Once—before the stars were stitched onto flags and before the anthem bellowed from stadium speakers—Benjamin Franklin had a suggestion. For the coins, the ones jingling in pockets and clinking in tills. Not E Pluribus Unum, not In God We Trust. No. He wanted something simpler. Something sterner.

“Mind Your Business.”

It wasn’t a brush-off. It was a blueprint. A compact little sermon on Enlightenment grit. Rationality, self-reliance, industrious calm. Do your work. Keep your eyes on your own hands. Don’t meddle. Don’t preach. Handle your affairs. Be the kind of citizen who builds a republic rather than begs it for direction.

That motto rusted out.

By the time the Cold War turned nerves to ice and the bomb made belief feel like armor, a new phrase took root:

“In God We Trust.”

First scribbled onto coins during the blood-wash of the Civil War—then canonized in 1956, when the Soviets became shadows and ideology demanded uniforms, even metaphysical ones.

The new motto wasn’t declared as a replacement, not in any official way. But the swap happened just the same. Quiet as snowfall. Loud in its implications.

Franklin’s phrase whispered, You’ve got this. Think. Build. Persist.

The new one thundered, He’s got this. Pray. Obey. Believe.

The contrast is no small thing.

One tells you to wake up early and get to work. The other suggests your fate’s already in escrow, held by something you can’t see and can’t question. One is the carpenter’s creed. The other is a liturgy.

And slowly, the hammer was replaced by the hymn.

You see it now on courthouse walls, above the judge’s bench. On money, our national sacrament. In speeches delivered with polished piety. It became more than a motto—it became an incantation, a passcode to prove allegiance.

Meanwhile, “Mind Your Business” vanished like fog burned off by rhetoric. Too plain. Too secular. Too stern for a nation that preferred to feel chosen rather than responsible.

We didn’t argue the shift. We didn’t vote. The slogans just traded places like day and night. And no one stopped to ask if something had been lost.

But maybe we should ask.

Because once upon a time, the message was clear: Handle your shit. Quietly, diligently. Take care of your land, your word, your ledger. Don’t wait for salvation. Don’t outsource your soul.

Now? We speak more of trust than of labor. More of assurance than of accountability.

And “Mind Your Business”—that old, flinty mantra of self-governance—it didn’t just disappear. It mutated.

What once meant tend your garden now means stay out of mine.

What once was responsibility has soured into deflection.

Don’t tell me what to do. Don’t ask how I’m living. Don’t expect me to help.

We kept the phrase but lost the discipline.

We wear it like a shield now—sharp-edged and hollow.

Not a call to carry your weight.

Just a warning not to look.

And maybe that’s the real motto now:

Don’t look. Don’t ask. Don’t care.

Perhaps by some innocuous sound or smell, maybe something I saw, or my subconscious was simply bored and began thumbing through memories like the pages of a photo album, it opened event that I hadn’t thought of in years. But there it was as unannounced as a door-to-door salesman. No doubt faded by time, it nonetheless retained it’s essence.

To the best of my recollection, it was July, 2012. At the time, we were living on a four acre plot of land with the house having been built next to a main county road. The only thing separating us from the farm equipment thoroughfare (and illegal drag strip during summer months) was a lateral ditch, strip of grass, and six-foot wooden fence. With all the elbow room of living in the country, neighbors closely bordered us on both the left and right.

Per our routine, my wife and I sat peacefully watching the nightly news, which made the time around ten o’clock or a little thereafter. Our three older dogs were lounging with us in the living room while our two pups were outside doing whatever it was that pups do at night. We didn’t hear the impact, although neighbors farther from the road did. No, the first indication that something was wrong came when pups erupted in a barking frenzy. As I rose to see what the commotion was all about, they rocketed through the dog door and raced to the front door, barking the entire way. Then whirling around, raced back outside, now followed the three seniors who had joined in on the barking.

Stepping out onto the back steps, I saw a car parked on the side of the road directly across from our house. It’s headlights silhouetted a person running towards the neighbor’s house screaming something unintelligible. My first thought was that someone had hit a dog, which was unfortunately a too-common occurrence.

“Something happened,” I said as I headed for the front door with all five barking dogs crowding me. Pushing my way past them, I went outside to find the car driverless but idling. Not far away lay a dark, crumpled mass centered in the road.

They said the boy was 16, but upon approaching him, my guess was closer to ten. He looked so small, so young, as he lay on his back, arms and legs splayed, his head resting in a large pool of blood. I had no doubt that he was dead, this not being my first encounter with a corpse. Looking down upon him, I could feel the body empty and lifeless. Even had he been alive, his condition was well beyond what my basic first aid training equipped me to deal with.

Assuming that a 911 call had been made, I stood over the body to - hopefully - ward off any oncoming traffic. Our neighbor on the opposite side had a beautiful pit bull who trotted over to investigate, and was quickly retrieved by his owner who carried him back home. Neither of us spoke.

Within a couple of minutes came the wailing siren and flashing lights of the responding Sheriff deputy. I flagged him down, and no sooner did he begin working on the body than an ambulance arrived and EMTs began their futile attempts to resuscitate the boy. After giving my statement, I was returning to the house when a gut-wrenching shriek stopped me.

Yeah, the boy’s girlfriend. Or ex-girlfriend, as they had broken up just minutes before, running hell-bent down the middle of the road screaming the entire way. The victim and his friend had left her house just minutes before. Originally investigated as a homicide, the friend was initially suspected of pushing him in front of the car; it was later determined a suicide.

The blood stain remained for weeks as a grim reminder, and neighboring dogs attracted to the scent, investigated. The following month, a car pulled up to the spot where the boy had been killed and I watched as parents, and probably friends or family, reverently nailed a white cross to the nearby power pole. Each year, a bouquet of flowers would be placed at the foot of the cross commemorating that tragic night.

