During the past 5 months, my wife and I have been working in Costa Rica. It is a country which has become one of the top vacation locations because of its lush beauty and amazing beaches. It has also been selected as AARP’s top locations to retire, with Atenas (the location we were near) considered by National Geographic as having the ‘best climate in the world’. Canadians have been flocking here to spend either part or all of their retirement days in one of the most beautiful countries in the world. I could fill a book with descriptions about the beautiful flowers and the unusual and abundant wildlife that are just outside our door. The culture is as rich and diverse as the land and the people have been rated by a recent study by Jeffrey David Sachs as having the highest “Average Life Satisfaction”. In short, they are a very happy people, and with only a few exceptions in my experience, they live up to their reputation.

Costa Rica has so many outstanding aspects that make it attractive that most people overlook one of its most important qualities. In 1948, Costa Rica disbanded its army, choosing instead to spend its limited resources on providing universal education and health care to its citizens. This did not happen without a great deal of debate and struggle – but it happened. At the time, disarming was unthinkable! Other nations of Central America were arming and in El Salvador, civil war was already smoldering. Visionary leader, José Figueres Ferrer, decided to choose a more difficult road because he believed it was best for his country. It proved to be a turning point for his nation and the world.

60 years later, Costa Rica is the richest and most progressive country in Central America. It is also recognized as one of the earlier democracies in the world. In 1941, they started what would become universal healthcare, a system which has been rated for quality by the UN as superior to the US. Costa Rica is also rated by the UN as the leading Latin American country in their Human Development Index, and in a nation of 4 million people and with a very small GNP, they have been able to achieve many positive goals, much of which have been possible because they haven’t wasted money on arms and armies. They have modeled what can be achieved through disarming. They are a forerunner nation to all the nations of the earth.

The benefits of peace and no military spending have over the years proven to be of enormous advantage to Costa Ricans. Therein lies the dilemma. Military spending doesn’t benefit people. Not one country in the world can demonstrate in its history an example where military spending has produced benefits for its citizens. Yet, Costa Rica’s stellar performance as an unarmed nation is quietly ignored.

Buying arms leads to war and/or enormous unproductive costs that never benefit anyone but the arms’ manufacturers. These manufacturers believe it is their job to promote the sale of weapons through fear. It is fear which prevents the world from taking the most obvious step toward total disarmament. The military budget of the US alone, if used for humanitarian purposes would end hunger, poverty, most illnesses, and change the economic base of the whole world. If we could end fear, wars and armies, the world would have the resources to fight its real enemies. Furthermore, “War doesn’t determine who’s right – only who is left.” (Bertrand Russell)

Disarming is the right idea, it is worth fighting for and there IS a way to accomplish it! Using Costa Rica as a model for change, we, the people, need a visionary leader to champion the wisdom and efficiency of a world without armies. They need to “sell it” to others less willing to try something new, with irrefutable arguments. We need more nations to opt out of the power struggle-arms race and set even more examples of what can be achieved through disarmament.

In a time of economic world crisis, complete disarmament would change every nation’s financial future and will benefit every person on the earth. It costs 1.5 Trillion dollars annually just to support the 80 million people who are in armies world-wide and that doesn’t include the purchase of arms. Miliart spending in the US is at the highest since World War II

Who has the courage to fight for this kind of change? Could Canada, UK, Germany, France become a forerunner nation like Costa Rica and do the unthinkable and disarm? Can we, the people of the World, challenge our leaders to a higher level of leadership? We are the peacekeepers. Who else should lead and do what must be done? Who has the courage and tenacity to make world history?

In the past 50 years, science has been promoted to the status of being “above question”. In fact, most scientists get rather annoyed that you would even think of questioning their theories. I don’t understand why, when you look at their history.

Over those same 50 years, science has produced some of the most toxic chemicals on earth, all the while assuring the public that there was nothing to worry about. If the world is in an environmental, military, or ethical crisis, science has played a huge part in creating that crisis, while claiming it is they who have the answers to all the world’s current problems.

