A Bangladesh teen was lashed 101 times for conceiving a child out-of-wedlock. What’s the catch? She was raped. In April of last year, a 20-year-old man from Brahmanbaria made this young girl his victim, and she is still suffering.

On January 26, 2010, Dean Nelson of The Telegraph reported Muslim elders in this girl’s village issued a “fatwa”, which is an Islamic religious ruling, or a scholarly opinion on a matter of Islamic law. This fatwa insisted the girl be kept in isolation until her family agreed to corporal punishment. Her father was also fined, and told his family would be labeled as “outcasts”.

According to The Telegraph, Bangladesh’s Daily Star newspaper reported she was so ashamed following the attack that she did not lodge a complaint. Not long after, the girl was married. However, her husband left her a few weeks later when health tests revealed she was expecting.

 The real kicker is the village elders pardoned the rapist.

 Understandably, the girl told the Daily Star she wants justice, because the rapist has “ruined her life”.

“Ruined her life” could be the understatement of the year.

 For Westerners, these religious beliefs and practices are hard to understand. When evidence shows a Canadian girl is raped, he is jailed and sentenced. However, in Bangladesh, it’s the women’s fault.

 This girl has suffered through an unimaginable experience. She victimized, and now she is paying for a crime committed against her. The 101 scars left on her body from lashing only serve to remind her every single day how the justice system has failed her in the worst possible way.

 These men are the worst abusers of women’s rights. Western society has done so much to improve the rights of women and to make equality a reality. However, we can’t alter the way Islāmic men treat women. Unfortunately, they need to make these changes on their own.

 If this girl decides to take a stand, there is the very real possibility she will be putting her life and the lives of her family in danger. Standing up to religious beliefs and practices is almost unheard of in her country.

This article opens up a can of worms regarding women’s rights in Bangladesh. The gender imbalance not only exists within legal sectors, it exists also within the home. Traditionally, Muslim women have been seen as something to control. They are raped by their own husbands, and abused in unimaginable ways. Every single aspect of their lives are controlled. How they dress, how they act, how they speak, to whom they speak to, how they walk, what they eat…is all monitored by their husbands, fathers, brothers and uncles. They are forced under religious beliefs, to be submissive and weak. To essentially give up the rights  every human being should have.

How long will the concept of “free will” elude these women? To these men, they are nothing more than mothers and wives. As they grow up, they are taught to obey, keep a tidy home, and raise their children. They don’t know any other way of life. And this is an unjustice in itself.

 If a woman chooses to object to this way of life,  she could be murdered by one of her own family members. Called a “mercy killing”, muslim women are killed for resisting religious law or family rules. Can we even begin to imagine this kind of thing happening in Canada? For men here to be so authoritarian and misogynistic would never be tolerated.

In Canada, women who are suffering abuse at the hands of their husbands have options. Interval House is there to put a roof over their head, and food in their stomachs. In Bangladesh, these women have nothing. If they resist the rules of their husbands, they are whipped, beaten, and left to die.

What can we, as Canadians, do to help? As we raise billions of dollars for the people in Haiti, we display our ability to be kind and compassionate people. We are there to help people in a desperate time of need. So how about we extend some of this goodwill to the women in Bangladesh? How can our money help these women escape lives of oppressive marriages and religious traditions?

Do we make it easier for women to immigrate to Canada after suffering such inhumanity? Do we give them a home, a place to re-build their life? Or do we continue to stand by, and watch this happen again and again?

The threats, murders and intimidation against women in Muslim countries needs to stop. How many lashes will it take before this is regognized as a serious problem? How many more young girls will be punished because they were raped?

 Think of your daughter, your sister, your best friend…and tell me this is something we should just ignore.

 Stuart Laidlaw, a medical ethics blogger for the Toronto Star, writes that despite medical companies who push consumers to buy their “feel good” products, only those who are severely depressed actually benefit from the drugs.

