November 18th, 2017

City showing favouritism with crosswalk decision

By Letter to the Editor on May 18, 2017.

I have just seen in this day’s Herald that our city council has voted to allow one group to paint our crosswalks with their flag.

I am strictly against such favouritism and can’t imagine why the council favours one organization in such a way – I hope many more will now ask the same favour.

If our mayor walks in this organization’s parade, I shall also question that action. He certainly is not representing me nor my family.

Joan E. McDonald


15 Responses to “City showing favouritism with crosswalk decision”

  1. johnny57 says:

    Oh but Joan you don’t understand!…The optics of progression trumps everything else here.
    They don’t want us to be seen as some backward “Redneck” little city..that would be a fate worse than death. If we oppose them well…well we must be hatefull homophobes, what else could it be.

  2. John P Nightingale says:

    I for one admire our mayor taking part in the parade. Same with the decision re the crosswalks. Letters such as McDonald’s and comments from contributors like j57 hide the real issue here. Homophobia, indeed raises its ugly head once again. (j57’s last observation is spot on!)

    • snoutspot4 says:

      JPN: Indeed, the only thing wrong with j57’s last statement was the period at the end of the sentence “If we oppose them well…well we must be hatefull homophobes, what else could it be. [sic]” Should have been a question mark [?]

      Rhetorical question.

  3. biff says:

    yes, j.m and j57, let us return to the good old days when women were told what to do by men; women got paid less and had far fewer opportunities for careers; women had long hair and men short hair; men wore pants and women dresses or skirts and rode side saddle; and sex was only for procreation so we could overpopulate the planet to the doom of all. oh,let us not forget to return homosexuality to being a criminal offence. ah, the good old days! sad to know that all that stuff was legal and acceptable in my short life time.

  4. petie150513 says:

    Joan should be happy that she lives in a world that doesn’t need a crosswalk or a parade to acknowledge her existence. See Joan be safe in projecting her agenda on others. See Joan promulgate the view that everyone else should obey her personal belief system. See johnney57 run, run, run, to defend Joan. Yes let’s get them and all their supporters to lobby city hall to paint a cross walk celebrating the biblical agenda of a modern world. How about the CCBR painting crosswalks with their lurid factually incorrect posters? How about one advertising conversion therapy to “pray the gay away”. Show up in person and craft your signs and crosswalks to get your point across: you want a theocracy for Canada.

  5. johnny57 says:

    Bad-bad Johnny for stirring-up the Liberal hornets nest again! lol.

  6. phlushie says:

    I have one question to ask. If the crosswalk and flag are to all of LGBTQ community to be inclusive with general population, why do they require exclusive flags and crosswalks? They have existed for many years and were never a problem for many in the general population, so why now, do they receive special status?

  7. John P Nightingale says:

    Not a “great question”. That “they ” have existed for “many years” is precisely the point. “They” have been ostracized, beaten murdered and prayed for (to cure them). Imagine as a heterosexual being subject to the same thing? No you cannot.

    • snoutspot4 says:

      JPN. Ah yes. “They”. “The Other”. I wonder when J57 decided he was straight so that he would free of persecution for the rest of his life and that he was then given the power to decide the fate of “others”. J57 is a local troll. He admits he gets his jollies from supposedly stirring up those who oppose repression by labelling them. Ho hum. Ignore.

  8. phlushie says:

    To all of you now. “They” must like the persecution, because “they ” will not leave well enough alone. “They” have been accepted but “they” still want the notoriety and to rub it in the faces of the general public.

    • John P Nightingale says:

      You know, I really wondered whether it was worthy of a reply but then I considered the source. “They” are persons who only ask to be accepted and free from persecution (in any of its forms). That you choose to refer to them as something like an inanimate object says it all to this commentator. “Rubbing it in the faces of the general public”??? I am one of the general public but not someone who because of religious convictions , feel these people can be changed or that they somehow enjoy rubbing our faces in “it” – whatever “it” is.
      “Must like the persecution”? PATHETIC!
      Do YOU accept “them” totally?

      • snoutspot4 says:

        JPN: I am Gobsmacked. “They” must like the persecution? Yah, phlushie probably thinks that Chechnya has the right program to keep folks from “not leaving things well enough alone”. Yeah, lets run them down in vehicles; lets coerce their parents to kill them or cut them off from any resources. I wonder what phlushie would do if every time he or she left their house they were met with folks whose sole person was to erase their existence. Oh of course, they would have to enjoy it – suffering is a virtue. I know it won’t do any good, but maybe just maybe folks like phlushie can watch something about conversion therapy, or justify why parents throw their children out on the street for being different from them. I hope that folks like phlushie and j57 and the whole goddamned Coaldale/Lethbridge fundamentalist bigots come out in droves to make their views known in public. Bring on your signs and your protests and your bullhorns and yell it from the rafters right at the cross walk that you oppose. Even better, suit up in gear and go after other citizens. Forget this snide exchange in the Herald, have them confront real “them” and tell the “them” to their face that their ‘kind” is not welcome in Canada. My safe bet is on phlushie wouldn’t dare. I am a cis-gendered heterosexual female who gave birth to a child who is also a heterosexual, cis-gendered individual. That apparently makes me not one of “them”. I’d far rather be with “them” than with this vile bigot.

  9. phlushie says:

    jpn and snoutspot4. You have just proved my theorem. People are who they are and most people exist without being noticed, persecuted, maligned etc. But the minute they become public with their views, then they are noticed and the negative aspects are the first to come out. That is why I asked the questions, not for religious or any other purposes. The minute you become public with your views you are in the public domain. As far as trying to erase my existence, the government is doing a fair job of that with their tax policies. And just to add something else to this rant I do have friends that are these people and most of them do not wish to have a special recognition but just want to live their lives. And I am not a fundamentalist either.

  10. biff says:

    phlush, your last entry here presents a couple of good points. placing oneself as a focus becomes a dual edged sword. attempting to create special recognition for oneself or group isolates more than it includes. in the end, the greedy power zealots that value accumulation, and have sold most of us on accumulation, continue to have their way through divide and rule. our differences are rather minuscule, yet the chasm is ever widened – and the masses become all the more weakened.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.