The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Young people can tell good from bad am a grade 10 high school stuâ€" Ident studying Canadian and world civics. I have been particuâ€" larly interested in the Young Offenders Act in Canada. Much debate has surrounded it since its introduction, having been often accused of catering too much to the needs and wants of the accused rather than the needs and wants of the victims. A young person who, for examâ€" ple, commits murder is subject to a committal to custody not to exceed four years, along with conditional The loophole for sameâ€"sex marriage does not exist istory has demonstrated that Hmaniage between a woman and a man is a fundamental building block of society. Research has proven that children, adults and society all benefit from strong, staâ€" ble heterosexual marriages. Even so, there are those seeking to redefine this most valuable institution to include sameâ€"sex partners. Such radical social reâ€"engineering, the results of which are at best unknown, â€" demands â€" significant thought and discussion before Canada tampers with something so foundational to our wellbeing. You said it Advocates of same sex marriage, determined to circumvent our marâ€" tiage laws, now claim that they have discovered an obscure legal ‘loopâ€" hole that will forever change the nature of marriage. Are we to underâ€" stand that this most critical and intiâ€" mate of institutions is to be altered because 19th century legislators didn‘t find it necessary to define the obvious, that marriage is the union of one man and one woman? _ Furthermore, this soâ€"called loopâ€" hole does not exist. To begin with, the definition of marriage is a federâ€" al, not a provincial, responsibility. The Ontario Marriage Act does not deal with the definition of marriage nor does it have the authority to do so, as was recently indicated by Bob Runciman, the minister responsible for the Marriage Registry. HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE POSSIBLE CLOSURE OF TWO UPTOWN WATERLOO ~ _ SsCHOOLS? If we read thg”‘fc_o}l!roversial" QUESTION supervision. Is this dn adequate . stories of tragedy, loss and suffering price to pay for unjustifiably robâ€" _ as a result of crime, that we cannot bing from an innocent person the tell good from bad? privilege of living? As the laws are now, there is little ki t â€" ol uin e w n e o ce e w as It is said that young people are not yet aware of the difference between right and wrong. However true this may be when applied to sixâ€" and seveh-year-olds, this law is applicable to all people under the age of 18. Is this to suggest that while we are thinking about our futures, planâ€" ning our education accordingly, and are overwhelmed by the media with Section 5 in the context of the entire Marriage Act and other marriage laws, it is clear that its drafters understood marriage exclusively as the union of one man and one woman. Mental gymnastics cannot change the fact that the adult perâ€" sons who may be married under the Act clearly refers to a "man and wife" as defined by section 31. Further, Section 5 states that any adult perâ€" son can be married, "provided no lawful case exists to hinder the solâ€" emnization." What constitutes lawâ€" ful hindrance in this case? Only the fact that Canada‘s laws, its courts and its legislators all recognize the uniquely heterosexual nature of marriage. The laws are clear. A cenâ€" tral ruling in Canada‘s common law tradition is the 1866 British case Hyde v. Hyde, which clearly indiâ€" cates that a legal marriage can only occur between a man and a woman. No Canadian court has changed that precedent and its definition of marriage. Quite to the contrary, in a recent case dealing with sameâ€"sex rights, Supreme Court Justice Iacobucci clearly stated that the issue at hand was not a "challenge to traditional conceptions of marriage." The Supreme Court also made a strong statement about the definition of martiage in the Egan case. Justice LaForest wrote for the majority, "marriage has from time immemorâ€" ial been firmly grounded in our legal "It sucks. The school board should try to accommodate the area where the chilâ€" dren are now. With bigger schools, the kids don‘t always get what they need." "I‘m not impressed. The board complains they don‘t have enough money as it is but they can go and spend more money on things like bussing the kids everywhere." Theresa Meilleur Ruth Bauman COMMENT As the laws are now, there is little deterring young people from comâ€" mitting crimes. Youth crime has doubled since the introduction of our present Young Offenders Act, and it is clear that amendments must be made. Crime should be treated with no less severity than it deserves, and I believe awareness is the only way for change to occur. tradition, one that is itself a reflecâ€" tion of longâ€"standing philosophical and religious traditions... in this sense, marriage is by nature heteroâ€" sexual." in so ruling, our top jurors were only stating the obvious. Legislators are clear. Canadians have spoken on this issue and our elected representatives listened. Just last year, Parliament passed by an overwhelming majority a resoluâ€" tion affirming marriage as "the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others." During the debate, Justice Minister Anne McLellan stated that the hetâ€" erosexual definition of mastiage is "considered clear law by ordinary Canadians, by academics and by the courts. The courts have upheld the constitutionality of that definition." She later went on to say, "the govâ€" ernument has no intention of changâ€" ing the definition