Robert J. DeRubeis of the University of Pennsylvania, who lead the study, says antidepressants didn’t do much to aid those who were only mildly depressed. Rather, it seems as if the attention given to them by doctors and caregivers during the drug trials is what made these people feel better.

 Therefore, DeRubeis points out, there is nothing to indicate antidepressants do anything to get rid of mild depression. He suggests exercise, seeing a doctor, psychotherapy, or simply reading about the disorder can help.

 According to Laidlaw, “About 70 per cent of those taking such medications have mild enough depression that the medications may be of no use. Therefore, there is the very likely chance this study could change doctors’ approach to dealing with patients who suffer from depression.”

For too long, antidepressants have been known as a quick fix for people suffering from anxiety and depression. One doctor feels the study could dampen people’s enthusiasm for this medication, “People’s expectations for the drugs won’t be so high, and doctors won’t be surprised if they’re not curing every patient they see with medications,” said Dr. Erick H. Turner, a psychiatrist at Oregon Health and Science University.

 Laidlaw mentions another Toronto Star blogger, Sandy Naiman, who is also against the use of antidepressants. She feels the study done at the University of Pennsylvania supports her strong feelings regarding “Quick-fix, pill-popping approaches to mental health recovery.”

 However, the makers of Paxil feel the study does not paint an accurate portrait of how antidepressants work. “Antidepressants are an important option, in addition to counseling and lifestyle changes, for treatment of depression.”

So what makes society feel that pill popping is the answer to all of their problems? Commercialism plays a huge role. It’s difficult to watch television without being bombarded by commercials advertising the various antidepressants available on the market. Companies like Effexor, Zoloft, Citalopram and Paxil are full of promises to ease anxiety, even out mood swings, and allow those suffering from mood disorders to sleep and eat better. For someone going through a difficult time, this seems like a magical answer. In the commercials, the actors’ go from sitting in a dark room, with their head in their hands to happily running through a field of sunflowers. It’s the magic pill that fixes everything.  

 In reality, it takes a lot more than swallowing a pill to improve mood disorders. As this blog points out, exercise, healthy eating, and therapy are all viable options to try before taking antidepressants. Unfortunately, drug companies seem to be more concerned about making a buck.

Antidepressants work by increasing the amount of serotonin in the patients’ body. Interestingly enough, exercise does the exact same thing. So, is it simply a matter of us living in a lazy society? Can the blues be treated by more exercise? A study done by the U.S Department of Health found that women who walked 45 minutes a day 3 times a week had better relationships, less distress and improved self-image.

A hundred years ago, people were not taking pills to alleviate systems of depression. So how can doctors know these pills are not going to have severe side effects in the coming years? Can they increase the odds of getting cancer? Having a stroke? Blood clots? For people who may not even need these pills, are the risks worth it? With the increasing amount of people turning to anti-depressants, its time somebody started asking more questions.

As H1N1 made its way around the country, many people were hesitant to take the shot recommended by the government. They were unsure of the side effects, and the long term consequences. How many of these people repeatedly swallow an antidepressant pill without considering these same questions? Really, long term costs can’t be argued yet, because antidepressants haven’t been around long enough for us to come to any solid conclusions.

This being said, the last several years have seen Canadians hit with a war, and a recession. Would these two factors have an impact on the number of Canadians seeking the aid of pills? How many Canadians have lost a loved one overseas, or gone into debt after the economic crisis last year?

A study done by Mental Health weekly found the use of antidepressants has doubled over the past 10 years. Meanwhile, consumers receiving therapy declined. About 6% of Americans were prescribed antidepressants in 1996, but this number rose to 10% in 2005. Therefore, the study concludes, this shows the ever increasing popularity of pill-popping in the United States.

Ultimately, Canadians need to be more concerned about the health risks associated with taking antidepressants. If they are not concerned about their own health, they should be concerned about children they may conceive, and grandchildren. Could these drugs have any genetic effects?

