In your article on June 3, our MLA, Ken Allred states that he feels that the controversy over Bill 44 is "overblown and will soon be forgotten." I could not disagree more.
This bill has the likelihood of stifling discussion within the classroom as teachers now have to worry about being brought before the Human Rights Commission should they venture into "controversial subjects" such as religion, sex or sexual orientation. The ability for parents to have their children opt-out already existed within the School Act. Placing the parental opt-out clause in Bill 44 was a completely unnecessary step.
This bill was also supposed to have enshrined protections against discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. Instead, it in essence offers state-sanctioned discrimination. If we don't allow students to be opted-out of discussions around race, culture or gender (other protected rights), why should it be any different for sexual orientation?
I couldn't help but notice that Allred did not take the time to show up and vote on Bill 44. Did he not wish to exercise his "free vote" or does his absence speak to his true feelings about the bill?
Tim Osborne, St. Albert
