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

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

COVID-19

Ontario student appeals ruling that dismissed religious objection to abortion-tainted COVID shot

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

An Ontario Tech University student is seeking judicial review after the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario ruled his beliefs did not qualify as protected ‘creed.’

An Ontario university student who was punished for refusing the COVID shot is contesting a tribunal ruling that rejected his religious objection to the vaccine.

In a November 28 press release, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) announced that a judicial review has been filed on behalf of former Ontario Tech University student Philip Anisimov after his religious objection to the COVID vaccine was dismissed by an Ontario court.

“Mr. Anisimov’s objection to the Covid vaccine was deeply rooted in his religious commitment to live according to biblical precepts,” Constitutional lawyer Hatim Kheir declared. “He hopes the Divisional Court will clarify that his religious objection was protected by the Human Rights Code and entitled to protection.”

In 2021, Ontario mandated that all students in the province show proof of vaccination unless they had an exemption or agreed to attend a COVID jab education session boasting about the shots. The third option was not available at Ontario Tech University, as schools could choose whether or not they would offer such a program to students.

Anisimov had requested an exemption from the experimental, abortion-tainted COVID shots on religious grounds but was denied and deregistered from his courses.

He was then forced to spend an entire extra year to complete his studies. According to his lawyers, Ontario Tech University’s decision to not approve his COVID jab exemption request “not only disrupted his career plans but also violated his right to be free from discrimination on the basis of religion, as protected by the Ontario Human Rights Code.”

The university’s refusal to honor his exemption prompted Anisimov to take legal action in April with help of the JCCF. However, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario rejected his religious objection, arguing that it was not protected as a “creed” under the Ontario Human Rights Code.

Now, Anisimov is appealing the ruling, hoping that his case will serve as a precedent for justice for students who were discriminated against for refusing the abortion-tainted vaccine.

“My hope is that this case helps set an important precedent and encourages Canadians to reflect on the direction our society is taking,” he explained. “My trust is that God does all things for the good of those who love Him, who are called by His purposes.”

Beyond health concerns, many Canadians, especially Catholics, opposed the vaccines on moral grounds because of their link to fetal cell lines derived from the tissue of aborted babies.

Continue Reading

Trending

X