We live in a society used to instant gratification. Therefore, for some, popping pills seems like the only viable answer. Doctors need to do more before they fill out a little slip, giving their patients the ability to change their moods with a tiny little pill. And really, who wants to rely on a little bottle to make them happy?

 http://thestar.blogs.com/ethics/

After last weeks devastating earthquake in Haiti, Canadian government officials are trying their best to ease the adoption process of orphaned Haitian children.

 An article written by The Globe and Mail reporter Steven Chase reports that despite the best intentions of Canadians, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney is concerned about a rise in human trafficking. People who prey on children could have easier access to children as a result of fast-tracking of the adoption process. Currently, Ottawa is working with Unicef to find safe adoption methods that will not put the children’s safety at risk.

At a news conference in Quebec yesterday, Kenney acknowledged the amount of Canadians seeking to adopt Haitian children, “I know there’s a lot of Canadians who want to help Haitian orphans, and over the long term, we’ll consider how we can work with international organizations to help these orphans in terms of perhaps adopting them in Canada.”

According to the article, there are various families and charities hoping to adopt orphaned children. They are optimistic within a few days, they will be given Humanitarian Parole, which fast-tracks the adoption process.

 Ottawa recently made the announcement that Canadians are allowed to bring their families to Canada legally, which will see about 5,000 Haitians arrive in Canada during the coming year. Combined with the amount of Haitians currently here on Visa’s, we will see around 6,000 Haitians become permanent residents of our country.

 The article also points out that since 2004, “Ottawa has had a policy of not deporting failed refugee claimants to Haiti, given the country’s social problems. That means it’s not sending back 1,900 failed refugee claimants and won’t deport any of the 8,000 with pending claims if their bids for asylum fail.”

So what does this mean for us? There are many families eager to adopt a child orphaned by the earthquake. However, rushing the adoption process means there is a greater chance children could be caught within the cycle of human trafficking.

In many cases, records of the adoption process have been buried beneath the rubble, therefore hindering the process for parents who were close to bringing home a child.

 Canwest News Service reports after the Tsunami in 2004, there was a significant increase in the amount of human trafficking. Everything needs to be done to ensure this does not happen again.

According to CTV news, between 600 and 800 people are smuggled into Canada each year, while a further 1,500 to 2,200 are trafficked through the country into the United States, according to police.

This being said, there is a greater need than ever for the children of Haiti to be welcomed into the homes of Canadian families. The Independent recently released a Q&A report on the adoption of orphaned children. According to the source, there were already about 380,000 orphaned children in Haiti before the earthquake. The Caribbean island, which has a population of about 10 million, may now have more than a million children without parents.

Furthermore, the article mentions The Joint Council on International Children’s Services. It has received 150 enquiries about Haitian adoption in the past three days. According to the council, usually they get about 10 a month.

Can adopting children out of their native country be detrimental to their mental well-being? One could argue that displacing children after a shocking event, like the earthquake, can lead to long-term physiological issues. Having survived such a traumatic event, many of these children are understandably going to be in a great deal of shock. Taking these children out of their native country and placing them in unfamiliar settings is going to increase this shock. New traditions, new ways of living, new routines, and most of all, a new family, is going to have a severe effect on any child.

Great care also needs to be taken to ensure these children are not taken out of the country before it is certain there are no living extended family members. If there is a slight chance the child could maintain some sort of normality after such a tragedy in their own country, everything should be done to ensure this happens.

Moreover, celebrities like Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have made adopting foreign children vogue. These children seem to be nothing more than an accessory. All we see is the glamour and positive press associated with adopting an orphan. What we don’t hear about is if these children are being raised by nannies as these parents with seven children are in other countries shooting a movie.

They also downplay the immense amount of stress that comes with adopting a child, giving prospective parents an unrealistic idea of what it’s like to adopt. It can take over a year for a normal adoption to take place. Celebrities seem to cut through the red tape, and take home babies based on their status as a star.

