Connect with us

COVID-19

How far is too far? How much is too much? The role of reason in pandemic control

Published

5 minute read

How far is too far????

I have been watching with interest the great extremes Canadian municipalities have gone to in the great cause of ‘protecting’ Canadians.

While I do not deny the devastating effects of Covid 19 on those who are most vulnerable to its potential respiratory destruction, nor the basket of symptoms from fever to loss of taste, I am incredibly cynical of the extremism displayed in measures enacted by governmental bodies in each province!

The level of care exhibited by medical and health care professionals is awe inspiring, so much so that those in the medical front lines have bee publicly lauded and thanked, though probably not enough.

Those who are working in what is deemed essential services have been exemplary as well-grocery stores, drug stores and other retail outlets with goods necessary for survival.

Firstly, I have to question a few things.  How was the list of essential services arrived at?  And more importantly, what makes a church NON ESSENTIAL when a liquor store is still open?  Spiritual care is far more long lasting (eternal) and beneficial to mental and family health than a retail outlet whose products, if mis used for self medication has led to destruction of marriages and incredible social destruction?

Secondly, if we are looking to banning activities with an eye to public safety, why is going to busy retail outlets deemed ‘safe’ when activities conducted outdoors, like going to parks or playgrounds are not safe or recommended.

It would make sense to me that any activity that occurs where there are few people, or protection via real glass or real distance, like camping and fishing or walking amidst our many parks and dog walk areas would be encouraged as opposed to being banned.

If anyone has gone into a Walmart or Superstore, and they are vulnerable or not necessarily well, the close contact with other shoppers accidental or on purpose, clearly does not fall under the no-contact or isolation recommendations.

Thirdly, if we, as a country are concerned about keeping people employed, why is there not a protocol in place to allow healthy workers to return to their employment to keep our economy going instead of keeping the 90 plus percent home and allowing our businesses to stagnate or potentially close?  Why don’t we keep the vulnerable and symptom exhibiting Canadians home?

If anyone has been traveling, stay home.

With the isolation order and economic shut down in place, all of Canada is being considered guilty (carrier or ill with symptoms) instead of innocent (healthy) first!

Fourthly, where is our national, provincial and local leadership? With our national health spokesperson telling us to stay home for everyone’s protection, where is the voice of leadership that looks at this with a voice of reason and balance?  One that provides guidance and humility that says, we can’t handle this on our own without REASON and without fear?

We also need to realize that without spiritual leaders coming to the forefront and providing calm, spiritually based principles for coping in this time where fear is the common currency and panic is the common denominator amongst communities.

In truth, science alone will not help us through this crisis, but rather a balanced approach that recognizes the sovereignty of God in our lives will take us through this.  We need leaders who publicly espouse faith and humility, not a changing narrative in science that is being questioned worldwide.

Let us pray that the voice of reason and faith is louder than the cries of fear in our nation.

 

Long-term care home deaths expected to rise: Tam

 

 

 

Tim Lasiuta is a Red Deer writer, entrepreneur and communicator. He has interests in history and the future for our country.

Follow Author

COVID-19

University of Colorado will pay $10 million to staff, students for trying to force them to take COVID shots

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

The University of Colorado Anschutz School of Medicine caused ‘life-altering damage’ to Catholics and other religious groups by denying them exemptions to its COVID shot mandate, and now the school must pay a hefty settlement.

The University of Colorado’s Anschutz School of Medicine must pay more than $10.3 million to 18 plaintiffs it attempted to force into taking COVID-19 shots despite religious objections, in a settlement announced by the religious liberty law firm the Thomas More Society.

As previously covered by LifeSiteNews, in April 2021, the University of Colorado (UC) announced its requirement that all staff and students receive COVID jabs, leaving specific policy details to individual campuses. On September 1, 2021, it enforced an updated policy stating that “religious exemption may be submitted based on a person’s religious belief whose teachings are opposed to all immunizations,” but required not only a written explanation why one’s “sincerely held religious belief, practice of observance prevents them” from taking the jabs, but also whether they “had an influenza or other vaccine in the past.”

On September 24, the policy was revised to stating that “religious accommodation may be granted based on an employee’s religious beliefs,” but “will not be granted if the accommodation would unduly burden the health and safety of other Individuals, patients, or the campus community.”