For more than 30 years, scientists became the main source of disinformation about the harmful effects of smoking. Did these scientists know that they were a pone in a grander scheme by the tobacco companies to mislead the public? If they had done the science, they would have known, yet they asserted that they were reliable, unbiased and ethical in their pursuit of the facts, which was a complete lie. The science and tobacco story is not an isolated one; there are hundreds, maybe even thousands of similar stories of chemicals and drugs which would later become known as dangerous, but which scientists assured us were safe. Most new drugs are approved by studies done by the companies that make the product, yet they claim the science is unbiased. They hire scientists to discredit independent studies which might refute their original findings. That is not science – it’s propaganda!

Science and academia have pointed to their achievements in order to hide their checkered past, but it is checkered, none-the-less. Six months before the banks in Ireland collapsed, a Harvard professor of economics assured investors that the banks were stable and solvent. He never declared that he was paid $100,000 to produce the report that led thousands of investors “down the garden path”. Did he commit a crime? Most people would say, “yes!”, but he was never charged for his obvious failure to do the research. Was he the reliable, unbiased, knowledgeable authority that people assumed they could trust – no? That’s not science.

Considering the state of science and its moral failure, nothing is above scrutiny; in particular, those who become incensed when asked to prove their claims. Their assertions that “peer review” raises their theories to being above question is in itself is not in the spirit of good science. Secondly, when asked “off the record” how well the peer review system works, most scientists say they don’t have the time to review papers (for which they don’t get paid). Some ask their students to determine the quality of science that is being presented in peer (not student) reviewed publications. The system has deteriorated to the point that it is unreliable in a “business” that “sells” reliability and that is not real science.

Science and Fraud

One of the best examples of failure to prove its assertions is the “climate change” fiasco. There has been an incredible amount of manipulation of the facts to present a story of “half truths”. An article about the summer ice in the Arctic (2007) claimed that the ice covered the smallest area in 30 years. The article asserted that this proved the theories of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The equally important but almost unreported facts are that while the Arctic had the smallest summer ice in 2007 for 30 years, the Antarctic had the largest summer ice in 30 years. The fact that this was never revealed in the article and dismissed by the press is damning evidence, which raises the question “why?”  Furthermore, this is not an isolated “indiscretion”.

While the majority of scientists are falling into line with the IPCC’s claims that the earth is warming at a dangerous pace, the more dependable satellite climate data defies their claims. Since 2001, the warming trend of the past 20 years has leveled off in what some scientists believe is part of a natural cycle. With no warming in almost 10 years, the question begs answering: why is the IPCC and its people continuing to “sound the alarm”? Is it science?

As Al Gore said to a group of Latin American businessmen in 2011, “There is a lot of money to be made in climate change”. He was speaking about private companies (like his own) who will trade carbon credits for huge profits. The proposed carbon tax will start at 1% of the world’s GNP. The main promoters of the climate change crisis is government (IPCC). What’s not to love about a new tax which will bring in trillions of dollars, some of which will be directed to creating thousands of new jobs in science? What scientist wouldn’t love that?

Science and academia are not above being corrupted. Their past has proved it. Research grants are distributed to those who do the science that supports the preferred point of view. Results which contradict the IPCC’s platform are scorned, dismissed, buried, or punished – that’s not how science is supposed to work. It doesn’t take long for the mainstream body of scientists to fall into line – their jobs and careers are on the line. It’s only the rebels (forerunners) who shout “foul”.

Business, government, and science are all on the climate change “gravy train” with thousands of jobs already connected to the political campaign disguised as science. This number could increase 100 fold if they can get us all to submit to a world-wide carbon tax. As usual, it’s all about the money. If you don’t think this could happen, then consider that a relatively small group of financial pirates manipulated information, systems and perceptions to plunder the US and most of the world of trillions of dollars. The biggest scam in history and they all got away with it. It was only possible with the compliance and/or support of academics, government, and scientists who had to have known. Trust is, and should be, at an all time low. Nothing is above personal scrutiny, including academia and science. The truth is hard to find sometimes but it is out there.