of marriage." The law, the courts and our legisâ€" lators â€" speaking for Canadians â€" are of one opinion: there is no such thing as same sex marriage. There are, however, compelling reasons to support and defend traditional hetâ€" erosexual marriage, and federal and provincial officials must be encourâ€" aged in their resolve to ensure that the law is enforced and the legal defâ€" inition of martiage as the union of one man and one woman is upheld Darrel Reid, Ph.D. president, Focus on the Famity Canada "I‘m in favour of the board revamping the current locaâ€" tions to make sure the children are well looked after and receiving the attenâ€" tion that they need." Cassandra Hendricks "They have good schools already, so why spend extra money to build a new school when the money could go toward other things." Mary Anne Pender Aditi Singh, 14 emember Glen Clark? He was the NDP Premier of British Rf:r:)lumbia until he was forced to resign shortly after the edia and police conducted a joint raid on his home in late 1999. Now facing criminal charges, Clark allegedly used his powers as premier to assist a friend who he had previously hired to do some minor home renovations. Based on emerging inforâ€" mation now becoming available, people in Ontario may soon be reading similar headlines as our friends in Lotusland. According to The Toronto Star, Osprey Links investors Peter Minogue (the premier‘s personal friend since high school and the husband of his campaign manager) and David Liddle (presâ€" ident of Harris‘ riding association} managed to secure both a controversial rezoning for a waterfront subdivision and golf course and nearly $150,000 in provincial government money to promote a tournament held at that course. In fact, a list of the development group‘s investors reads like a Who‘s Who of North Bay Tories. When the land was first purchased in the early ‘90s, that list even included Harris‘ now estranged wife Janet. The rezoning of the environmentally sensitive lands was done over the vociferous objections of officials in the Natural Resources Ministry, who wanted to i uphold strict conditions that would . j Mn 8 have prevented the development | ANO THER ‘ (which is located near both a rare Class . | VI E\v One fish pickerel spawning habitat i and the osprey nests for which the | wal poig . " course is named). Government docuâ€" . |M@R®) * o ments show that the investors were ‘ &v E made aware of the restrictions on . [R t * & development well before they bought EoJ "’ e 2 1° the land. The Star reports that these || [ MWM# We previously secret government memos ' e .0 "*" also demonstrate that "the developers‘ A fortunes rapidly improved after an ‘ official said in a confidential memo J SCOTT that she had been told Minogue took his complaints about planning condiâ€" PIATKOWSKI tions to ‘political levels.‘" 1 C 101 w 1 Sn iaboitindbindlt sboanantndabeain The Star has confirmed that "at least three provincial govâ€" ernment ministries put up $148,500 of taxpayers‘ money to fund a golf tournament at the course last July" in which Harris and several of his key cabinet ministers took part. Both Tourism Ontario and the Ontario Lottery Corporation handed $25,000 cheques to Golf Strategies, a company now partly owned by forâ€" mer municipal affairs minister Al Leach. Before he retired from provincial politics in 1999, Leach‘s ministry had approved the golf course development in 1998 just 14 days after the Natural Resources Ministry again voiced its objections. Harris lands in a sand trap In addition, a $98,000 grant for promoting the Ontario Heritage Open was given to Golf North Ontario â€" an organizaâ€" tion headed by Peter Minogue â€" by the Tourism Ministry‘s Northern Ontario Heritage Fund. David Liddle‘s brother Roger is a director of the fund, although he tersely denied any conflict of interest when contacted by The Star. A spokesperson for the Tourism Ministry_appeared surprised to learn of Liddle ‘and Minogue‘s role in the development when questioned ("That‘s news to me", he told The Star.). The provincial government money was just enough to offset the $125,000 in prizes given to the professional golfers who took part in the sparsely attended tournament. Still, the participatâ€" ing golfers were hardly impressed by the stillâ€"incomplete Osprey Links course, complaining in particular that they couldâ€" n‘t use the club house or its washrooms. "It was not at all what we expected," California golfer Arron Oberholser told The Star. "Of all the great courses there are to play in Ontario, why would they pick this one?" Why indeed? & M e d ie e uk EODRD UE AE S Ooimnenieeecend There are far too many unanswered questions and far too many coincidental relationships into this matter. The Liberals and the NDP are calling for a public inquiry into the developâ€" ment and the grants, though it is more likely that the provincial auditor will be assigned the task of getting to the bottom of the case. The media, including such traditionally supportive outlets as The Toronto Sun, aren‘t going to let go of the issue either (The Sun stated in a scathing editorial that "no matter how you slice it, it doesn‘t look good."). This is political trouble with a capital T, which stands for Tory. : P" i Role n e booen on en uP Harris was expected to finally end his silence on the issue this week. Last week, reporters were not able to talk to him because he was busy. He was golfing in Florida with a group of friends that included Peter Minogue and Jack Raino, another key investor in Golf Strategies. Al Leach was with them. Another coincidence, no doubt ANOTHER | _ VIEW 12 x1 o