How the Government is Turning Your Kids Trans

For years, Americans have been forced to suffer through the twice-yearly ritual of setting our clocks forward and back, disrupting our sleep, ruining our circadian rhythms, and making us question the very fabric of time itself. But what if I told you that this so-called “time change” isn’t just about manipulating daylight? What if I told you Daylight Saving Time is a covert government operation designed to dissolve gender norms and subtly nudge society toward transgenderism?

Stay with me.

First, let’s examine the facts. Prior to the introduction of Daylight Saving Time (DST) in 1918, there were precisely zero documented cases of gender transition surgeries in the United States. None. Coincidence? The math speaks for itself. The moment we started messing with time, reality began to crumble. By 1966, when the Uniform Time Act forced DST onto the nation like a mandatory pronoun policy, transgender visibility started to rise. By the 2000s, when states started arguing over permanent DST versus standard time, gender dysphoria clinics began popping up like Starbucks locations.

How does this happen? Simple: Chrono-Gender Dissonance.

The human brain relies on consistency. When we lose an hour in the spring and gain it back in the fall, our bodies don’t know who we are anymore. Are we morning people? Are we night people? Am I a man? Am I a woman? Time-shifting disrupts the biological anchors that once kept our identities fixed in place, and Daylight Saving Time accelerates this decay by unraveling the traditional gender norms that were once grounded in stable, farm-driven sunrise schedules.

Moreover, consider the effect of hormonal discombobulation. Studies show that lack of sleep disrupts hormone levels, particularly testosterone and estrogen. Losing an hour of sleep in March? Boom—testosterone dips, men feel weaker. Gaining it back in November? Sudden estrogen surge, women become taller. It’s no wonder that people begin questioning what’s happening inside their own bodies. The system keeps us in flux, nudging us ever so gently toward androgyny.

Still skeptical? Follow the money. Big Clock and its shadowy Greenwich overlords have been manipulating global time for centuries. Watch companies, phone manufacturers, and a secret council of timekeepers profit from the chaos. It’s an international operation, designed to weaken traditional masculinity, destabilize feminine identity, and confuse children.

The solution? A return to God’s Time.

No more clock-switching. No more state-by-state debates. If the sun is in the middle of the sky, it’s noon. If it’s dark, it’s nighttime. We must stand firm against the Woke Clock Agenda before every child in America wakes up one spring morning wondering if they were ever really a boy or a girl, or just another victim of the deep state’s relentless meddling with time.

We stop the time change, we stop the confusion. It’s that simple.

You reach that stage in life where you are attending more funerals than weddings. And the former is why we have gathered today. We are here to say “Goodbye” to Dennis.

I don’t remember the actual moment I met Den, even though he had an imposing presence at 6’2”, two hundred plus pounds with a personality to match. It was probably during my freshman year in college at a mixer sponsored by the science department. Whenever it was, an immediate friendship was forged. Without any hesitation or effort, it morphed into a brotherhood lasting over forty years.

He was from New Hampshire; I was an Ohioan, so we had the shared desire of not pursuing a higher education on a campus requiring snow removal four months out of the year. Plus, although we both grew up landlocked, we had a kindred affinity for the ocean. Attending the University of Miami satisfied both these requirements.

After graduation, he got married and remained in South Florida. I was disillusioned and moved back North. But we remained in touch. Upon my return to Miami two years later, he and his wife welcomed me back with open arms like a prodigal son. We picked up where we left off without skipping a beat.

For however long you knew Dennis, whether a portion, a majority, or the entirety of your life, you were fortunate. The duration was irrelevant because his welcoming warmth never waned. Your days were brighter, which made your months fuller which meant your years were richer. Dennis elevated you. His impact was profound because he was genuine. He was a constant in a very inconsistent world. Den could have taught a MasterClass or given a TED speech on the fundamentals of being a great friend.

In Den you had an ally. He shared your triumphs without stealing the spotlight. He was a confidante who pulled you up without being judgmental. He’d give you an honest opinion or a differing viewpoint in a way that didn’t belittle you. And he knew things. He soaked up information on a variety of subjects. He’d have the answers to your questions, no matter how obscure the inquiry seemed. And if he didn’t know the answers, he’d make a point to find them for you. Dennis was Google before Google was Google.

He fully embraced life and sought experiences which he wanted to share with others. He led the way to adventures, whether off the beaten path or right into the thick of things. If anyone was hesitant, he encouraged/dragged them along because he knew good times were to be had. He was usually correct too, because there were enumerable good times. Much to your liver’s detriment, but good times, nonetheless.

I am eternally grateful for sharing so many years with him. Although our journey reached its conclusion, well before I would have liked, his treasured guidance remains. I can take comfort in knowing I’m the person I am today because of meeting Dennis.

On Friday February 31st of 2025 we lost Mrs. Annie B. Long. She was born September 22, 1925.

Mrs. Long would've been a centurion this year. She worked most of her productive years as a teacher with the Hanover Virginia Education System. She gave most of her spare time to volunteering at the after school programs at the YWCA helping students of all ages with their homework.

Mrs Long was a proud mother of two children. She will be an angel for her daughter, Kathy Long and her twins Helen and Holly. Also she will be an angel for her son David Long Jr. and his son Jasper.

She also leaves behind three sisters, Jackie Hall, Joyce Cane, and Kim Bridges. She will be a guiding light for 11 nieces and nephews. She also leaves many friends and distant family as well.

Mrs. Annie Long wanted her family to celebrate her introduction to heaven at her wake which will be held at the Bishop Funeral Home at 3201 Park Ave Henrico, VA. 23228

Remembering Mrs. Long is missing her famous apple pie and her friendly smile whenever she came around. You will never be forgotten, Mrs. Annie B. Long

How They Make You Pay to Get Scammed

Look, every second you spend looking at a screen is worth something. Companies are falling over themselves to shove ads in your face, to track your every move, to know what brand of toothpaste you’re thinking about buying before you even know it yourself. And yet—somehow—you, the one being studied, sold, and used, are the only one not getting paid.