In practice, the school denied religious exemptions to Catholic, Buddhist, Eastern Orthodox, Evangelical, Protestant, and other applicants, most represented by Thomas More in a lawsuit contending that administrators “rejected any application for a religious exemption unless an applicant could convince the Administration that her religion ‘teaches (them) and all other adherents that immunizations are forbidden under all circumstances.’”

The UC system dropped the mandate in May 2023, but the harm had been done to those denied exemptions while it was in effect, including unpaid leave, eventual firing, being forced into remote work, and pay cuts.

In May 2024, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals rebuked the school for denying the accommodations. Writing for the majority, Judge Allison Eid found that a “government employer may not punish some employees, but not others, for the same activity, due only to differences in the employee’s religious beliefs.”

Now, Thomas More announces that year-long settlement negotiations have finally secured the aforementioned hefty settlement for their clients, covering damages, tuition costs, and attorney’s fees. It also ensured the UC will agree to allow and consider religious accommodation requests on an equal basis to medical exemption requests and abstain from probing the validity of applicants’ religious beliefs in the future.

“No amount of compensation or course-correction can make up for the life-altering damage Chancellor Elliman and Anschutz inflicted on the plaintiffs and so many others throughout this case, who felt forced to succumb to a manifestly irrational mandate,” declared senior Thomas More attorney Michael McHale. “At great, and sometimes career-ending, costs, our heroic clients fought for the First Amendment freedoms of all Americans who were put to the unconscionable choice of their livelihoods or their faith during what Justice Gorsuch has rightly declared one of ‘the greatest intrusion[s] on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country.’ We are confident our clients’ long-overdue victory indeed confirms, despite the tyrannical efforts of many, that our shared constitutional right to religious liberty endures.”

On top of the numerous serious adverse medical events that have been linked to the COVID shots and their demonstrated ineffectiveness at reducing symptoms or transmission of the virus, many religious and pro-life Americans also object to the shots on moral grounds, due to the ethics of how they were developed.

Catholic World Report notes that similarly large sums have been won in other high-profile lawsuits against COVID shot mandates, including $10.3 million to more than 500 NorthShore University HealthSystem employees in 2022 and $12.7 million to a Catholic Michigander fired by Blue Cross Blue Shield in 2024.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Canadian Health Department funds study to determine effects of COVID lockdowns on children

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The commissioned study will assess the impact on kids’ mental well-being of COVID lockdowns and ‘remote’ school classes that banned outdoor play and in-person learning.

Canada’s Department of Health has commissioned research to study the impact of outdoor play on kids’ mental well-being in light of COVID lockdowns and “remote” school classes that, for a time, banned outdoor play and in-person learning throughout most of the nation. 

In a notice to consultants titled “Systematic Literature Reviews And Meta Analyses Supporting Two Projects On Children’s Health And Covid-19,” the Department of Health admitted that “Exposure to green space has been consistently associated with protective effects on children’s physical and mental health.”

A final report, which is due in 2026, will provide “Health Canada with a comprehensive assessment of current evidence, identify key knowledge gaps and inform surveillance and policy planning for future pandemics and other public health emergencies.”

Bruce Squires, president of McMaster Children’s Hospital of Hamilton, Ontario, noted in 2022 that “Canada’s children and youth have borne the brunt” of COVID lockdowns.

From about March 2020 to mid-2022, most of Canada was under various COVID-19 mandates and lockdowns, including mask mandates, at the local, provincial, and federal levels. Schools were shut down, parks were closed, and most kids’ sports were cancelled. 

Mandatory facemask polices were common in Canada and all over the world for years during the COVID crisis despite over 170 studies showing they were not effective in stopping the spread of COVID and were, in fact, harmful, especially to children.

In October 2021, then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced unprecedented COVID-19 jab mandates for all federal workers and those in the transportation sector, saying the un-jabbed would no longer be able to travel by air, boat, or train, both domestically and internationally.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, a new report released by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) raised alarm bells over the “harms caused” by COVID-19 lockdowns and injections imposed by various levels of government as well as a rise in unexplained deaths and bloated COVID-19 death statistics.

Indeed, a recent study showed that COVID masking policies left children less able to differentiate people’s emotions behind facial expressions.

Continue Reading

Trending

X