaphysical healer’ less than 2 years ago. I wanted to raise the world’s ‘frequency and consciousness’. I read all the books, attended the classes and shows, got a certificate in ‘crystal healing’ and everything. I was surrounded every moment with constant New Age beliefs while working at a local health food store.
(These days, as a skeptic, ‘having a certificate in crystal therapy’ is like having a certificate in training unicorns and dancing with leprechauns. It’s deluded, doesn’t exist, and is a waste of everyone’s time.)

Being an avid New Ager, I thought/believed:

• I had psychic powers and could heal people with nothing but my hands and thoughts.
• That we had swirling colors of ‘energy’ all around us and if I ‘trained’ enough, I could see and read them like a colourful Morse code. (Chakras or Aura Reading)
• That if you wore a symbol of something, that that symbol had a particular ability to give you. (Runes/Celtic symbols, Tribal/goddess figurines, religious symbols etc.)
• And more*

Fortunately, reality gave way. Attempting to look into any evidence to justify my beliefs to others, I came up empty handed or shot full of holes. The science that I loved so much couldn’t make any sense of this non-specific ‘energy’ business. Everything I had believed in wasn’t true, and had no rational or logical backing to it. Reading article after article critiquing my beliefs sounded the death knell for my entire way of life.

My heart broke. It was nothing more than wishful thinking and a desire to actually have ‘magic’ and ‘powers’ in some form or another in my life. I thought I could be special.

I was lied to. I was mislead. I was deluded. It was an illusion. The veil was lifted, and I couldn’t go back.

I became an atheist at the same time I gave up all of my New Age beliefs. It only drove me further to seek the truth, and I didn’t find religion there.

Not having any skeptics around me in life didn’t help in preventing me from falling for the charade, either. I was raised to be theistic and I guess, in the end, raised to accept whatever anyone told me or suggested. Magic and the esoteric are always supported by religion. Logic and critical thinking are not.

It’s All The Same

Of course, every religion, every spiritual ‘practice’ makes these sort of magical, mystical, no evidence claims. What does ‘awakening’, ‘frequency’ and ‘consciousness’ even mean in the sort of ambiguous context New Age puts it in? Why would certain colors or crystals on parts of my body ‘heal me’? Why would a planetary position change or affect my personal life?

This metaphysical stuff is the same ‘spiritual’ blather that religion requires. It’s put into a nicer looking more ‘modern’ (and I use that term lightly) package so that all the usual constricting and contradicting rules and doctrine of a religion don’t have to be followed. It just ‘feels’ better because there is no fear or guilt attached. There is no overlooking mean person in the sky judging you, there are just wispy magical energies around you that can help you if you can find them. It’s all the same basic thoughts and ideas but with no storyline, no rules, and no characters to ‘hold it together’ like religion creates.

Here are some beliefs in ‘New Age’ compared to some religious beliefs:

• Belief that we are all ‘special’ and have some ‘special’ purpose? Check
• Belief that this ‘purpose’ is somehow ‘revealed to us’ through mystical/magical means? Check
• Belief in some higher spiritual power(s)(like the universe or ‘energy’ as an anthropomorphic entity)? Check
• Belief in a ‘soul’ or life force? Check
• Belief that our ‘soul’ goes somewhere or that something special happens after our body death)’? Check
• Belief that by doing particular things we can gain higher access to certain ‘planes of existence/being/consciousness’? Check
• Belief that moving the hands over the body or laying hands on the body can ‘heal’ someone? Check
• Belief that particular objects, colors, or words contain magical powers? Check
• Belief that a few particular people know the ‘truth’ and can share their ‘special knowledge’ with the rest of us who are not so ‘enlightened’? Check
• Belief in ‘love’ being some ultimate ‘thing’ that we all just need to be ‘complete’ and that it flows from ‘something’ to us? Check
• Hallucinations and feelings that supposedly can’t be described/lights/overwhelming emotion? Check
• Relying on pure anecdotal testimony? Check

In the end, it’s all the same delusion.

*I also used to believe that:
-Everyone else around me was constantly sick with ‘bad energies’ that needed to be ‘cleansed’ and ‘balanced’. (Reiki)
-Burning a plant in my house would rid it of some ‘energy’ that wasn’t supposed to be there. (Ritualistic sage home and body ‘cleansing’)
-The way the planets moved had an effect on my life. (Astrology)
-Magical faeries, angels, and ‘spirit animals’ actually lead my life somehow. (Life or spirit guides)
-Sticking needles into points on your body ‘heals’ it. (Acupuncture)
-A flower had a magical essence that could remove ‘bad’ emotions (Flower Essences).
-There is a ‘map’ of the human body on the foot, and if you touch those corresponding points, it’ll help heal that part fo your body.(Reflexology)
-Putting furniture in a particular pattern in a room changed how things are ‘attracted’ to you in life. (Feng Shui)
- Holding a product in your hand while someone ‘tests’ your muscle strength of your arm could tell you whether or not something was helpful for you. (Muscle Testing)
-Certain colors could ‘heal’ afflictions, pain etc. (Color and Chakra Therapy)
-Plain water that had supposedly gone through some sort of mixing treatment could ‘heal’ people.(Homeopathy)

After more than a year of dealing with the school board and education ministry to obtain secular public schooling for their children, the parents in Morinville filed a human rights complaint with the Commission.

The Alberta Human Rights Commission refused to consider the case. Supposedly the education minister has a solution ready to go, and just hasn’t announced it, but the parents are expecting a great solution, based on the ministry’s past performance.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/life/Human+rights+commission+consider+Morinville+school+complaint/6064040/story.html