This wasn’t always how it worked. Once upon a time, you got free TV because ads paid for it. Seemed fair. Radio, newspapers, same deal. But somewhere along the way, that balance got completely wrecked. Now we’re in this hellish setup where:

You pay for platforms that still show you ads.

You give away personal data that companies sell—without cutting you in.

You subscribe to services that charge more just to remove the ads they forced on you in the first place.

How did we all just… accept this?

-

How They Get You Twice (And Then Again for Good Measure)

YouTube. Hulu. Cable. Spotify. Netflix. Mobile games. Take your pick. Every single one of these has some scammy, double-dipping nonsense going on.

Hulu wants you to pay more to remove ads, but their cheaper plan still costs money. Wait—if ads are covering the cost, why am I paying at all?

Cable never got cheaper, but they crammed in more commercials. Remember when TV had, like, three ad breaks per show? Feels ancient.

Streaming services jacked up prices, then introduced cheaper ad-supported tiers—which is just paying them to advertise to you.

Amazon Prime now has ads unless you pay extra. But I thought Prime meant “premium”? Nope. Just means they found a new way to nickel-and-dime you.

So if advertisers are paying these companies, and you’re paying these companies, who’s the sucker here?

-

You Are the Product (And They Own You)

Your scrolling, your clicking, your hesitating on a product page for half a second too long—that’s all data. And that data is worth billions.

Companies aren’t just selling ads anymore. They’re selling certainty. They track what you buy, what you want, what makes you angry, what makes you stop mid-scroll, and they package that predictability into a goldmine for advertisers. That’s why the ad for the exact pair of shoes you almost bought follows you across the entire internet. It’s not a coincidence.

And the best part? You don’t get a cut.

If human attention is the most valuable resource online, why are humans the only ones not making money off of it?

-

What a Fair System Would Look Like (That Will Never Exist)

Let’s be real: the solution is painfully obvious.

If a platform runs ads, it should be free. Ads are supposed to cover the cost, right? No excuse for also charging a subscription fee.

If your data is being sold, you should get paid for it. If a company profits from selling your habits, you should be on the payroll.

But we all know this won’t happen. Because we’ve been trained to accept paying for our own exploitation.

We don’t even think to demand better. We just sigh, shrug, and sign up for yet another subscription.

-

Welcome to the Subscription Hell You Can’t Escape

And it’s getting worse.

Every major platform is moving toward “pay more or watch ads.” The scam is now the default.

Ad blockers are under attack. Google, Apple, and everyone else is working overtime to break them because they threaten the ad-revenue pipeline.

AI-driven ads are going to make things way creepier. Your face, your voice, your mood—all analyzed in real-time so an algorithm can decide what to sell you right this second.

You don’t own your attention anymore. It’s been stolen, resold, and locked behind a paywall.

-

So What Can You Do?

Honestly? Not much. You can’t boycott the entire system. But you can push back in small ways:

Use open-source, ad-free platforms whenever possible.

Block ads aggressively. They hate it.

Push back against subscription models that still force ads.

Demand laws that let people profit off their own data.

At the very least, don’t let them convince you this is normal.

It’s not. It’s a scam, dressed up as a “service.”

So next time they ask for your money and your attention? Make them pay for it.

Our names are _____ and we are from _______. We are writing to you today to ask that you stop discriminating against First Nations children and their families and communities. We ask that you adequately fund services on reserves so that the people there can have their needs met. We ask that you negotiate with First Nations communities themselves, and all First Nations communities, to create a Final Settlement Agreement on Longterm Reform of First Nations Child and Family Services that is better than the pathetic Draft Final Settlement Agreement you have now. We need an actually good agreement on child and family services that will actually guarantee that all current and future First Nations children will be able to stay with the families that love them and be safe. You also need to make sure all children and youth needing Jordan's Principle services get them in an adequately fast time. The Final Settlement Agreement on Jordan's Principle needs to also be adequate to permanently ensure all children and youth get the services they need in a timely manner. We ask that you phase out the ineffective institution of Indigenous Services Canada and replace it with an Indigenous-run treasury board. Finally, we ask that you adequately fund and support education on reserves so that the educational needs of the children are met and they receive educational outcomes equal to that of non-Indigenous children.

There are so many problems facing First Nations children, especially on reserves. Problems that are caused by the willful and cruel behaviour of the Canadian government. Canada's discrimination against First Nations children is deep, severe, and widespread. And it is causing immense damage to the lives of children.

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has made many orders to Canada to stop the discriminatory conduct, and yet Canada has not rooted out the discrimination and inequity in its dealings with First Nations children, families, and communities.

First, let's talk about the situation with Child and Family Services. For decades, Canada has underfunded prevention services that keep families together. This leads to children being taken from their homes, their families, their loved ones. It leads to children being placed in foster care where they cannot be with their families who love them and who they love. First Nations children who are taken from their families are the vast majority of times not being abused. Their families are simply poor, or disabled, or struggling with addiction, or mentally ill, and they are trying their best to take care of their children despite the factors that they have no control over. If equitable and effective prevention services are funded, developed, and put into action, then instead of taking children away, child and family services could help to give families what they need in order for their children to have the childhoods they deserve.

During child welfare investigations, First Nations children are 17 times more likely to be taken from their homes, not due to abuse, but due to their families being poor or struggling. There are more First Nations children taken from their homes now than there was at the height of the residential school era. This is all horrific. Children need their families, and taking children away from their families causes immense and lifelong trauma, causing mental illnesses and even physical illnesses.

Canada has been negotiating with some First Nations representative groups to create a Draft Final Settlement Agreement on long term reform of child and family services. But there are many problems with this agreement.

