This is as much to remind me as anything. Thursday night it seems North Americans may be in for some meteor action. (Europeans and Asians should see it the night before). The weather network, unfortunately is claiming that we'll probably be clouded over that day. :(
I know, I've been gone for the last week with no updates. I've been doing this that and the other thing. Yesterday I was up near Orangeville, helping to chop branches off a tree. Then there was Saturday, helping to move walls around in a friend's basement. Oh joy, oh bliss. Any luck I'll have work soon and then I won't be doing these physical labour type things so much...
Tuesday I went in to Sunrise records. I stop in there from time to time to see if they have any movies I'd like to see on sale. As I was browsing the box sets I noticed that the first season of Dark Angel was only $20 and the second season was $80! So I asked the guy standing a foot away about it and he said, yeah, they have a sale on first season box sets. So, I got to thinking, $20 for say 16 hours of commercial free television. I'd say that was worth it. I used to pay $20 for cable television each month (my half) and I wouldn't watch all that much more than 16 hours a month. So I bought it. I've watched two epsisodes so far and I'd say I got a good deal. I was thinking I'd buy the first season sometime anyway. (Notice, this is Dark Angel, not Angel. Angel is about a vampire and is a spin-off of Buffy, the Vampire Slayer. I've never liked Buffy and Angel never caught my interest. Dark Angel is a future fiction story about a 19 year old woman and the trouble she gets into 'cause the military is after her. I've had people mess them up on me before. They're very different shows.)
In the news: The BBC is reporting about the possible introduction of Sharia courts in Ontario. As I was reading the article I noticed the following line: The problem the Ontario Government has is it cannot say: Jews, we like your law, it is good; and Muslims, we do not like yours, it is unfair to women. My immediate reaction is, yes they can. If Sharia is unfair to women and goes against the grain of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, then the Ontario Government can most certainly refuse to introduce Sharia into its court system. It indeed must refuse. That is one of the reasons the Charter of Rights and Freedoms exists, to stop governments from trampling the rights mentioned therein.
For a government to cowtow to a religious court, allowing a religious group to dictate policy to the government, is to invite a hierarchy ("sacred rule") mindset and we'll end up no different than Iran or pre-2001 Afghanistan. I believe I can say on behalf of the vast majority of Canadians that we do not want a hierarchy government like those. The article refers to Iran as a theocracy "God holds", but is God holding when you a land with it's recent history? The article mentions various supporters of introducing Sharia law, saying that in the past it has been interpreted in a way that gives it a bad name. So, uhm, how is it supposed to be interpreted, and where has it been interpreted correctly? And how is this known to be correct, versus other ways of interpretation? I'm not trying to discriminate against Muslims here. I'm just of the opinion that to allow Sharia law courts just because there are Jewish law courts is very muddled thinking. I find that on the level of "You gave buddy over there a paycheque, so you have to give me one too. The fact I don't work for you is irrelevant."
If the supporters of introducing Sharia law courts can convince the people who make the decision to add them on their own, without refering to the fact that the Jews have law courts, that the courts will abide by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the decision makers are satisfied, without worrying about if it's fair to the Muslims that the Jews have something they don't, then by all means. Sometimes I get the idea the government is expected to act as a bad parent. (If older sister gets chocolate, younger brother cries for the same. The fact he gets it, and as much, even though it's not appropriate for him to have because he gets a sugar rush and turns into a terror generally make me think the parent needs to learn some discipline.)
This is a little, um, suprising, coming from a Canadian politician. What are they trying to say? That in the bad times what you do isn't important? I very heartily disagree. It's in the bad times that you find out what kind of person you are.
The last few days I've been helping people move. Saturday, I helped a couple move. Then, yesterday, another couple. It turns out, that it is possible to drive from St. Catherine's to Waterloo in about an hour and twenty minutes with a truck that tops out at 120 even though you get caught in traffic for the short stretch on he 403 and again on highway 8 coming into Kitchener. As it was though, I got the truck back about half an hour late, but the woman running the UHaul place said it was okay.
In the 'a bit of good news' department: the Ontario Insurance overseers have told Stop'N'Cash to Stop. Stop charging insurance fees when unlicensed to do so that is. 24% insurance on a loan seems a tad expensive to me as it is...
Meanwhile in the big money department: This guy seems to think because he was depressed he should get a lighter sentence, or at least that's what his lawyer says. I guess it's true that money can't buy happiness, even when it's millions of other people's money.
No news is good news
by alan on Thu 5th Aug 2004 8:34PM
except when you're looking for work. In such a situation, no news means no interviews, no thing to do, and no income.
In the meantime, here's a story about the latest probe to Mercury. Interesting stuff.
