Mississauga!

Welcome back, gentle reader, for another fresh serving of humankind's innermost thoughts and the ways in which they are expressed. Today's selection of authors have one thing in common: a frail grasp on grammar and logical reasoning! Ah, pardon The Postmaster, they have, in fact, two things in common, for they are, additionally, all residents of that fine suburb of Toronto which demands to be known as Mississauga.

One of the first letters that caught The Postmaster's eye from this fine town was an example of what The Postmaster likes to refer to as "Typewriter Art"; this is when someone decides to, shall we say, "spruce up" a piece that is otherwise - both aesthetically and intellectually - less than noteworthy; this is done by using the keys and paper in such a matter as to produce graphics and/or patterns on the page. In this particular case, our contributor typed her letter in the shape of a goose. The Postmaster, unfortunately, has neither the time nor the inability to self-express to recreate such a deed. That is left to your own imagination as we delve into the following:

"DO YOU KNOW MOTHER GOOSE? HOW IS SHE GOING TO FEEL WHEN JACK & JILL BECOME JACK & JACK? WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO JACK SPRATT WITH NO WIFTE TO EAT THE FAT? HE'LL PROABLY SUFFER FROM A MAJOR HEART ATTACK WHICH WILL, OF COURSE, BE AN EXTRA BURDEN ON OUR MEDICAL & WELFARE SYSTEMS. PETER, PETER PUMPKIN EATER WON'T HAVE A WIFE TO KEEP IN A PUPKIN SHELL, SO THE PUMPKIN FARMER MAY GO OUT OF BUSINESS. AND THEN HE'LL APPLY FOR UNEMPLOYMENT, AND THEN ALL BECAUSE OF A SMALL MINORITY GROUP, THE GOVERNMENT WILL HAVE TO PUT OUT EXTRA FUNDS AND EVERYONE KNOWS THERE ARE NO EXTRA FUNDS TO SPARE!"

Ah, yes. The Postmaster understand now how those who have been pushing for equal rights regardless of sexual orientation have been completely, and incosiderately, ignoring how their rights might impact FICTIONAL CHARACTERS. Pardon The Postmaster for using all capital letters, but The Postmaster feels that this is an appropriate situation in which someone does, in fact, deserved to be shouted at, as this particular someone is angrily demanding the oppression of a minority group in order in order to "protect" the rights and lifestyles of FICTIONAL CHARACTERS. However, The Postmaster should not be too judgmental of this poor soul, for it is possible that she feels such affinity to fictional characters since they doubtless account for many of her closest friends.

Let us know move from a Mother Goose afficionado to...another Mother Goose afficionado. Here is a letter from a representative of the younger generation:

"I am twelve years old and I am against same-sex marriage. I would like the sanctity of marriage to be upheld. I think it is totally disgusting for two boys or two girls to get married!"

Ah, out of the mouths of babes. What a fine young man he will be once his parents allow him to form his own ideas instead of automatically regurgitating their ignorant rhetoric! That being said, The Postmaster would like to assure this young citizen that "his" views are semi-accurate. It can indeed be described as "disgusting" for two boys or two girls to marry, or, for that matter, a boy and a girl to marry. That is why in this country boys and girls may not marry, only men and women.

And here is the final entry in our trifecta of terribly-structured texts:

"As one of millions of concerned Canadian citizens, We are against this terrible bill that would DESTROY THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE! (The union of 1 man & 1 women.)"

The Postmaster can only hope that these authors represent the exception, not the rule, of the intellects produced by the system of education in their town. This last one in particular; as he is apparently under the impression that one must use the royal "we" in proper letters. Perhaps, however, the problem runs deeper than that, as he is also convinced that it is possible to have "1 women". Perhaps he should worry less about the sanctity of marriage and more about the sanctity of proper pluralization.

And that, gentle reader, is the end of our sojourn through the minds from Mississauga. Where shall our travels take us next? Only the letters know for sure.

On Reason and Rhetoric

As other scandals rise, the issue of same-sex marriage has generated far fewer letters to fill The Postmaster's canvas sack of human emotion. Fortunately, no matter how long an issue has been debated, regardless of whether all the relevant points have been raised and discussed, and in spite of one's own intellectual limits, there will always be a Member of Parliament willing to, as it is often said colloquially, "beat a dead horse". And, on rare occasions, a person is elected to the Lower Chamber who will not only beat the horse that is already dead, but also the horse that is not even there, and will then chase after the dragons, trolls and pixies that only he seems capable of seeing.