First of all, the negotiations that lead to the Draft Final Settlement Agreement were kept secret from the public, including the public of the First Nations communities themselves. If the process of negotiation is kept hidden from the First Nations communities, then the communities cannot meaningfully affect the creation of the Draft Final Settlement Agreement and its contents. This is not democratic. Victims of previous discrimination, notably, have been left out of the negotiation process that lead to the current draft.

Secondly, not all First Nations communities could send their representatives to the negotiation table. This means that some First Nations communities were completely left out when it came to the process of creating the draft, since they were not even able to send representatives.

Experts in child and family services and child wellbeing were also not consulted in the making of the Draft Final Settlement Agreement on child and family service reform.

Along with being exclusionary and undemocratic, the Draft Final Settlement Agreement also does not solve the problem of prevention services facing a lack of funding. The reason families can't get the help they need and are separated is because prevention services to give families help is currently underfunded. And they will continue to be so under the Draft Final Settlement Agreement.

First of all, the $47 billion in projected funding over ten years is simply a projection, a prediction, it is not a guarantee of any sort. The funding for prevention services will depend each year on a vote by the House of Commons, and is therefore subject to the whims of government and politics. Secondly, after the next nine years, there isn't even a prediction of funding. We don't have any idea what funding for prevention services will be like after the ten years run out. The funding structure is not effective, according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy. What's more, the projected $47 billion over ten years is unlikely to be enough to adequately fund prevention services. Especially since we don't know how much of it is actually going to go to prevention services and not governance or things like that.

The way that reforms will be made to family service provision on reserves is also flawed. The Reform Implementation Committee will be responsible for figuring out what things to change with the way child and family services is carried out on each reserve. However, the Reform Implementation Comitte's work will be secret. What changes they will make will be kept secret until the changes are already put in place. This is an undemocratic way of doing things and does not let the public, especially the public of the First Nations communities, be involved in the reform process. It also doesn't not let civil society be involved. Because of these two things, the reforms that get put into place by the Reform Implementation Committee will likely not be effective in creating child and family services that keep children with their families.

Not to mention, the recommendations the Reform Implementation Committee call for will need to be agreed to by the Canadian government. The Reform Implementation Committee for child and family services will make a report that is kept secret from the public, which will have the changes it wants to put in place. The federal government will have the power to either green light or veto these changes, depending on whether the government likes them or not. Given the government's track record of continually trying to take kids from their homes for decades, the government will not allow changes to happen to service provision that actually keep loving families together.

The Draft Final Settlement Agreement will also have a secretariat who will gather, analyze, and share information about child and family services and what the results are for children and families. Yet this secretariat will not be independent from the government and apolitical. This means that the work that it does will be biased and untrustworthy.

The Final Settlement Agreement needs to put provisions in place that ensure that if any discrimination or inequity is happening at any level of family service provision, that discrimination/inequity gets identified, addressed, and solved. They need to have a mechanism that is effective at solving any problems that arise and is enshrined in law for future generations, while being able improve over time.

The Alternative Dispute Resolution Process in the Draft Final Settlement Agreement does not do that. First of all, this dispute resolution process only lasts for ten years, and there is no mechanism to deal with problems after ten years is up. Secondly, the Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism has no power to force Canada to act in specific ways or change its specific actions, therefore letting Canada not do what it needs to do in order to be equal and equitable. The mechanism cannot ask for damage compensation, and it also cannot do anything about systemic issues. As well, the employees in this process have no requirement to be impartial and apolitical, which compromises their ability to act in just ways. The mechanism cannot even ask for more funding of prevention services or funding of new service components.

The Alternative Dispute Resolution Process does not protect the human rights of First Nations children and families. First of all, people making claims under this mechanism lose the rights they have under the Human Rights Act. Communities cannot make any human rights claims regarding the issues "addressed" in the Draft Final Settlement Agreement. And there are no measures stopping the government from legally retaliating against people making claims in this process.

There are other problems as well. As well, the dispute resolution process takes a long time, which means that urgent cases involving children who need help immediately are stalled and the children suffer. And if a person or family wants to bring up complex cases with the Alternative Dispute Resolution Process, they do not get their legal representation funded. This means that many people cannot bring up the problems that they are having, problems that need to be addressed, due to not having the money for legal representation.

The Draft Final Settlement Agreement limits the definition of First Nations Child to the definition under the Indian Act. This leaves many First Nations children out, because there are many children who are recognized by their First Nations communities but not recognized under the Indian Act, and these children also need services.

There is also not adequate funding to help First Nations people self-advocate for their needs. Band representation services help First Nations people be directly involved in individual child welfare cases. This is very important, because each child welfare case determines the fate of a child and their family. If the communities, families and children involved in the case have band representation services, then they can have their voices, desires, and needs be heard better during the case, and this will help them stop injustice from happening. However, in most communities, band representation services are underfunded. Off-reserve, Indigenous people have no access to band representation services at all.

Other problems with this draft include that once signed, it cannot be changed if some aspects of it are harmful, it doesn't hold up the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and it gives Canada too much power over child and family service providers as opposed to giving power to the First Nations themselves.

Chiefs across Canada have called on the federal government and the other negotiating parties to create a better agreement, an agreement that is actually effective at stopping the trauma, injustice, and discrimination First Nations children, both on and off reserve, are being faced with due to the current child and family service model. They have created the National Children's Chiefs Committee to push for true and effective change, so that children can stay with the families who love them. They monitor the reform of Jordan's Principle services (more on that later) and child and family services, and report back to First Nations representatives across the country.

So what should an actually good Final Settlement Agreement, which is better than this draft, be like? First Nations communities, First Nations experts, and other experts working closely with First Nations communities have many ideas for how to bring real reform. The child and family services of each community should be unique to the community and its needs, and should be developed by each community. Services should be lead by the communities they serve. And any changes or reforms should be adequately reviewed by each community before being put into place to ensure that the community wants the changes being made and that the ideas and desires of the community are included. Regional and subregional organizations representing First Nations communities should also have their voices heard and included, and also deserve to have funding to be able to be involved in the negotiation and in other negotiations and issues.

