Wildrose and PCs vote against supporting Gay-Straight Alliances in schools where children want them

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."

-Martin Luther King Jr.

Liberal MLA Kent Hehr's Motion 503 which called for schools to support the establishment of Gay-Straight alliances to help protect children from bullying and discrimination was defeated in the Alberta Legislature Monday.

The final vote saw the motion lose 31 to 19. Every Liberal and NDP MLA supported the motion with some PC MLAs. However, the majority of PCs and all Wildrose MLAs voted against the motion. (37 MLAs didn't show up for the vote)

I have four points:

1. Gay-Straight Alliances save children's lives by reducing bullying and suicide attempts. Gay-Straight Alliances create safe places for children to organize, empower, educate and protect each other from discrimination against their sexual orientation. They make schools safer for children. The Alberta Party has come out strongly in favour of Gay-Straight Alliances.  Watch PC MLA Sandra Jansen's remarkable speech on Gay-Straight Alliances:

2. Gay-Straight Alliances put children first. There isn't an MLA in Alberta who would disagree with putting children first. The PCs and Wildrose alike have boasted that they put children first and highlight the freedom to choose as a distinguished and important feature of Alberta's education system. 

The Wildrose specifically claim that they respect individuality and want to empower local autonomy. To be clear, Motion 503 only mandated Gay-Straight Alliances in schools where students want them. A vote for Motion 503 would have put students first by empowering them with the freedom to choose Gay-Straight Alliances. 

A vote against Motion 503 is a vote for the status quo where individual children who want Gay-Straight Alliances to protect themselves and others from bullying can and are rejected by centralized authorities.

When it comes to Gay-Straight Alliances, Education Minister Jeff Johnson claims that he doesn't want to interfere with school boards because he respects their local autonomy -- but when it comes to collective bargaining, he has no trouble hijacking school board's local autonomy with with legislation.

Alberta's Education Minister Jeff Johnson

3. Gay-Straight Alliances don't single out any single specific group of students any more than efforts to support First Nations, Metis and Inuit (FNMI) students. For the MLAs who defend their vote against Motion 503 because it unfairly singles out one specific group of students, I have one question:

Do you reject Alberta's recent efforts to specifically support First Nations, Metis and Inuit (FNMI) students because it unfairly singles out a specific group of students?

Of course not.

No one would say that they value all sports so schools should not give special attention to individual sports like basketball or that school should value all subjects so we shouldn't give special attention to individual subjects like math.

Sometimes people say they value everything so they don't have to take a stand on anything.

Voting against Motion 503 because you want to protect all students from bullying, not just some, might make some politicians look good because they won't tolerate any bullying -- but it represents a hollow promise to children who would be safer with Gay-Straight Alliances in schools where the adults won't allow them.

4. The Wildrose are still morally bankrupt. It's true that the majority of PCs voted against Motion 503 and they most certainly need to be challenged individually, but because every single Wildrose MLA voted against Gay-Straight Alliances, the entire Wildrose party needs to be challenged.

I can't help but remember Alberta's 2012 election when Wildrose MLA hopeful Allen Hunsperger spawned his comments about gay people burning in a lake of fire and that public education is godless, wicked and profane for putting into place anti-bullying policies to protect children from being targeted for their sexual orientation.

As shameful as Hunsperger's hateful comments are, I hold a special distaste for Danielle Smith's refusal to condemn her party's candidate. That Smith retreats to the party line that "the Wildrose will not introduce legislation on contentious social issues" is nothing more than silence as assent.

On Monday, April 7, 2014, the Wildrose's unanimous opposition to Motion 503 shows Albertans that nothing has changed with the Wildrose. 

The Wildrose are still morally bankrupt and intellectually indefensible.

Alberta needs to be healthy and wealthy

I attended a Wildrose meet and greet event in Red Deer where leader of the Wildrose Danielle Smith gave a talk and took questions. I went because I wanted to see and hear what the Wildrose are doing and what the people who would attend a Wildrose event are saying and thinking.

I was there to learn.

Danielle Smith talked about the ridiculous wages that some government administrators make like the head of Alberta Health Services or Redford's chief of staff.

Talking about income inequality is often a great way to get labelled a communist or a socialist, but when Danielle Smith and the Wildrose talk about government employees who make a ridiculous salary, they get head nods and hell-yeahs from Wildrose and NDP alike. 

Albertans who don't make six figures have a problem with public-sector employees who do.

Danielle Smith elicited gasps from the crowd when she said that the Alberta Union of Public Employees (AUPE) reported that many of their frontline members don't make $45,000 in an entire year -- which happens to be the cost of Alison Redford's flights to Nelson Mandela's funeral.

This hit home big time amongst the room of people in Red Deer -- I saw heads nodding everywhere. The tension in the room was escalating. If Smith was trying to elicit an emotional response, she hit everyone, including me, between the eyes.