This earthquake has shown the innate need within humans to help each other during critical times of need. While doing this, we need to remember not to be trivial about this help. Although adopting a child is nothing short of admirable, potential parents need to be fully aware adopting a child is a lifetime commitment, and they that can’t send these children back when life returns to normal in Haiti.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/ottawa-working-on-speedy-safe-adoptions/article1435843/

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTNews/20060512/human_trafficking_060512/20060512?hub=CTVNewsAt11

 http://www.canada.com/news/Quebec+holding+Haitian+adoption+requests+over+child+smuggling+fear/2461076/story.html

CBC news recently released a story on the rising rate of child obesity. According to the article, doctors should start screening children at the age of six.

The report comes after 20 clinical trials of behavioral and drug treatments for obesity revealed evidence that screening can prevent weight gain among young children.

Medium to high intensity behavioral intervention programs were held once or twice a week, and generally lasted for about one year. According to Dr. Evelyn Whitlock, the program involved diet counseling, organized physical activity and behavior management.

It comes as no surprise the amount of hours children are spending in front of the television has had an effect on their waistlines. Furthermore, fewer children are walking to school, there is a lack of green space and parks, and physical education programs in schools have been significantly reduced.

The report also found many doctors do not address a child’s obesity. If it was addressed, would the child obesity rate go down?  Mark Tremblay, an obesity specialist at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario in Ottawa, says doctors may not say anything because there is a certain level of discomfort regarding the problem.

According to the article, Statistics Canada recently reported that among young children, an astounding 17 percent are considerd overwight. This is a three-fold increase since 1981. The report also found kids are taller, heavier and weaker than in the early 1980’s.

What does this mean to us? As obese children grow, they are at an increased risk of becoming morbidly obese as adults. This inevitably leads to higher mortality rates, as well as an increased risk of diabetes. Oftentimes, diabetes can lead to heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, kidney disease, stroke, and limb amputations. Do we want this to be the future of our children? This being said, the futures of these children could be significantly shorter. These children have the potential to die younger than their parents, because of the lack of physical activity present in their everyday lives.

What contributes to this complete lack of physical exercise? The computer, the internet, e-mail, online games and instant messaging are all to blame for the laziness of today’s young children. According to CBC News, the Canadian Medical Association Journal reported the average Canadian child spends three to five hours a day sitting in front of a TV or computer screen. For them, it’s just easier than going outside and using their imaginations as they play. Likewise, it’s easier for busy parents. They don’t need to worry about keeping an eye on their children as they play outdoors. They can just plop them in front of the television and know they are safe inside the house. This points to a growing need for increased parental involvement. Despite today’s fast-paced world, parents cannot continue to ignore the prevalence of obesity in today’s children. Children need fresh air and some kind of physical activity everyday. In fact, Canada’s Physical Activity Guide advises children to aim for 90 minutes a day of physical activity. They need to exercise their limbs, as well as their imaginations in order to grow healthy.

Parents also play a huge role in being role models for their children. If parents are constantly inhaling fast food, and practicing unhealthy food habits and lifestyles, there is a greater chance their children are going to practice the very same habits. Parents need to lead their children by example. If they eat healthy and exercise, their kids will be more likely to follow suit.

The fast-food industry does not make trimming our waistlines any easier. Everyday, we are bombarded with mouthwatering images of juicy hamburgers, and crispy French fries. It’s hard to resist hitting up a McDonald’s to get our greasy fix.

Children, who are more prone to the brainwashing of advertising, are going to want to satiate their craving for fast food. At a time when both parents of the household are working, it is sometimes easier to pick up a fast food meal than to cook a balanced and nutritious meal. According to Statistics Canada, children’s consumption of fast food has increased dramatically over the past two decades, and a large majority of children and adolescents do not have an adequate number of daily servings of fruit and vegetables.