In one sentence, Fernando brought me from a warm glow of pride for our nation to a knowing shame for the way Canadians and our national sport are perceived around the world. It was an honest question…..but one I could not answer.

I couldn’t stop thinking about Fernando’s question: Why DO WE allow the players to fight? I was familiar with the sacraments Don Cherry preaches to Canadians every Saturday night about how violence is necessary in the game; but I realized that trying to explain Don Cherry to a Costa Rican, or to anyone for that matter, would only make me sound ridiculous. Is it credible to blame a TV “personality” for the state of our national sport – I think not. Cherry may be the most vocal, but he could not be the reason fighting is allowed in hockey.

There is a reason that fighting is allowed in hockey and it isn’t about altruistic ideals – it’s about money. For the broadcasters who buy and sell hockey, it is only the space between the advertising. Hockey is about delivering to advertisers a certain group of people. Broadcasters sell the eyes and ears of the audience who watches hockey to other people who make and sell stuff. The system has become very sophisticated with ongoing studies conducted about the age, sex, income, and values of the people who tune into hockey. Currently, the largest group of viewers are young males age 19-32 which is very different from the early days of televised hockey which attracted families. Somewhere between then and now, the game changed and so did the audience. For many Canadians (then and now), watching hockey is like passing a car wreck – you want to look, but you don’t want to see. What we loved about hockey, the skill and the speed, became overshadowed by the intimidation tactics, stick work and bullying of untalented players. Hockey substituted violence and brutality for skill and talent and even exported it to Europe.

Hockey is the way it is, because advertisers don’t want change. They believe there is only one audience for hockey – the one that they currently have. They don’t know that 100s of thousands of viewers would come back to hockey IF it got rid of the violence that blemishes the sport and diminishes talent and skill. Concussions threaten to end the careers of some of the best players currently playing the game. The owners, the commissioner, the players’ union and a lot of Canadians are being held hostage by the broadcasters and their advertisers. That is the current state of the game of hockey and the answer I could not give Fernando.

For those of us who love hockey and Canada’s association with it, hockey must change. The game that we love has deteriorated into something unappealing to most Canadians. Some very good changes have been made proving that change is possible. Though change is what we all need, it is the one thing we seem to dread the most. Change happens when we see the future (what we want) and act as if it already is; that means watching hockey and changing its demographics and continuing to believe that Hockey can be great again….

As I searched quotes about capitalism, I soon realized that there were significantly more quotes against capitalism than for it. They came from renowned politicians (including Churchill), economists, business leaders, gangsters (Al Capone) and even US founding father, Thomas Jefferson. Yet, we are told all the time in the media that there is no better system than capitalism. In fact, you may be branded a communist and or even a threat to a successful, progressive society simply by questioning the fairness of capitalism. In light of the melt-down of capitalism in 2008 and the world-wide repercussions which we are all still feeling today, it is appropriate, maybe even prophetic, that 2012 is the United Nation’s International Year of Cooperatives.

Cooperatives are an alternative to the idea that capital (money) is the most important ingredient in an enterprise and therefore deserves the majority of the rewards (profits). Alternatively, cooperatives are founded on the premise of people working together for their mutual benefit. They are unofficially defined as “an organization owned by its members who use its services”. Cooperatives first appeared in the UK in the mid 1800s. They differ from other organizations in that they benefit the members based on the amount they use the services of the organization rather than on the basis of their capital input. This frees the organization to serve members’ needs rather than focusing on returns for investors.

There are many examples of large scale cooperatives in Canada and around the world: ACE Hardware, Mutual of Omaha Insurance, State Farm Insurance, True Value, Piggly Wiggly (USA), Mountain Equipment Coop, Co-operators Insurance, Gay Lee Foods, Desjardins Group, United Farmers of Alberta, and Coop Atlantic (Canada). There are over 9000 cooperatives in Canada employing 155,000 people with more than 18 million members. In most regions, you can buy general insurance, life insurance, and banking and financial services from credit unions. Cooperatives provide energy services, food production, housing, and mutual purchasing, to name just a few. Almost any service can be acquired through a cooperative  in most cities. Cooperatives are an alternative that is based on the principle that there is a synergistic effect which benefits all the participants when they work together.