Shooting stars
by alan on Mon 9th Aug 2004 5:53PM
This is as much to remind me as anything. Thursday night it seems North Americans may be in for some meteor action. (Europeans and Asians should see it the night before). The weather network, unfortunately is claiming that we'll probably be clouded over that day. :(
Bye
by alan on Thu 19th Aug 2004 7:39PM
I know, I've been gone for the last week with no updates. I've been doing this that and the other thing. Yesterday I was up near Orangeville, helping to chop branches off a tree. Then there was Saturday, helping to move walls around in a friend's basement. Oh joy, oh bliss. Any luck I'll have work soon and then I won't be doing these physical labour type things so much...
TV
by alan on Thu 26th Aug 2004 5:55PM
Tuesday I went in to Sunrise records. I stop in there from time to time to see if they have any movies I'd like to see on sale. As I was browsing the box sets I noticed that the first season of Dark Angel was only $20 and the second season was $80! So I asked the guy standing a foot away about it and he said, yeah, they have a sale on first season box sets. So, I got to thinking, $20 for say 16 hours of commercial free television. I'd say that was worth it. I used to pay $20 for cable television each month (my half) and I wouldn't watch all that much more than 16 hours a month. So I bought it. I've watched two epsisodes so far and I'd say I got a good deal. I was thinking I'd buy the first season sometime anyway. (Notice, this is Dark Angel, not Angel. Angel is about a vampire and is a spin-off of Buffy, the Vampire Slayer. I've never liked Buffy and Angel never caught my interest. Dark Angel is a future fiction story about a 19 year old woman and the trouble she gets into 'cause the military is after her. I've had people mess them up on me before. They're very different shows.)
In the news: The BBC is reporting about the possible introduction of Sharia courts in Ontario. As I was reading the article I noticed the following line: The problem the Ontario Government has is it cannot say: Jews, we like your law, it is good; and Muslims, we do not like yours, it is unfair to women. My immediate reaction is, yes they can. If Sharia is unfair to women and goes against the grain of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, then the Ontario Government can most certainly refuse to introduce Sharia into its court system. It indeed must refuse. That is one of the reasons the Charter of Rights and Freedoms exists, to stop governments from trampling the rights mentioned therein.
For a government to cowtow to a religious court, allowing a religious group to dictate policy to the government, is to invite a hierarchy ("sacred rule") mindset and we'll end up no different than Iran or pre-2001 Afghanistan. I believe I can say on behalf of the vast majority of Canadians that we do not want a hierarchy government like those. The article refers to Iran as a theocracy "God holds", but is God holding when you a land with it's recent history? The article mentions various supporters of introducing Sharia law, saying that in the past it has been interpreted in a way that gives it a bad name. So, uhm, how is it supposed to be interpreted, and where has it been interpreted correctly? And how is this known to be correct, versus other ways of interpretation? I'm not trying to discriminate against Muslims here. I'm just of the opinion that to allow Sharia law courts just because there are Jewish law courts is very muddled thinking. I find that on the level of "You gave buddy over there a paycheque, so you have to give me one too. The fact I don't work for you is irrelevant."
If the supporters of introducing Sharia law courts can convince the people who make the decision to add them on their own, without refering to the fact that the Jews have law courts, that the courts will abide by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the decision makers are satisfied, without worrying about if it's fair to the Muslims that the Jews have something they don't, then by all means. Sometimes I get the idea the government is expected to act as a bad parent. (If older sister gets chocolate, younger brother cries for the same. The fact he gets it, and as much, even though it's not appropriate for him to have because he gets a sugar rush and turns into a terror generally make me think the parent needs to learn some discipline.)
Another one
by alan on Fri 27th Aug 2004 4:55PM
This is a little, um, suprising, coming from a Canadian politician. What are they trying to say? That in the bad times what you do isn't important? I very heartily disagree. It's in the bad times that you find out what kind of person you are.
MOVEMENT
by alan on Tue 31st Aug 2004 3:00PM
The last few days I've been helping people move. Saturday, I helped a couple move. Then, yesterday, another couple. It turns out, that it is possible to drive from St. Catherine's to Waterloo in about an hour and twenty minutes with a truck that tops out at 120 even though you get caught in traffic for the short stretch on he 403 and again on highway 8 coming into Kitchener. As it was though, I got the truck back about half an hour late, but the woman running the UHaul place said it was okay.
In the 'a bit of good news' department: the Ontario Insurance overseers have told Stop'N'Cash to Stop. Stop charging insurance fees when unlicensed to do so that is. 24% insurance on a loan seems a tad expensive to me as it is...
Meanwhile in the big money department: This guy seems to think because he was depressed he should get a lighter sentence, or at least that's what his lawyer says. I guess it's true that money can't buy happiness, even when it's millions of other people's money.