When we heard about the passage of Saskatchewan’s Bill 139, we were of two minds. On one hand, this is very good news when it comes to protecting the rights of patriots and those who cherish common sense; on the other hand, the passage of Bill 139 is ominous news given that there was a need for such legislation in the first place.
By way of explanation, Bill 139 is also known as the Saskatchewan Remembrance Observance Act. Now that Bill 139 is law just in time for Remembrance Day 2023, provincially-regulated employees in Saskatchewan are legally protected to wear poppies from Nov. 1–11 annually.
Translation: if a worker is micromanaged by some pigheaded poppy pariah who demands that the poppy be expunged from public display, well that managerial moron can now take a long walk off a short pier given that employees are now protected, by law, to wear this crimson-coloured symbol of respect and reverence.
So, you might ask, what led to the creation of Bill 139 in the first place? Well, according to Don McMorris, Saskatchewan’s Minister of Labour Relations and Workplace Safety, the government became aware of a “couple of instances” in the province in which a worker was asked to remove their poppy.
As for the rationale for the poppy censorship? Well, brace yourselves: apparently the poppy is not “seen to be neutral.” What?! Alas and alack, some people in our great dominion in the 21st century are poppy-averse because this symbol isn’t… “neutral” enough for them?
What does a lack of neutrality mean exactly? And who are these people? And for that matter, why aren’t they incarcerated in a mental institution? But they are correct when they complain about the poppy’s lack of neutrality, for there is zero nuance when one dons a poppy.
When you wear a poppy, you are stating, unequivocally, that you are honouring veterans. That includes the more than 100,000 Canadians and Newfoundlanders who made the ultimate sacrifice in the First and Second World Wars alone.
You know something? We have a hunch that the anti-poppy creeps who bemoan the lack of "neutrality” when it comes to workers wearing poppies for a few days in November are the very same people who are totally onboard when it comes to displaying, for months on end, the Pride flag.
And we bet they have no issues with the lack of neutrality when it comes to drag queen story time being forced upon an audience of minors. In Prime Minister Blackface’s Canada, this sort of woke virtue-signalling amounts to a celebration of diversity, equity and inclusion… whereas showing respect to those who serve and for those who gave their lives to defend this nation and its values is… what exactly?
A declaration of colonialism and imperialism and, oh, what the hell, white supremacy? Is this where we’re at now? Of note, Ontario and Manitoba have similar legislation in effect protecting poppy wearers. Which brings me to our original premise: as we stated at the beginning of this tale, the passage of Bill 139 makes for a good news/bad story.
It is, of course, very good that those who wear poppies have legal protection in which to do so. But it is nothing short of egregious and outrageous that there was a need for such poppy-protection legislation in the first place. What new laws are forthcoming?
Legislation protecting the rights of mothers to nurse their newborn babies? How about a law that enshrines that citizens have the right to breathe oxygen? Talk about repairing something that never should’ve been considered broken in the first place.
It’s equal parts baffling and enraging. Well, at least it is for normal people who recognize the importance of Remembrance Day. Indeed, the motto for Remembrance Day is, “Lest we forget.” But it would appear too many people have already forgotten the significance of this day, and the significance of wearing a poppy to commemorate this day — so much so that now THREE provinces have found it necessary to enact laws to protect the rights of Canadians to wear poppies in November.
Unbelievable…And for all you poppy hating weirdos out there, please forgive our lack of “neutrality”…