Mother defends sheltered workshop
Sir: Regarding the article in The Journal about employing people with disabilities for a low wage.
My son works at Wawanosh Enterprises and doesn’t care about the wages. He loves his job and the people he works with. He works in the gasket department and is great at what he does.
Don and Jeanette are absolutely wonderful people, and they encourage my son to achieve his goals. He knows his job, and if he didn’t have it to do every day, then what would he do?
Does Mayor Mike Bradley, who wants to eliminate sheltered workshops, want to spend five days a week with him, finding things to keep his mind occupied? Could you run a C&C machine, Mayor Bradley? Probably not.
As far as parents who complain about the low wages, I too was one of them. But not anymore. What would my son do every day if he didn’t have this job? He has responsibilities, and he is very proud of what he does.
Wawanosh clients also receive compensation from the Ontario Disability Support Program, and unlike people on welfare, they are working to earn their money.
Suzuki criticism was inaccurate and illogical
Sir: The letter titled “David Suzuki Harming the Economy” published June 25, 2015, makes no sense at all.
First the writer, one Barry Demeter, talks about a supercomputer in the U.K emitting a lot of carbon dioxide. Then he makes a giant leap.
He connects this supercomputer with David Suzuki, by stating that “the giant computer is yet another example of how David Suzuki’s environmental propaganda…”
As if Dr. Suzuki influenced the British government to build this supercomputer! The only time I met Dr. Suzuki, he lamented that he had no influence over the Canadian government and that Prime Minister Stephen Harper would not even agree to meet him.
Besides bad logic and non-sequiturs, Demeter’s opinion piece is factually incorrect, since the ultimate source of this disinformation is the Daily Mail, the British tabloid, not Uncle John’s Bathroom Reader, which is merely a secondary source.
Though the Met Office supercomputer emits 12 000 tonnes of carbon dioxide every year, its weather forecasts for the aviation industry help save fuel and associated carbon dioxide emissions of 20 million tonnes per year, as even the Daily Mail acknowledges.
Thus, this supercomputer actually results in less net carbon dioxide emissions.
Barry Demeter’s letter also talks about this supercomputer needing “1.2 megawatts of energy to operate.” This statement reveals his ignorance of elementary, high school physics.
Power can be measured in megawatts, not energy. Energy can be measured in “megawatt-hours,” not in megawatts. Power and energy are two entirely different but related quantities. The term ‘Power’ refers to how fast energy is consumed.
Yet, despite his ignorance of physics, Demeter continues to write about ‘terribly inefficient wind farms.’
The truth is that a wind turbine has an overall efficiency of 35% to 40% – slightly more than a coal or nuclear power plant.
Wind-derived electricity is indeed two to four times more expensive than electricity from coal or hydroelectric projects. Whether this extra cost justifies wind’s environmental advantages over conventional generation is actually a legitimate policy debate.
Unfortunately, the opponents of wind power have debased this argument by inventing their own facts, making a rational discussion impossible.
How about a Free Hug?
Sir: Have you hugged anyone lately? When did you have a hug that lasted more than 10 seconds?
It has been proven that hugging can create such an energy bond that the participants instantaneously feel an improved state.
The logical explanation of this phenomenon is that a person with high levels of oxytocin in their system is more likely to be happier, therefore flood you with positive emotions through hugging.
The many benefits of hugging include upbeat moods, lowered heart rates/blood pressure, reduced levels of cortisol (stress hormone), increased levels of oxytocin (bonding hormone), boosts the immune system, builds self- esteem and more.
Plus it is portable and it doesn’t cost a cent!
The Free Hugs Movement was created by Australian Juan Mann. He first offered Free Hugs on the June 30, 2004 in Sydney’s Pitt Street Mall.
It began as a simple way to pick himself up and pull himself out of depression. But it put a smile on the face of everyone who passed by, plus those who stopped to share a Free Hug.
It grew to be a weekly event until, in January 2005, Free Hugs was banned.
A petition was started lobbying the City of Sydney to lift the ban and allow everyone in the city to share in this awesome inspirational movement. After collecting 10,000 signatures and presenting them to the council, Juan Mann and his friends were once again allowed to share their Free Hugs, and continue to do so.
In September 2006, a video was uploaded to YouTube sharing this simple story.
Between then and now, people all over the world have joined the movement by gathering in busy locations and holding up Free Hug signs.
Free Hugs have hit Sarnia on multiple occasions, so if you see people holding up FREE HUG signs, pop over and give them a hug. It will do your body and your mind some good.
Kudos to our soccer women
Sir: I would like to give a tip of the hat to the Canadian women’s soccer team for their performance at the Women’s World Soccer Championships.
They were a couple of goals shy of making it to the semi-finals, which would have put them in a very elite group. I watched all the Canadian games and a couple of the other teams and I must say they are not genteel ladies playing croquet. As a man I would not like to play against any of the teams because I have a delicate skin and bruise easily.
A few nights go I was driving east on the 402 and just past Modeland road I saw that all the pitches at the soccer complex in use. Hundreds of little girls playing, competing and hopefully having fun.
I see a bright future for women’s soccer and with good coaching and a belief in the old adage, “it’s not whether you win or lose, but how you play the game,” a Canadian team, one day, might go all the way.
Critics of Bible should read it more
Sir: As I have read letters to the editor I have thought how blessed we are in Canada to have the freedom to state our opinions, and though often ridiculed, we can even state our religious views.
I was astounded by Bill Blake’s Letter, which stated that the sex education curriculum is not of the Liberal Party. Excuse me Bill, but this curriculum was first brought in by Dalton McGuinty, and now elaborated up with the sanction and input of Kathleen Wynn and another man who is serving time in jail for child pornography-related offences.
I do not just think, but know, that Bob Thiessen has as much right as you to have his letter with his views published.
It amazes me that so many people state what the Bible says, and does not say, and when asked if they have read the Bible, they will tell you ‘no.’ When questioned further they will sometimes admit they have just taken out verses from books of the Bible.
There is a subject called Hermeneutics, which tells us how to read and interpret the Bible. It says you often must read chapters of a book, read verses that come before a certain verse, and often must refer to other books in the scripture. If Mr. Blake, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Williams would adhere to the above statement they would not be so critical.
They would also realize the settings in which the scripture was given, and that the Bible is a very up-to-date book, and many things it states will happen before Christ comes are actually happening today.
No denomination or church will get us to heaven. Everyone who wants to spend eternity with Christ must repent of their personal sins and ask Christ to be their personal saviour. Why would anyone want to spend time with Christ in eternity if they do not want to spend time with Him on earth; and by the way, reading the Bible correctly will not reveal God condoned slavery, then or now.