When the banking system collapsed in Argentina and owners deserted their businesses and their workers, they were taken over by cooperatives (groups of workers) and run very successfully – even to this day. After the economic storms subsided, the owners and managers tried unsuccessfully to regain control.

Families are the simplest form of a cooperative, and when any group works together, large or small, and the parties mutually benefit, it’s a cooperative. Cooperatives place value on all the components that make an enterprise successful, not just capital. Most corporations’ sole objective is to make as much money as possible, any way they can. Corporations have no conscience and rarely are they prosecuted for their crimes the way individuals are. Every day in the news, we see the consequences of unconscionable greed by multi-national corporations. Could cooperatives be an effective alternative to the unbridled self-interest that threatens to destroy the planet and our financial systems?

Capitalism’s greed is considered “tolerable” in part because we don’t believe there is another alternative. Its values and objectives are in direct conflict with the environment, the public, and governments whose mandate it is to serve the common good. Cooperatives offer an alternative and a model for people to accomplish almost anything. They are the way of the future and the past. They benefit the 100% rather than the 1% and they are capable of stimulating innovation, creativity, and efficiency without overly exploiting the planet or its workers.

The setting is North Korea. The central character is a husband desperately seeking medicine for his very ill wife. We learn that the only solution to his problem is to pass illegally through the border into China to get the medicine. For many Christians in North Korean, life is very difficult – they face persecution, diminished human rights, and many are refused work. The only way to escape is to illegally enter China and then travel overland to South Korea with the help of an underground railroad. The desperate
husband reckons that if he is going to risk years of jail to get the medicine, he may as well escape to freedom.

Few people understand this man’s life, but the film powerfully reveals the desperation, fear, and courage people face when they risk their lives and futures for freedom. The most moving footage shows a group of refugees attempting to force their way through a wall of North Korean police into the safety and freedom of the Japanese consulate. Some escape, others are captured – it is heart wrenching.

I promised myself after the film I would do something to raise awareness of these people who want only a chance to work and live with some dignity. My research into the subject revealed complications and, as usual, corruption in the handling and treatment of refugees coming from North Korea. It muddied the water somewhat for me.

This week Kim Jung II “Beloved Leader” died suddenly of a heart attack – his death offers North Koreans hope for the future. His 3rd son was named as successor, although for millions of Christian North Koreans, it is unknown how and if things will change. Those who have escaped the North took the opportunity to demonstrate in Seoul.

For many of us here in Canada, this story is just another blip on the daily news screen, with little background understanding or significance to us. It is difficult to keep up with all the issues that are going on in the world. There are so many problems that need our support and engagement, we may wonder how WE can do something to contribute to positive change?

In a recent interview for Wisdom-radio with Dale and Linda Bolton from Organics 4 Orphans, Dale described how this revolutionary organization was birthed. On seeing literally millions of orphans (victims of the AIDS epidemic) they committed themselves to do something. They somehow got over the fact that they were two people facing a 40 million person problem. They began with the premise that even if they could help only a few hundred children, it would be worth their effort. They, however, grew in understanding of the culture and the problems and discovered better solutions. It has been a journey of amazing revelation and innovation. The key was their commitment to do something. After that, all the rest came together.

As 2011 comes to a close with one of the great celebrations of family and caring, we should evaluate what we have done for others and how we can do our part to make a positive impact on our world. All around us we are challenged with needs. We may think we can’t do much to solve the world’s problems, but over and over again, people of modest means and expertise make enormous changes for good. Their key is commitment and endurance. 2012 will be filled with opportunities to become engaged in your community and to find a place to serve. You can’t do everything and you can’t do ‘nothing’. The world, our country, and our community need you and what you have to give no matter how small you believe your impact will be. Find an issue to affect for good. Find someone or something that needs what you have to give and 2012 will be the beginning of the best years of your life.