The prevalence of cars is also playing a huge role. Gone are the days of walking to school, and to the grocery store. Each generation seems to get lazier and lazier. Many of us think nothing of hopping in the car for the five minute drive to the grocery store. Not only is this bad for our bodies, but it’s also bad for the environment.

What about teens? At a time when more and more young adults are going to college and university, there is a need for them to work part-time jobs. On top of classes, they are also dealing with homework. For many, it becomes an issue of not having enough time for physical activity. Therefore, should physical education be made mandatory in both public schools and high schools?  If there was a class devoted primarily to exercise and fitness, would this decrease the amount of obesity present in children and teens?

The Heart Association says, “Experts agree that increasing physical activity can help combat childhood obesity, yet many schools are cutting back on PE programs because of lack of resources and competing academic standards.” On average, about 3.8 percent of elementary schools offer physical education. Meanwhile, the minimum amount of time children should be spending on physical activity is about 60 minutes. It seems as if schools are now forcing children to focus more on academic studies than physical ones. This is interesting, because for many years, pediatricians have said physical activity lends itself to academic work.  In fact, physical exercise makes both children and adults more alert and focused. It releases all kinds of “feel good” endorphins. So what’s the problem with that?

What else can schools do to combat the rate of child obesity? Offering “healthy food” programs may be a good start. If more fruits and vegetables were made available during snack time, children may be more apt to eat these instead of unhealthy snacks. Many teachers could even begin a reward system for children who chose a healthy snack over an unhealthy one. These rewards could range from the traditional “gold star” to getting to be the “helper of the day”.

This epidemic needs to be addressed by health care workers, schools and parents. Heath care workers need to put their discomforts aside, and address the parents of overweight children. If they continue to ignore the problem, the health of today’s children will continue to be at risk. Schools need to place a higher importance on physical education programs, and recognize that physical health is just as important as academic success. In turn, parents need to set good examples for their children. Healthy eating mirrors healthy eating.

How long will it take before we recognize this as a serious problem and do something about it?

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/01/18/obese-screening-children.html

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2009/03/31/f-physed-obesity.html

Earlier this week, Haitian’s were devastated by an earthquake that has since claimed the lives of thousands. The Toronto Star’s David Olive recently posted a blog relaying how relief efforts have been suspended by the chaos occurring in Port-au-Prince.

Olive reports survivors are complaining nobody is in charge and relief workers are scarce. They are also complaining the government is too overwhelmed to do anything. There have been a significant amount of deaths among public service workers, as well as a lack of available resources. According to Olive, Haitian emergency skills are limited.

Canada, China, and Nicaragua are among the nations flying into Port-au-Prince to offer whatever aid they can. Meanwhile, the U.S. has offered $100 million in assistance.

However, On January 16, several news sources reported planes are clogging the airport, making it difficult for rescue workers to bring in supplies. Upwards of 200,000 people are now dead.

The ones still alive are praying for help to arrive. Today, Canada joined the search and rescue effort in full force. Police and fire departments from Montreal and Quebec have now departed and will land at the battered Haitian airport, which is currently under U.S. control. 

The Canadian military has also deployed a warship, filled with supplies. It’s expected to arrive on the Haitian coast on Tuesday.

Governments are not the only ones stepping in to offer help. On Friday, Jan. 22, Actor George Clooney is hosting a telethon to raise money for the earthquake victims. It will be broadcast live on ABC, NBC, HBO, and CNN at 8:00pm ET. Model Gisele Bündchen also donated 1.5 million to Haitian victims.

 At a time of such tragedy, devastation and loss, it’s a welcome thing to see everyone pulling together in support of this overwhelmed country. The devastation and loss in Port-au-Prince has shown the humanity that does exist beneath the layers of war and hate that seem to pervade us everyday. Ultimately, we are all people and this catastrophe brings to the surface just how much we need to stick together.