Parties involved in the negotiation of this agreement should be allowed to go to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to bring up any necessary cases while negotiations are in place. This is because the Canadian government continues to deal cruelly with First Nations children and families while the negotiations for reform are in place. And therefore, parties need to be able to go to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to seek help for children and families who are being treated unfairly while the negotiation process is in place.

There should be a National Advisory Committe made up of First Nations people that has representatives from every First Nation community. There should also be a transparent and independant Expert Advisory Committee that includes independant and credible experts vetted by the communities. The National Advisory Committee, the Expert Advisory Committee, and most importantly First Nations communities themselves should be the ones leading the reforms.

Child and family services should be holistic and multigenerational, taking into account the physical, cognitive, emotional, psychological, spiritual, and social needs of the children. Services should help children have a sense of belonging and attachment to their families and communities. They need to be given good educations, healthcare, housing, and other basic necessities. And services must help children be part of and immersed in their languages, cultures, and heritages. We need to actually help the families to have their needs met, we need to actually help the children to have their needs met, instead of taking children from their families.

Prevention services should include income support, housing, education and employment opportunities, tutoring, after-school clubs, recreational and cultural programs, childcare, therapy, counselling, medicine, speech therapy, trauma support programs, addiction and mental health programs, parenting education, intimate partner abuse prevention, community connection, in-home crisis intervention, trauma education, and more. These services will help children and families thrive instead of further traumatizing them when they're in an already vulnerable situation.

Prevention services should include post-majority supports. Post-majority supports are supports given to young adults who are entering into the adult world for the first time and are therefore vulnerable and need extra support. If there are adequate post-majority supports, this will help young adults establish happy and sucessfull lives, which will help them create better lives for their children and break cycles of generational poverty and trauma. Post-majority supports need to be evidence-based, culturally appropriate, and needs-based.

In order to provide the services families need, child and family service providers need to have all the funding, resources, and supports they need in order to provide services that help families and keep them together. The government needs to provide this funding, support, and resources so that the human rights of First Nations children and families are met. The funding structure needs to be evidence-informed as well as being community-lead. Funding structures must take into account the specific needs of each community, including needs related to remoteness or specific disadvantages. Funding structures must also respond to the actual and changing needs of children, families, and communities. Service providers also need to be given flexibility as to how to use their funding to meet people's needs. There should be funding set aside for if there is more than expected use of child and family services.

The funding given to First Nations communities and service providers in order to keep kids in their families cannot decrease over time. There must be adequate legal and policy protections in place that make it so that funding for prevention services does not decrease but rather rises to meet changing community needs. There needs to be adjustments to funding that adequately meet the changing needs due to regional and national inflation levels, due to changing populations, and due to changing needs.

There must also be funding for things such as emergency funds, extentuating circumstance funds, maintenance costs, technology, and information gathering. There needs to be adequate money to pay for people to represent their communities to the government. Funding must exist to help with the planning processes that go into creating new services or expanding and improving services. And there needs to be money for insurance, technical experts who provide advice and guidance, buildings, and all other costs related to delivering prevention services that help children and families meet their actual needs.

Funding must be guaranteed. It should not be dependent on political factors, and adequate and comprehensive funding must be guaranteed no matter what party is in power. As well, no matter how exactly a community is delivering child and family services, whether they are doing it themselves or relying on an agency or something else, they should be guaranteed to have the adequate and comprehensive funding they need. We don't know yet exactly how much funding will be needed for reformed child and family services, but the government must pay the money necessary no matter how much it is. The funding should be put into the Special Purpose Allotment so that it can't be used for anything else. The government should not be allowed to use any laws to try to justify underfunding prevention services or other necessary services to First Nations.

There also needs to be adequate funding for First Nations self-advocacy. There needs to be adequate funding of band representation services, which help people engage with child welfare cases. There needs to be adequate funding of this service both on and off reserves. Also, Canada should adequately fund national and regional groups lead by First Nations youth that help the youth advocate on issues that affect them.

The future of child and family services needs to be evidence-informed. This means that there needs to be regular information gathering on how services are affecting children and families, what the needs of children and families are, and how services could be improved. There should be a funding review every five years by independent, non-political public finance experts experienced with First Nations. Indigenous Services Canada or any other governing body, as well as service providers, must provide data for this review within ten days of being asked. This review must be reviewed by First Nations and experts, and approved by all First Nations communities, and the government must implement the recommended changes.

For the sake of information gathering, there should be national and regional secretariats that collect, analyze, and distribute information. They should be independant, apolitical First Nations non profits who are appointed by the National Advisory Committee. They should be funded by the federal government and receive all the funding that they ask for.

There must also be a Program Assessment, which assess the progress that is being made towards reaching equitable and non-discriminatory child and family service provision. This assessment must be public, independant, transparent, inclusive, and accountable. The group that does the Program Assessment must be chosen by First Nations communities themselves, with all communities being able to be represented and to participate in the selection process.

There needs to be an actually effective dispute resolution process for child and family services that finds and stops any future discrimination that could be occurring. The complaints and dispute resolution process must let the court enforce and mandate changes, it must be public and transparent, respect human rights, be efficient and not have delays, offer relief to children and families, be non discriminatory and have adequate ways of stopping and preventing discrimination, have state-funded legal representation and support for First Nations parties, and it must be accountable. A dispute resolution process needs to be able to make orders, including orders for compensation, and it needs to have independent and accountable decision makers who haven't served in a political capacity, have disclosed conflicts of interest, and are experienced in First Nations matters. The dispute resolution process must stop the government from backsliding or not progressing when it comes to First Nations children and families.