At one time, there was a very good operating system called CPM that was crushed by a late arriver MS DOS. Commodore once had a future in personal computing until it went head-to-head with the PC (IBM Personal Computer). Atari had a superior computer for a long time but was eliminated in an “early round” by the fashionably late PC clone. Xerox produced the feature-rich, Venture Publisher, that was “marketed” out of the business by Adobe Page Maker for Macintosh – a far inferior product.

Almost none of the original players are around today to enjoy the fruit of their ground breaking labour. The forerunners who dream and challenge new horizons don’t always make the best managers. Steve Jobs may appear to be an exception – he stayed close to his function as “Head-Dreamer” of the company and it worked for him and Apple.

Being second or third into a big market has proven to have its advantages. Research In Motion conceived and birthed an idea which required a tremendous amount of creative and technological resources, only to have others build on and innovate the idea. It is much easier to refine a good idea than it is to make it a reality. RIM’s competitors have made a place for themselves “frilling up” a monumental technology with a user friendly interface (Iphone) and a fortune of supplementary applications which appeal to anyone and everyone’s personal interests. Some of these apps are “software froth” and some are well conceived and designed add-on functions to the main and original idea of mobile e-mail, internet and phone service.

RIM still has a unique market advantage in spite of the press that is determined to destroy them. Their networks are secure because they operate them. That one advantage for an intelligent and informed consumer is worth trading all the “frills” any marketing manager on steroids can come up with. It seems that RIM’s superior security has irritated more than one government. Saudi Arabia wanted a “backdoor” into the Blackberry system in order to spy on their people. Somehow, Blackberry was “responsible” for the riots in London in August. Their networks were secure and for that reason rioters used them to organize. The British didn’t like that and called in the Blackberry folks to give an account for themselves. The social unrest and religious persecution of Christians in countries such as Egypt have made RIM the secure and obvious choice of many. For that reason, RIM has gone from being heros to zeros, at least in the press. It would appear for being just too darn good. There are a lot of people who would like them to give up their secure networks so they can  “trap data” and spy on whomever they please. In some cases, that is good and in others it is bad, but who gets to decide which is which?
RIM has a lot of enemies, but the founders are used to fighting for what they believe. They were around long before Blackberry and learned their “tuffs” over years of struggling in order to arrive where they are today. They may have made some mistakes and become mesmerized by their tremendous success for a season, but the next battle is for the survival of the company. My money is on RIM. They have the leadership to make the adjustments that need to be made. They are “forerunners” who can lead the industry again. They have been there and know what it takes to create and pioneer. They just need to remember who they are! As with most forerunners, they don’t mind taking some heat for doing things their way.

I am optimistic about RIM’s future in spite of the media’s intentional attacks and pessimistic predictions. As a team, they are more than what the “barking dogs” (the press) say they are. They have proven their character and good will in the market place and to our community whenever there was a need. This battle is not primarily about stock prices, or shareholder value, or marketing, or PR. It is about control and who is going to get it.

The first line of defense in this battle is character….“character” that says: “I will not let ‘them’ destroy me or this company.” This attitude must start at the top and trickle down through the ranks and infect those not intimidated by a good fight with courage and determination. I’ve seen that from the senior RIM team in the midst of a volley of personal attacks. They stood firm when their leadership was challenged and when “analysts” wanted to break up the company. Their courage and strength tell me they are not finished fighting, and it gives me courage and the conviction that RIM will not only survive, but will flourish.

Mark’s work was his purpose and without purpose he knew life would be missing something important. He came to one of our seminars and was able to turn his feelings into a focused objective. He discovered that he was better suited to a new purpose and was needed more now than ever before.