Smith also talked about making Alberta's Heritage Fund a priority and pointed to Norway's Oil Savings Fund that now sits at over $900 Billion, compared to Alberta's $17 Billion.

That's some of what Danielle Smith and the Wildrose talk about.

Here's some of what Danielle Smith and the Wildrose don't talk about.

Like Smith and the Wildrose, I too am interested in what Alberta can learn from Norway. It turns out that Norway does a better job of saving money in the bank and keeping kids off the street. Smith and the Wildrose make a point to be envious over Norway's bank account, while ignoring their superior skills in keeping children out of poverty. I think Albertans care about both, and so should any political party worthy of governance.

The whole point of being fiscally responsible is born out of the idea that responsible adults don't run up a tab and then throw the bill at our next generation of children. If this matters, and it really does, then so does ensuring that our present generation of children don't live in poverty.

It is disingenuous to talk about government cronyism and then ignore Alberta's growing income gap and children living in poverty. (Did you know that the top Canadian CEOs earn average workers' salary in a day and a half?)

Anyone who wants to talk about fiscal responsibility or education without talking about reducing poverty has an agenda and should be challenged, and anyone who talks about social responsibility and reducing poverty without talking about balancing the books is irresponsible and should be challenged.

If we care about children, then we need to talk about fiscal and social responsibilities. For too long, Alberta political parties have been marinated in ideology that prioritizes one at the expense of the other. The ancient tug o' war between left and right over fiscal and social responsibilities is an old and tired political model that have many people angry, cynical or apathetic.

If you are a fiscally responsible and socially conscious Albertan who is looking for a different way of doing politics, then I invite you to check out Greg Clark and the Alberta Party.

Greg Clark and the Alberta Party believes, "we can have a strong economy. We can have a strong commitment to the environment. A strong balance sheet and a strong social conscience."

The Alberta Party understands that it is easier and cheaper to build strong children than to repair broken people. Their social policies reflect an understanding for the idea that an ounce of prevention can be worth a pound of cure.

The Alberta Party is a breath of fresh air that Alberta desperately needs.

Winston Churchill once said:

Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.

While I give Churchill full credit for being pithy, this kind of black and white thinking holds us back. If Alberta is going to be healthy and wealthy, we have to stop choosing between having a brain or a heart.

Alberta needs both.

Alberta needs the Alberta Party.

Wildrose is morally bankrupt

I was disgusted when I read Wildrose candidate Allan Hunsperger's hateful comments about gay people burning in a lake of fire and that public education is Godless, wicked and profane for putting into place anti-bullying policies to protect children from being targeted for their sexual orientation.

I was appalled when I heard Wildrose Candidate Ron Leech say that he has an advantage in the election because he is white.

Deep down there is a religious libertarian contradiction that lives in the bowels of the Wildrose and it goes something like this:

"I want to be able to say and do whatever the hell I want without the government meddling and interfering with my life so that I may impose my will on others who are different than me."

As shameful as these two examples of the Wildrose's bigotry and racism are, I hold a special distaste for Danielle Smith's refusal to condemn either of her party's candidates. That Smith retreats to the party line that "the Wildrose will not introduce legislation on contentious social issues" is nothing more than silence as assent.

We all have the moral authority to stand up and speak out against hatred and intolerance, but when given the opportunity to lead her party, Danielle Smith chooses to follow a racist and a bigot.

Danielle Smith and The Wildrose are both morally bankrupt and intellectually indefensible.

Condoning bigotry

The 2012 Alberta Provincial Election is something I routinely discuss with my students.

I was reading a blog post that was written by Wildrose candidate Allen Hunsperger that featured his views on gay people that included:

-“accepting people the way they are is cruel and not loving.”

-Hunsperger used Lady Gaga's song Born this Way to preface his point that gay people can choose “to not live the way they were born.” He went on to write, “You can live the way you were born, and if you die the way you were born, then you will suffer the rest of eternity in the lake of fire, hell, a place of eternal suffering."

-Hunspurger went on to label public education as “godless,” meaning “profane or wicked.”

Afterward the leader of the Wildrose Danielle Smith refused to condemn Hunsberger's post and reiterated that her party won’t legislate on contentious moral issues. You can read about all this here.

How the hell am I going to explain this to my students?

Can you imagine if a teacher witnessed one student bullying another for their sexual orientation and the teacher opted out of doing anything because they didn't believe in taking a stand on contentious moral issues?

Allan Hunspurger is a bigot. Danielle Smith is a coward and Albertans should be ashamed of both and leave them where they belong -- in the past.

If this is how our potential elected officials model citizenry, what affect will this have on our children?

Bravo to Glenn Taylor and the Alberta Party for challenging Danielle Smith and the Wildrose to withdraw Allan Hunspurger as a candidate for the upcoming election.