The dispute resolution process should also be based on human rights. This includes allowing people to make claims in court under the Canadian Human Rights Act while using the dispute resolution mechanism. It also means that national and international human rights legislation, and the best interests of the child, must be givern precedence above any other law. There should be no retaliation allowed against claimants. The mechanism needs to be able to make systemic changes both small and large, and it also needs to be able to conduct inquiries to find out what changes to make.

An actually good Final Settlement Agreement must be in line with the Truth and Reconciliation Committee's calls to action, in line with the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. The best interests of the child should always come first, and the wishes of the child should be given importance. Children, families, and communities need to have power in decisions that affect them.

It will take time for prevention services to be developed. It will also take time for First Nations who want to move towards delivering child and family services themselves to do that. The government needs to support the development of these services and the transition to First Nation-delivered services. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal needs to be around to make sure that the reformed service delivery to communities is equitable, non-discriminatory, and just. In the current Draft Final Settlement Agreement many communities are being forced to make this transition without preparedness or support.

Small First Nations populations have unique needs. It's not yet well understood how to deliver child and family services to small populations in a way that is equitable and keeps families together. There needs to be independant and expert community-lead research into what is needed in small communities, and the Canadian Human Rights Trubunal needs to be around to make sure that small communities are getting the services they need in a non-discriminatory and just way.

There are also some reserve communities who have their child and family services delivered by the provinces. These communities also deserve all the same funding, reforms, rights, and protections that other communities get. Additionally, the federal government must make public the agreements and terms they have with provincial governments in cases where provincial governments are providing child and family services. This allows for communities to know what supports they have access to and how to improve service provision. The provincial and federal governments need to coordinate well with each other and with First Nations communities when family services on a reserve are being provided by the province. Different communities will have different needs, and it will take time, money, research, and effort to create truly effective prevention services for communities served by the provinces.

Within three years of an actually good Final Settlement Agreement for child and family service reform being approved, there needs to be an evidence-based plan to fund and build all the buildings and other physical infrastructure that need to be built for adequate prevention service provision. Canada should not delay funding and supporting the building of this infastructure. Urgently-needed things should be built with the necessary urgency.

As well, an actually good Final Settlement Agreement would give children, youth, families, and communities off reserves the same services, funding, protections, and inclusion that on-reserve children get. Off-reserve children, youth, families, and communities should get the same prevention services, the same quality services, and they should have their rights and needs respected just as much as children on reserve. Their voices should be heard and included just as much as people on reserve. And they should be just as included in the negotiations and just as protected by the dispute resolution mechanism.

This is because 76% of children who are investigated by child welfare agencies actually live off reserve. And off-reserve child welfare agencies also do not focus on structural drivers of poverty. Off-reserve child welfare agencies also do not have the structure necessary to help families with what they truly need instead of taking children away. There have been many studies on improving the off-reserve child welfare system, but the reform has been slow. Hopefully, a revised and improved Final Settlement Agreement is what it takes to get the ball rolling on reform off-reserve.

Everything that we talked about on how child and family services should be reformed should be enshrined in law. All the changes that we have stated we need to make, changes that are called for by First Nations communities and experts, should be enshrined into law so that any progress made for children and families does not backslide if different governments come into power.

All the different aspects and elements of a reformed Final Settlement Agreement on child and family service reform need to work together and be implemented together. Because each aspect of reform supports all the other aspects of reform and improves the situation just for First Nations children and families.

Now let's talk about Jordan's Principle.

Jordan River Anderson was a child born in Norway House Cree Nation. He had many medical conditions, and the provincial and federal governments were fighting over who had the responsibility to pay for his care. Because the provincial and federal governments couldn't reach a decision, he ended up having to stay in the hospital and he died there, having lived his whole life in a hospital rather than in his family home.

Jordan's Principle is a law that states that if a First Nations child needs a product or service, they have to be given that, and questions about who should pay for it should be sorted out later. This includes things like health, mental health, education, cultural learning, developmental therapy, mobility devices, accessibility, and more.

Unfortunately, the government has been taking a really reductive and narrow approach when it comes to Jordan's Principle, and not giving all children the services they need. Because of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal's orders, much progress has been made with how Canada is providing Jordan's Principle services, and many children have fortunately received services. However, issues continue to remain.

One of the problems is that Canada has narrowed the definition of who can receive Jordan's Principle services. The Human Rights Tribunal has said that all First Nations children recognized by their communities, as well as all children on reserves, can access Jordan's Principle supports. The government however does not recognize this.

The methods of receiving and processing requests for Jordan's Principle services are ineffective and inefficient. People are calling the national and regional call centres asking for help and they're not being able to reach anyone. As it is today, it takes a long time to process requests and actually deliver the necessary services to the children. This means that children go a long time without receiving the support they need. This is also true for children who urgently need support right now, due to a medical or psychological emergency or other circumstances.

Jordan's Principle requests need to be fulfilled in a timely manner. One of the necessary steps to do this is to automate the intake process, since currently an unknown number of cases are not opened and categorized in a timely manner. Another step is by having the call centres be adequately staffed, and letting families indicate if their requests are urgent. Call centres need to be accessible to everyone who needs them. And urgent requests, such as those involving the death of a biological family member or non-related caregiver, threat of imminent physical harm, or an emergency in the community, should be given priority and fulfilled within twelve hours. It needs to be easy to indicate if your request is urgent and there should be enough employees to deal with urgent requests. Requests under $500 should be automatically granted since it takes more than $500 to process a request.

Another inefficiency is the fact that Indigenous Services Canada is taking too long to reimburse service providers who are delivering services to children under Jordan's Principle. This is even leading some service providers to not being able to provide the necessary services anymore. Canada should reimburse all service providers within 15 days and all families within 5 days. The debt that any families or service providers went into when delivering children their needs should also be paid off by the government.