Statistics show that people with purpose live an additional 10 years. That could be attributed to the satisfaction and intentionality they develop when they are engaged in something that is important and significant. It really doesn’t matter if you are retiring or if you are in mid-life or if you are just graduating and starting a career, keeping a place in your life for giving to others pays many rewards. Giving “yourself” to others is a gift that benefits the giver as much or more than the receiver.

You may have thought about purpose and giving before and wondered how you could add another activity to your list of things to do. Other people may respond with: “I don’t have anything to give”. I have heard all the reasons “why not”, but there are far more reasons to find a way to make it work, than to declare it impossible.

People of all ages have talents and strengths which others don’t have. They have wisdom and character which will help a person in a dark moment find some light. You, by your very existence, are valuable to those around you – they need you. Parents need parenting, too. Fathers need fathering and mothers need mothering at any age. Young people just starting out have problems that others have never faced, yet knowing someone is with them helps a lot.
Everyone needs a purpose. They need a place to give what they are, and have, and have learned in life to someone else.

Finding a place to connect with others isn’t hard – there are needs everywhere. All you have to do it start looking for them. There are also some really amazing things that are being done by new groups with great visions and who really need help. The smaller the group, the bigger the role you can play. It is very satisfying to use and give away the wisdom that you paid so high a price to gain.

Winston Churchill said these wise words about giving: “You make a living by what you get, but a life by what you give”. Everyone needs a vision and purpose for making this community and the world better. We can’t really “live” without purpose. If you’re not giving, then you’re not living. The purposed life is one of pleasure, significance and happiness. Find a place to give the most precious thing you have – you! It will make you, others, and the world a better place.

“Never before has the global financial system been so interlinked and integrated, which means that problems in one part of the world are capable of causing severe stress almost everywhere else. ”

That’s globalism for you, folks. That’s what the globalists have forced upon us during the course of the last fifty years. That’s what they insisted would be good for us.

If ever you feel like blaming someone, blame them. And then, when you’re all done blaming the international financiers, the multinational corporation owners, the media barons and their bought politicians, blame yourselves as well.

Blame yourselves for ever having been foolish enough to believe the lies that the most greedy, self-serving, power-mad and brutish among us told you.

Recently a friend from San Diego sent me a similar quote about the state of Rome in the era of Cicero. A little research revealed that the original quote (as shown above) had been altered significantly to suit the political views of the plagiarist and his/her view of the solutions to the problems in America. In pointing out the flaws of the “system” and the failing lack of integrity on the part of many of our public officials, the author didn’t see the irony of using deception to get his point across.

The Internet has enabled a new level of everyday “slight of hand”. No one will ever know who altered the quote and the “good” is better than the “evil”, or so they believe. In some ways, big cities, big business, and politics, provide the same anonymity for people. In this state of “disconnect” from the people they serve, those who lead can only feign caring and sincerity.

With the election coming in a few days, politicians are touting campaign promises which will win votes for them. Most of those promises are not so subtle attempts to buy our votes with ‘our’ money. The promises and strategies of all the campaigns are extremely vague. It is political campaign strategy to NOT tell the public what they intend to do in the future because that would divide the voters for-and-against, which does not accomplish their end. That is why there is so much deception, avoidance, and outright lying in most of the campaigns. All of that in the name of “caring, visionary leadership”.

The classic quote from the movie “A Few Good Men” may be the politicians’ self-justification: “You can’t handle the truth!” In the film, the court-marshaled soldier eloquently defends his right to break the law for the greater good because he knows things that others don’t know. That theory may be acceptable in the military, but not in a true democracy. But the problem may not only be that we, the voter, can’t handle or know the truth, but that we just don’t care enough to listen to it. Ontarians, like the rest of the western world, are living at twice the pace of their fore-fathers. We don’t have time to think about things that we don’t have to think about. When we have a moment to consider things beyond our personal lives, we choose to take a much needed break rather than ponder the collective good.

As the ancient philosopher said, “The arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled….”. 2066 years later, humanity is faced with the same problems, requiring the same solutions. The founders of democracy quickly realized that the freedom and the responsibility to make our leaders work for us reside with us. We get the government we deserve.