And so we are brought to the political enigma that is the Member from Calgary West, one Rob Anders. What can one say about such a man that has not already been said, or perhaps even used as fodder to have this person of questionable qualifications removed from any sort of position even remotely resembling authority?

The Postmaster normally does not pay any more attention to Mr. Anders, nor those who share his propensity for random outbursts of illogical ramblings and unreasonable statements, as the quality of their language skills is not so great as to make worthwhile the moments of precious life one would lose to their amusingly nonsensical diatribes. Furthermore, as he has had his own unique brand of self-expression positively reinforced bye being elected and re-elected to Parliament, he is unlikely to be a strong candidate for, to put it delicately, having sense knocked into him - at least, certainly not by your humble Postmaster.

However, his attempts at coherent arguments do retain some worth, though he himself is seemingly beyond redemption, in that they may serve as lessons to those who might otherwise wander ignorantly down the path to - well, ignorance. And so I present some excerpts from Mr. Anders recent speech on Bill C-38, so that we may be warned from such behavior in the realm of dialogue and rhetoric, much like so many small children hearing of the monstrous Boogeyman. Let us proceed:

I know that some of my colleagues in this place have quoted philosophers. I know one of them relied on John Stuart Mill and took his great treatise On Liberty to go ahead and talk about freedoms.

I want to quickly touch on this philosopher in particular because I think he is sometimes being used and abused by some of my colleagues in this place. With regard to marriage, John Stuart Mill said:

A person is bound to take all these circumstances into account, before resolving on a step which may affect such important interests of others; and if he does not allow proper weight to those interests, he is morally responsible for the wrong.

What Mill is saying is that we have to take into account the interests of children in this debate because they are third parties that are called into existence by marriage.

Now, this particular effort begins valiantly enough, but then ends in a tragedy of reason and textual comprehension. Let us analyse: he introduces his theory that his fellow members have been misinterpreting the philosopher for their own needs, and promises to explain and support his position, and then not only fails to do either, but then raises a quotation which is unrelated to his immorality of same-sex marriage argument which he is supposed to be defending, and then uses what The Postmaster can only imagine is the Random Sentence Generator located exclusively in his own mind to interpret the quotation which in actual fact has nothing to do with his argument nor the conclusion which is derived from said quotation.

Those readers who are prepared may chose to continue:

Mill adds:

--forbid marriage unless the parties can show that they have the means of supporting a family, do not exceed the legitimate powers of the State...not objectionable as violations of liberty.

What he is basically saying is that we can prohibit a mischievous act if it is injurious to others and that such an act should be subject to reprobation and social stigma.

When a timely and merciful end to his career in politics arrives, The Postmaster offers that Mr. Anders should take whatever device he is using to take much-respected and studied works of philosophers to arrive at his own unrelated, uncorroborated and previously unheard of interpretations, and throw it into a pit deeper than the human despair it has caused. Or, preferably, he should do that immediately.

Should that not be enough of a warning to the careful excercise of public oration, let The Postmaster provide one further example.

Julius Caesar in 59 BC offered rewards to Romans who had many children. He forbade childless women to ride in litters or wear jewellery. It sounds pretty stark in today's climate but, nonetheless, he understood the importance of family.

Oh, sweet, naive, diminuitive, Mr. Anders. The Postmaster is sorry to that you have been raised with the illusion that the goal of Julius Caesar, by imposing fascist and discrimatory laws on women that essentially reduced them to living incubators, was to promote the importance of the family! Were it but so, The Postmaster is sure that said women would have taken the sub-human status inflicted upon them gladly, despite the obvious conflict within the notion that one can both protect the importance of the family and by devalue the intrinsic humanity of half of its members. Unfortunately for your innocent worldview, however, this particular Caesar - whom you so admire for his bold stance against women who might wish to have worth in their own being as opposed to as reproductive instruments of patriarchal society - was not so much concerned with the family as he was obsessed with conquering the world, for which task he would require many, many children to be born in order to fill the rapidly growing ranks of his military forces. A childless woman was punished not because she was morally bereft of her responsibility to the family, but because she had failed her State-designated purpose of providing the next generation of soldiers who would one day grow up and become the instrument of blunt violence and conquest under the banner of Rome.

Rather than further disillusion poor Mr. Anders, The Postmaster will save the obvious comparisons with the other notable "Culture of Life" for another, more suitable time.