This is shameful. So after dithering and refusing to show leadership on the issue of Insite for so long the Conservatives have come off the fence and made it clear that they fully oppose its continued operation by their decision to waste taxpayer money to appeal the decision of the BC Supreme Court that will leave Insite open for another year. In the meantime the program everyone knows works will continue to operate thankfully but this government’s serious disregard for science and what’s morally right is extremely troubling. Did Canadians vote for a party that would put ideology before saving lives?
Recommend this Post
3 comments:
a party that would put ideology before saving lives?
what ideology?
The ideology of criminalizing addiction instead of treating it as a health problem. The ideology of criminalizing behaviour and ignoring scientific proof.
With the Harper reformers if its not about police and military spending, they're not interested.
Harper is a Bush wannabe and is excited about a War on Drugs. The same program that has put 1 in 36 American adults in jail, has cost trillions of dollars and has been proven ineffective.
Here is an interesting website with some of the facts of the War on Drugs:
http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm
Here is an interesting article on the effects of the American War on Drugs: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/17438347/how_america_lost_the_war_on_drugs
The policies of the Harper clan are the ideology of shame and blame. It's failed in the US, why on earth would we impose it here.
On October 4, 2007, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced a Canadian War on Drugs in Winnipeg.
This policy is a direct contradiction of the thoughts of the best minds in the world.
Canada's Senate did an in depth study of the issue completed in 1998. The study was completed by the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy and examined situations around the world. The updated report of Jul 24 2001 can be seen here.
http://www.cfdp.ca/sen1841.htm
Some quotes:
The prosecution of thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens every year is both hypocritical and an affront to individual, civil and human rights.
(Raymond Kendall, Secretary General of Interpol).
From that Senate report, this is the most damning quote, in my opinion:
The real reason behind this policy:
Why, then, does prohibition persist and alternatives remain such an anathema to law enforcement and many politicians? Gil Puder, an outspoken member of the Vancouver police force puts it bluntly: "The reality is that policing’s make-work project called drug prohibition has been so successful that society can no longer afford to pay for the crime wave we’ve created..." Regarding the relationship between prohibition, weapons, and the industry of law enforcement, Puder writes that the "violence of prohibition is simply good for business." He concludes that: "There are simply too many people who have formed their value system around an idea, an idea that has back fired to magnify social misery and run roughshod over our justice system. Critical thinkers might ask why prohibition advocates are content to blame others for the disaster left in the drug war’s wake. There’s a simple reason for this, going far deeper than the overt examples of personal gain and empire building. The defining characteristic of the drug war is that it enables people to form a self-concept, based not on the quality of their character, but through disparaging the morality of others."
Hi Deb,
Well explained, thank you.
The defining characteristic of the drug war is that it enables people to form a self-concept, based not on the quality of their character, but through disparaging the morality of others.
Interesting how the Canadian neo-cons have been able to turn their own bigoted ideology into an effective self-fulfilling prophecy: who's going to expose them for what they are?
Post a Comment