Letters: Two dead. And we’re discussing language?

Article content

Sympathy for all of those people, not the language used to offer that sympathy, is what matters.

Article content

Paul Clarry, Aurora, Ont.

Article content

Article content

Why has Don Cherry been excluded from the Order of Canada?

Article content

Article content

The Order of Canada definitely has a “who-you-know” kind of clubby atmosphere. There have been Quebec separatists who have accepted the award, even though they don’t believe in Canada, and Indigenous people who have gladly seized it yet believe their land was stolen from them.

Article content

In the United States, the Presidential Medal of Freedom is given to those who contribute greatly to the fabric of the U.S.; it’s an honour and an appreciation, not a closed club. The U.S. doesn’t discriminate. The medal has even been awarded to Canadians — Michael J. Fox is one example.

Article content

In a country like Canada, which prides itself on being a hockey nation, it does seem odd that Don Cherry, who has contributed so much to “the game,” would be denied entry into the Order of Canada. Like many awards, there’s politics, elitism and discrimination involved. It’s given to some who don’t deserve it, and not given to those who do.

Article content

Article content

Don Cherry shouldn’t worry about it. Everyone knows his contribution, even if he hasn’t been “pinned” to prove it.

Article content

Douglas Cornish, Ottawa

Article content

Article content

A ‘points’ system for sentencing discounts?

Article content

Article content

Jamie Sarkonak’s recent column on Judge Faisal Mirza and the growing use of race- and background-based sentencing discounts should concern anyone who still believes in equality before the law.

Article content

We appear to be drifting toward a system in which punishment is no longer tied primarily to the crime, but to a checklist of personal characteristics and grievances. If this logic is to be taken seriously, we might as well formalize it.

Article content

Why not introduce a “loyalty points”-type system for sentencing? Points for hardship, points for identity, bonus multipliers for overlapping categories of disadvantage — redeemable, presumably, at the courthouse.

Article content

The satire writes itself because the underlying principle is already absurd. Justice cannot function as a sliding scale of identity. The moment we abandon equal treatment, we cease to have a legal system and instead adopt a form of bureaucratic moral accounting.

Article content

Article content

A court should weigh evidence, intent, and harm — not ancestry, fashionably interpreted disadvantage, or ideological trends of the moment.

Article content

If the law is to command respect, it must be blind — not selectively so.

Article content

Paul Finlayson, Vaughan, Ont.

Article content

Article content

‘A whole new case for defunding the police’?

Article content

Article content

Let me please get this straight: the “long-term health of police officers” is threatened by the very act of policing? And this excuse is being used by the very organization tasked with doing the actual policing job? These questions raise others.

Article content

First, why employ these officers if they cannot do what they’ve been hired to do? And, second, why have the police organization at all if they won’t perform the duties of policing?

Article content

I must be missing something, but the City of Victoria and its police department seem to be making a whole new case for defunding the police.

Article content

Tim Harkema, Calgary

Article content

Article content

Don’t squander this opportunity for regime change in Iran

Article content