Many requests are being denied which should not be denied. Requests that are in the best interests of the child are often denied, and 88% of the requests that are re-reviewed after their initial denial are granted, meaning that the initial granting/denying process is flawed.

There is also insufficient accountability in Jordan's Principle service provision processes, and problems and injustices do not get remedied. There needs to be an independent, credible, and effective Jordan's Principle complaints mechanism that publicly reports Canada's compliance with Jordan's Principle. This mechanism must be able to force the state and service providers to make necessary changes. Accountability mechanisms also need robust measures to stop retaliation against anyone speaking out about problems.

There is a large backlog of Jordan's Principle requests that need to be looked at. As of March 2024, there were about 82 000 backlogged requests. Many of these requests could be urgent and have not been opened. The government must fix this backlog at the utmost speed and ensure that it doesn't happen again. The current "surge" strategy to deal with this backlog isn't sustainable or enough.

Different federal programs related to Jordan's Principle services are not well-coordinated, and if they were well-coordinated then children, youth, and families could get the services they need more efficiently and with less delays and waits.

There are some First Nations organizations that are providing some Jordan's Principle services. These organizations need to be well-funded and well-supported so that they can deliver the services people need.

Jordan's Principle needs to be able to cover other needs as well that it currently does not. One of these needs is prenatal supports, such as vitamins, medicine, etc. These supports help children be born healthy and stay healthy for their lives. Another need is housing. Obviously, children need and deserve safe, sturdy, well-ventilated housing, and Jordan's Principle services should cover this as well.

The government is making excuses for why it's not properly following Jordan's Principle, but the truth is, this is a human rights matter and following Jordan's Principle is a human rights obligation that supercedes other laws.

There are negotiations underway to create a Final Settlement Agreement for Jordan's Principle reform, similar to the one on child and family services reform.

Unfortunately, the negotiations for the Jordan's Principle Final Settlement Agreement face the same problems as the one for child and family services did. The negotiations have been confidential, meaning that the public, including the public of First Nations communities, have not been able to have any kind of a say in making the Final Settlement Agreement. The public of the First Nations communities themselves were not consulted in making this agreement, and not all First Nations communities were able to send representatives even. Therefore there are likely going to be many problems with the Draft Final Settlement Agreement on Jordan's Principle once it comes out.

The good news though, for both child and family services and Jordan's Principle services, is that the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has to approve the two Final Settlement Agreements before they can be put into action. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal can and has made orders to Canada to stop its discriminatory conduct. While Canada obviously has not done that, due to the Tribunal it has been making some steps towards progress. The good thing about Tribunal orders is that they don't expire when a new government comes into power, they can only expire if a final settlement agreement gets agreed to by the parties and passed by the Tribunal. Canada evidently still needs the guidance of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, and will continue to need that guidance until effective reform is enshrined in law that is properly followed. The Tribunal should retain its jurisdiction after accepting and passing Final Settlement Agreements on Jordan's Principle and child and family services reform, to make sure the reforms are actually carried out in the proper way in the real world.

Education is also something vital and lifechanging, which is underfunded on reserves. A good quality education is a basic human need and human right that every human needs and deserves access to. It helps people use their cognitive functions and develop their ability to be lifelong learners. It is an important tool for learning about the world and considering different perspectives and experiences. It is an important place for learning social skills and making friends. The list of important things education teaches us all is endless. Good quality education is vital for the wellbeing of a child and their healthy development into an adult.

Education also changes entire communities. With education, people can pursue their dreams and become the things they want to be. If children can grow up and pursue the careers they want, then there will be a lot of skilled and educated people in the community. This will increase the economic prosperity of the whole community and the economic opportunities the entire community has, as well as empowering the community to solve its other problems.

School can also be a place where people can learn about their own culture, their own language, their own religion, and their people's history. School can be a place where First Nations children are supported in being proud of who they are and the communities they are a part of.

But in order for education to be of adequate quality, schools need to be well-funded. They need to provide a safe, comfortable learning environment. They need to have enough up to date textbooks, well-stocked libraries in classrooms and in the school, they need computers to teach computer literacy, they need lab equipment and sports equipment and stationaries. They need space and infrastructure for playgrounds, gyms, labs. They need adequate heating, cooling, and ventilation. They need good quality washrooms and water fountains. They need enough teachers, and education assistants for students with special needs. They need money for field trips. The list goes on.

But schools on reserves don't have the funding to pay for all of the things they need. Therefore, children on reserves don't get the good quality education they need. And they don't have as good quality education as children off reserves do. This is incredibly unequal, unfair, and unjust, and it violates the inherent rights of children on reserves. Therefore, the government must fund schools on reserve as much as schools for non-Indigenous children are funded.

Services on reserves in general are funded less than services off reserve. This includes housing, income support, medical and mental healthcare, job training, childcare, and the list goes on. There is more poverty and greater need on reserves, because of the racism, colonialism, generational trauma, and lack of job opportunities. And yet there are less services on reserves and those services are worse quality. This is why we must adopt the Spirit Bear Plan.

"Spirit Bear calls on:

CANADA to immediately comply with all rulings by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ordering it to immediately cease its discriminatory funding of First Nations child and family services. The order further requires Canada to fully and properly implement Jordan's Principle

PARLIAMENT to ask the Parliamentary Budget Officer to publicly cost out the shortfalls in all federally funded public services provided to First Nations children, youth and families (education, health, water, child welfare, etc.) and propose solutions to fix it.

GOVERNMENT to consult with First Nations to co-create a holistic Spirit Bear Plan to end all of the inequalities (with dates and confirmed investments) in a short period of time sensitive to children's best interests, development and distinct community needs.

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS providing services to First Nations children and families to undergo a thorough and independent 360° evaluation to identify any ongoing discriminatory ideologies, policies or practices and address them. These evaluation must be publicly available.