It also serves to remind us how fortunate we are as Canadians. We live in an area not prone to earthquakes. If there was one, we would have countless emergency and support services available. Meanwhile, Haitians are dealing with an overwhelmed government, totally relying on outside help. And it will never be enough.

When Hurricane Katrina left a wake of destruction in New Orleans, help was there. It came in droves, but left just as quickly. Even today, there are people who don’t have homes. What does this say? We can’t let that happen in Haiti. We can’t forget about the people in Port-au-Prince in a month when it’s not in the newspaper everyday, and not being covered on a continuous reel on CNN. We have to keep helping. Haiti was a struggling country to begin with, and it will be years before life returns to their kind of “normal”.

 I ask, is it simply “vogue” to help out? Celebrities and politicians are quick to get involved with aid organizations and telethons, but when all the hype and attention is gone, will they be too? Will the George Clooney’s of the celebrity world be there in two years when Haitians are still trying to get their lives back together? Do they simply do it for publicity?

There exists an argument that nobody does anything out of complete selflessness. In some way, they benefit. So, in the case of celebrities and politicians, are they donating millions because to them, a million dollars is nothing, and it makes them look good? Or are they doing it out of the complete good of their heart? Call me a cynic. But, really, it’s a valid question. Celebrities are notorious for being self-absorbed. So does this personality trait shine through in critical times of need, to flaunt their money and success, or to promote a new movie?

The media is just as guilty of a short attention span. A week ago, the “major news story” was Stephen Harper proroguing parliament. Now, all we are hearing about is Haiti. To go from hearing about the suspension of Parliament everyday, to not hearing anything at all says something about the attention deficit order of  some journalists. What happened to the so-called “important” news seven days ago?

 This serves to remind us not to forget about Haitians in a few months when the newness of the earthquake wears off. We can’t just go back to our everyday lives, and forget about the people who have been devastated by loss and destruction. In a few months time, they are still going to need aid, supplies, food and water. We need to remember the people pulled from the rubble of collapsed buildings, and know they are going to need our help for a long time. They need to know they will not be forgotten.

http://thestar.blogs.com/davidolive 

Tonight, the faculties of 24 Ontario Colleges could change the lives of students by voting in favor of the second college shutdown since 2006.

Toronto Star Reporter Denise Balkissoon asks: Do students really care?

On Tuesday, thousands of furious students were supposed to walk out of class, angrily protesting the looming strike vote. Instead, only few braved the harsh winter weather- petitions in hand, and nobody to back them up.

Out of the province’s 450,000 college students, nearly 22,000 members joined Geaeme McNaughton’s antistrike Facebook group. There were also 4,000 signatures on an online petition, promising to walk out of class.

According to McNaughton, only a dozen-odd students ended up joining him during the protest. As told to the Toronto Star, “We didn’t get the numbers we were hoping for. But the whole meaning was to hand over the petition.”

Meanwhile, at Humber College, only one student brought a copy of the online petition into administration and union offices.

What does this say for Ontario’s college students? Are they lazy? Or are they just tired of dealing with the bureaucratic  you-know-what?

The article examines how there are thousands of Canadian protest and political groups on Facebook. However, many people sign online petitions, or join online Facebook groups, only to essentially forget about the cause. According to Balkissoon, they are “washing their hands of other political activism.”  This is what skeptics are calling “slacktivism.”

Balkissoon uses the example of the Facebook group that was supposed to support Tre Smith. In 2007, the Toronto Humane Society investigator was suspended for handcuffing the owner of a dehydrated dog to his car. 5,000 people joined a Facebook group to support him, but only 25 showed up for a rally.

The article also mentions a Facebook group currently garnering plenty of attention. “Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament” now has nearly 175, 000 members. The founder of this group, Christopher White, hopes his group will inspire people to write letters to MPs, or take part in any form of online activism.