The advertisement falls on closed minds: “On October 6th vote!”. Citizen cynicism is a symptom of a process which neither includes them, informs them or provides accountability. Our election campaigns have the hard content of an hour with the “National Enquirer”. For that reason, “officialdom” has become arrogant – they rarely have to give an account for their actions.

If democracy is going to work for “us”, it is not enough just to participate in the process by voting. The very nature of our freedom is to be informed, to vote, and to then hold our “officialdom” to account for their responsibilities, promises, and actions. That is the only way democracy will work for the common good. On October 6th be an informed voter and an active participant in making our politicians work for us.

One of the best things about Canada is that we honour a person’s culture and native language. We have two official languages and hundreds of unofficial languages. We have proven with our actions, laws, and financial support that we value and even celebrate traditions of every country and people group. This is to our credit and benefit. We also have created laws and rights which focus on preventing discrimination against sexual orientation, colour of skin, race, creed and culture – all in the name of protecting a person from injustice and abuse. We not only protect these rights, we actually bring them into the public square and celebrate them in a variety of ways. All levels of governments have funded gay pride parades, cultural events, and every imaginable form of celebration of Canadians’ ethnic origins.

Canadians have recognized that a significant part of a human being is connected to his/her past culture and background. Another equally important part of a person’s world-view, values, and objectives is formed in their perceptions of the origin of humanity and the planet. This perception is at the core of the person’s views about what it means to be human and to live a meaningful and “successful” life. In other words, these beliefs are every bit as important to a person as their sexual orientation, race, language, culture, or gender, yet they are being treated quite differently.

More than 90% of the world’s population believe in a superior being who has created humanity and the earth. Yet the few remaining people who have chosen to believe otherwise have pushed all of the people of faith into a corner and required them to be silent in public about one of the most important parts of who they are. People of faith are regularly mocked by arrogant atheists claiming the higher intellectual ground. Science has not, nor ever will be able to prove the origin of the species – it is impossible to do so – it still is only a theory. Therefore, belief in evolution is acquired by faith. We teach evolution as if were a fact when it has no more substance than a religion. The “some” have claimed, by the slight of intellectual hand, control over the “many” because no one is fighting for justice.

If we define freedom and equality for some of our rights in a certain way but exclude a person’s “origin orientation” (faith), it clearly constitutes an inequality. Our government doesn’t fund religious events; furthermore, because of a very vocal few who are hostile to faith, faith has been attacked with attempts to banish it completely from having any public expression. A person may bring their culture, race, sexual orientation, or gender etc., etc. freely into the public square but not their faith – and that is religious bigotry. Faith is the only protected right that is openly and publicly being treated with indignation by a small group of people who believe, in their misguided ignorance, that forbidding any expression of faith in our public intuitions is required by law.

I am always dismayed by those who ignorantly cite “separation of church and state” as justification for bigotry. First of all, that is part of the American Constitution and it does not exist in Canadian law. Furthermore, the founding fathers of the United States were not intending to restrict faith in any way, but rather to create equality for all faiths by prohibiting the institutionalizing of one denomination as the official religion of the nation. They were particularly sensitive to this issue since they were people of faith who had come to America to escape this inequality. It’s rather ironic that the profoundly ignorant justify religious bigotry using a law intended to prevent it.

I can expect that for writing this article in defence of all people of faith that I will be belittled, mocked, and marginalised. People of faith regularly endure attacks on the internet and in print that if directed at homosexuals, Jews, blacks, or East Indians, for example, it would create social outrage. Attack a person of faith, or faith in general, and there is silence. If we believe in equality it must be for everyone.

Is there religious freedom in Canada? An inquiry would reveal that there are vast inequalities for people of faith when compared with the other rights and freedoms protected by our Charter of Rights and that faith is ridiculed and marginalised in ways that others who also are protected by the Charter are not. That is the sad truth even though it is not what most Canadians believe or want for Canada.