Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson went on a camping trip and retired for the night.
“Watson, look up at the sky and tell me what you see,” said Sherlock.
“I see millions of stars,” replied Watson. “And what do you logically conclude as a result?”
“Well, it tells me there are millions of galaxies, billions of planets, and that we are a small and insignificant part of the universe,” Holmes answered, and then asked, “What logical conclusion did you arrive at, Watson?”
“Holmes, you idiot! Someone has stolen our tent!” Watson replied.
So what is logic anyway? By definition it’s “a proper or reasonable way of thinking about or understanding something.”
I began pondering the subject of logic after reviewing some decisions being made in our country, and the logic behind each decision. Let me begin …
[emember_protected for=”2″ custom_msg=’For more on this story, please see the Feb. 9 print edition of The Cross Roads.’]
As it happens, the official version of Robert Stanley Weir’s Canadian anthem lyrics went like this: “Thou dost in us command.” In 1914 the line was changed to “All my sons.” So now the government wants to change the words back to the original “in us command.”
Fair enough, except for the logic behind the decision.
The rational goes like this: “Changes to O Canada are a return to its gender neutral origins.”
But I’m not so sure it was Weir’s deliberate intent to project gender-neutral lyrics back in 1908.
Nevertheless being gender neutral has been given so much prominence that our prime minister finds it necessary to correct a Canadian who asked him a question using the word “mankind.” He quickly corrected her, saying “peoplekind” would be a better word to use. If you’ve never heard the word before, don’t worry; even spellcheck got confused on that one.
And the next topic was the court cases the Canadian government has against veterans. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s logic was to say, “The veterans are asking for more than we are able to give right now.” But what about the $215,000 they were able to give towards his vacation and the $8.1 million they were able to give for a temporary hockey rink?
Then there’s the Bill C-45, to legalize marijuana. It needs more thoughtful consideration.
The rationale is there will be less money for organized crime and more difficult access to pot for our kids. Yet Tory justice critic Rob Nicholson said, “Is there any easier way for young people to get marijuana than if their parents have four plants in the kitchen?”
The logic in response was that it’s much like having prescription drugs or alcohol in the home, where adults are expected to take extra precautions and safety measures. But, unlike prescription drugs and alcohol, plants need to be out in the open.
The public use of marijuana for anyone over 17 years of age is restricted to 30 grams at a time (equal to 60 joints).
But what does ‘at a time’ actually mean? Is that 30 grams a week, 30 grams a day or 30 grams at any given time? Is this an appropriate amount considering the Canadian Medical Association has warned that the human brain continues to develop until 25 years of age and marijuana use gravely stunts the development of adolescents?
As for driving out the illegal black market so there will be less money for organized crime, experience shows this doesn’t happen. The black market has not gone away in Colorado, Oregon or Washington State since marijuana was legalized for its recreational use.
And what is logic anyway? Does the logic we’re seeing belong to some other ‘peoplekind’ that many Canadians are not aware of?
[/emember_protected] 