Currently, organizers are planning to put up posters and flyers in Toronto regarding the issue of Proroguing Parliament. In Alberta, there have been several emails sent to MPs and journalists. Could this be a sign that this particular group will have more of an impact?

If only college students followed suit. Would walking out of classes have affected the outcome of the strike vote? We’ll never know.

So why is this important to us? Does the meager outcome of students who walked out suggest a lack of ignorance, maybe even laziness? Have we simply become too reliant on technology to really care? Do we think a Facebook Group, or any form of online activism is going to end all of our problems?

Don’t people see that we need to get out there to make a difference?  That simply clicking on “Join this group” isn’t going to make much of a difference?

Simply put, Facebook can’t do our dirty work.

In a world where technology dominates our everyday life, we need to recognize there are some things it just can’t do. It can’t voice an opinion, and get someone to really listen. Sure, they can read it…but they can just skim through the parts they don’t care about. Furthermore, Facebook can’t debate. What happened to good, old-fashioned face-to-face confrontations? Has technology made us lose our dignity and self-respect? Do we become braver when we are hiding behind a computer screen?

And really, Facebook can’t picket outside on a cold winter day, really hammering home the point that, yes, we do happen to care.

Many people are arguing a walkout really wouldn’t have made much of a difference. How do they know this? As the old adage goes, “You can’t know until you try.” Would college faculty and union representatives taken a step back and thought twice about what a strike means for the thousands of students in the province?

It’s not all about missing classes. For students, it’s about money. It’s also about the hundreds of students who may not have a place to live if the strike results in extended classes during the summer months. For others, it means not graduating on time. It means not starting a new job when they were planning to.

Ultimately, a strike does more than interrupt our lives. It’s a slap in the face that says, “You don’t matter. Your money doesn’t matter. Now quietly go away while we negotiate more money for ourselves.”

How can we accept this slap in the face without fighting back? Did people seriously think just joining an online social networking group was really going to do that much? How can we be so passive? So naive? Signing an online petition does nothing but pacify our need to feel like we did something.

Why not turn off our computers, put on a parka, and really make a point?

It’s sad that out of 450,000 college students, there was a mere handful that cared enough to step up and actually do something.  What could have been done to generate more awareness of a walkout? Obviously Facebook wasn’t enough.

According to McNaughton, there were volunteers at 11 colleges who were willing to lead student walkouts. Why did these students not do more at their own schools? What could they have done to bring more awareness to the fact there was a proposed walkout on Tuesday?

The term “Slacktivism” does nothing more than perpetuate the stereotypical definitions of younger generations. It’s amazing how one made-up word displays our weakness, our laziness to act, and ultimately, our right to free speech.

Facebook college protest fizzles; How much do 450,000 students care if teachers walk out after a strike vote on Wednesday?

Denise Balkissoon. Toronto Star. Toronto, Ont.: Jan 13, 2010. pg. A.4

The Globe and Mail recently published a story on a legal case that could change how the term “marriage” is perceived in the United States. The battle is challenging Proposition 8, a voter-approved law banning gay marriage.

As both sides argued their case to Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker, supporters of gay marriage assembled outside the court, protesting Proposition 8 and what it means for the gay and lesbian community.

The topic of same-sex marriage in the U.S. remains a taboo topic. As of yet, it is legal in only five states and the District of Columbia.

The case, which began January 11, is the first to dispute the state ban on gay and lesbian marriage. It is fully expected to make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. If this case is won, it could forever change the rights of same-sex couples in America by giving them constitutional protection.

This landmark case is expected to draw wide criticism in a country full of old-fashioned values. However, it is also anticipated it will receive praise from those who support gay and lesbian communities.

 During the trial, testimonies will be heard from different parties concerning the history of discrimination against gays and lesbians, what defines “marriage”, and the ability of same-sex parents to have a family.

