A Canadian judge has ruled that a man’s anti-masking beliefs, along with his attendance of anti-lockdown protests, are cause to remove his children from his custody.
A report by The Free Thought Project detailed how the legal framework of “health and welfare” has been twisted to serve practically any government-dictated political design.
“The health and welfare of the children (and by extension their principal caregiver) should not be jeopardized because of [his] public behaviour in promotion of his opinions,” Superior Court Justice George W. King opined in his ruling, according to the CBC. The government broadcaster didn’t name the father involved in the case, to shield the identity of the children.
Human rights advocates north of the border mostly expressed little concern over the ruling. Ottawa-based human rights lawyer Yavar Hameed said that people have the right to express themselves, but that expression is limited at the point where harm can come to another person.
“So it’s not just a matter of freedom of conscience, freedom of expression protected by the charter of rights and freedoms, it’s expressions that simply might relate because of the underlying actions on the safety of another person,” he said.
But what health issues are actually at stake? The case represents how selective “wrongthink” is being used to target political opposition in dangerous ways. Most people, and especially children, have near zero risk of being seriously medically affected by COVID. In fact, studies have shown that prolonged lockdowns have had more deleterious effects on the health, well-being, and education of children than the virus.
Meanwhile, the utility of masks, whether single, double, or triple, is scientifically dubious. In the U.S., states which haven’t required them have fared no worse than virtue-signaling urban enclaves in California and the Northeast.
And all that says nothing about the prospects of the children’s health, at being deprived of their relationship with their father.
There are factors that increase the risks of serious health consequences of COVID, but they have little to do with whether states or whole countries practiced strict lockdowns and mask-wearing protocols. They have to do with age and obesity. But woke concepts like “body positivity” forbid talking much about that, let alone shaping a more sensible public policy.
The Free Thought Project summed up the abusive power of the courts in suppressing political opposition to failed, socially and economically disastrous COVID policies: “‘Disagree with the government? We can now take your kids to keep them safe.’ See how that works?”

Comments are closed.

Skip to content