 According to The Globe and Mail, “Gay rights lawyers called the ban discriminatory, and compared it to laws that once prevented interracial marriage. Lawyers defending the ban cited thousands of years of tradition and claimed that a state, without malice, can be cautious about changing the institution of marriage”.

Fighting for the right to same-sex marriages in America are two couples. One gay, and one lesbian. According to Paul Katami, the issue lies in not creating a separate category for gays and lesbians. Why should they not have the same rights to a loving and legal marriage as a straight couple?

Two of the lead attorneys in this case, Theodore Olson and David Boies, represented Al Gore and George Bush during the presidential election in 2000. Now, they are teaming up to fight for the rights of same-sex couples. Interestingly enough, Olson is one of the most conservative lawyers in the country.

Meanwhile, defendant Bill Tam, who was one of Proposition 8’s supporters, asked to be excluded from the case, saying he feared for his family’s safety. According to The Globe and Mail, during the 2008 campaign, Tam claimed same-sex marriage would cause children to become homosexual.

In a society  that advocates tolerance, acceptance and diversity, it seems unthinkable…even laughable, that people continue to oppose same-sex marriages. Why are gays and lesbians not given the same legal rights as straight couples? How can such prejudice continue to exist? How can America place gays and lesbians in a separate category, seemingly labelled “abnormal”? 

Nearly every day, the United States is bringing soldiers home from war in body bags. What does this teach children? It teaches them about war and hate, and evil versus good. With such a focus on negativity, what is wrong with showing some love?

 It seems as if America just needs a hug.

In all seriousness, this court case has the potential to seriously change the way Americans view same-sex relationships. Past controversial court cases have done this. For example, Dr. Jack Kevorkian’s stint in court changed the way people viewed euthanasia, while Dr. Henry Morgentaler helped people accept women’s right to abortion.

Perhaps rather than categorizing people as gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, or straight, Americans will begin to see things in another light. Do they just need the court to say it’s “okay” before they will accept it? Or are Americans so rooted in tradition and outdated values that legalization won’t change a thing?

Let us consider for a moment what it is like when a man and a woman fall in love. Naturally, many wish to marry, buy a home, and begin a family. It is instinctual for many of us to want to carry on our names, and see ourselves in the faces of our children. We want to impart our knowledge, and shower them with unconditional love and affection. Being gay or lesbian does not necessarily change these very human needs and wants. However, in America, Proposition 8 places restrictions on people who have every right under the sun to love who they want to love, and marry who they want to marry.

Now, let us consider what it’s like when legal marriages disintegrate. The justice system ensures each person has rights. They can go to court, have their assets divided, and part ways with some dignity and respect. What rights do same-sex couples in America have? None, because their marriages are not recognized by the state. How does this continue to be tolerated?

“Proposition 8” should erase it’s unconstitutional “proposal” to ban same-sex marriages, and begin to recognize the rights of all people, whatever their sexual orientation. Americans need to start accepting diversity, and establish the understanding that the cookie-cutter version of the “American Family” no longer exists. More than half of married couples seem to divorce.

Meanwhile, gay couples are not given the same legal rights, their relationships are in no way recognized as genuine, and they are forced to feel as if they need to hide their feelings, as they say, in a closet. Our world is changing every day, so when will this change improve the rights and privileges of gays and lesbians?

Furthermore, the article mentions advocates who doubt the capability of gays and lesbians to raise a family. When in fact, they are just as capable of loving and caring for children as any straight couple would be. One could even argue same-sex couples would never take their status as parents for granted, because of the rocky road which led them to their children in the first place.

As previously mentioned, gay rights lawyers have compared the discriminatory ban to laws that once prevented interracial marriage.  It makes sense. A law that once separated black and white has now become outdated and ridiculous. How long will it take before gays and lesbians are given the same recognition and rights?

California’s gay-marriage showdown begins

Siri Agrell. The Globe and Mail. Toronto, Ont.: Jan 12, 2010. pg. A.13