ALL PUBLIC SERVANTS including those at a senior level, to receive mandatory training to identify and address government ideology, policies and practices that fetter the implementation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's Calls to Action."

Some specific examples of how needs within First Nations reserves are being unmet is the housing situation, the clean water situation, and the disaster recovery situation. A lot of housing on reserves is unsafe, mouldy, under insulated, and doesn't have the utilities that houses need. There are also not enough houses for everyone. Instead of helping communities build better houses, and enough houses for everyone, the government is not doing enough to solve this issue. As well, 618 First Nations communities do not have clean water. They have to buy water instead of having access to it in their house. And this is more than many people can afford. And there is also not enough for natural disaster relief. The climate crisis is causing reserves (as well as many other communities) to face natural disasters such as forest fires and floods. The government is not doing enough to help on reserve communities rebuild after these traumatic and destructive events.

Children can only be healthy if their communities are healthy. Children are tied to and connected with their communities and community members. What is good for the whole community also leads to children having better lives and better childhoods. Healthy and thriving communities can raise healthy and thriving children. And of course, children grow up into community members.

Indigenous Services Canada is claiming that they'll make programs to help the community with their needs, but they're not giving any information about those programs. As well, they are taking far too long to implement these programs, leaving people to suffer. These claims are therefore not trustworthy and it is unlikely that Indigenous Services Canada is developing programs that will actually be effective at meeting community needs.

Indigenous Services Canada, which runs the service provision of all services on reserves, is blatantly inadequate at their job. They are and have always been a colonial institution. They need to be phased out and replaced with an Indigenous Treasury Board that will be run by Indigenous people and will ensure communities and service providers are getting the funding and support they need. For example, the Indigenous Treasury Board and First Nations organizations should be the ones delivering funding from the federal government to child and family services, as this will help communities and service providers have an organization that truly fights for them and their needs to the government.

There are many problems with the current government department. They do not provide adequate and efficient services for people, as well as not being interested in non-discrimination and justice. For example, Indigenous Services Canada develops and implements its own training on cultural sensitivity and other issues. This of course isn't accountable. As well, Indigenous Services Canada isn't self-reporting the problems that happen in their organization, because why would they?

Despite the problems with Indigenous Services Canada, there is an attempt to reform the department. There are ways to make this reform more effective. First of all, the committee that is making a plan to prevent recurrence of discrimination in Indigenous Services Canada should report directly to Chiefs in Assembly and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. The department should be reformed according to the rulings of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. The committee planning to reform Indigenous Services Canada must be well-funded, remain non-political, and their recommendations must be followed.

Children are the most important people in First Nations cultures. They are also the most important people in general, for obvious reasons. It is incredibly important that the rights and wellbeing of children, their families, and their communities are given utmost importance. We have an opportunity now to improve the system for First Nations children. Public pressure has been the biggest factor in causing the government to act thus far. And we will continue the pressure until we achieve real change for children.

Please fulfill your obligations towards First Nations children both on and off reserves by creating actually good Final Settlement Agreements on Jordan's Principle and child and family service reform, properly delivering Jordan's Principle services, properly funding education, and properly funding all services on reserves. Also replace or at least reform Indigenous Services Canada. Thank you for reading our letter and please take our concerns to heart and act upon theme.

Sincerely,

———

Here are the people you should send your letter to:

-Prime Minister Trudeau:

-Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations Gary Anandasangare

-Minister of Indigenous Services Patty Hajdu

-Your own Member of Parliament

Stupidity used to be obvious. The guy who stuck a fork in a light socket. The neighbor who invested his life savings in a "sure thing" because some guy at a bar told him about it. There was a clarity to it. A cause and effect. Now, stupidity is slippery. It wears a suit. It has a verified account. It speaks in the right buzzwords, retweets the right opinions, and knows just enough to be dangerous.

It’s not that people are getting dumber; it’s that the world makes it easier than ever to feel smart while knowing nothing. We have access to infinite information but no time to process it. We consume headlines, not articles. Hot takes, not analysis. We mistake speed for accuracy, volume for truth, confidence for competence. The guy who reads one Wikipedia page and suddenly has strong opinions on international policy isn’t an outlier—he’s the blueprint.

This isn’t entirely our fault. The system is built to keep us in a permanent state of mild ignorance. Every app, every platform, every news cycle is designed to keep us scrolling, clicking, reacting. Outrage is easier than understanding. Certainty is more marketable than doubt. And so we float through the world, forming half-baked opinions on things we barely understand, mistaking engagement for insight, collecting facts like trinkets rather than using them to build anything meaningful.

The worst part? It feels like thinking. It feels like participating. You read, you react, you post. You feel a brief rush of righteousness, of being on the right side of something. But real thinking is slow. It’s uncomfortable. It requires sitting with doubt, resisting the urge to immediately categorize everything as right or wrong, good or bad, my team or their team. It means accepting that most issues are complicated, that most people aren’t villains, and that sometimes, the correct answer is “I don’t know.”

But who has time for that? Modern life moves at the speed of distraction. If you’re not reacting, you’re falling behind. If you’re not constantly reaffirming your identity—political, moral, cultural—who even are you? The internet has turned beliefs into brands, and once you’ve invested in one, changing your mind feels like bad marketing.

So we stay where we are. We mistake familiarity for truth. We listen to the voices that make us feel smart, that confirm what we already believe. We build our little worlds out of opinions that were handed to us, convinced we arrived at them on our own. And maybe that’s the worst kind of stupidity—the kind that doesn’t know it’s stupid. The kind that would rather be wrong forever than admit it was ever fooled.

But there’s another option. You can slow down. You can resist the pull of easy outrage, easy certainty, easy tribalism. You can step outside your bubble and let your brain do what it was meant to do: think, question, wonder. Not for clout, not to win an argument, not to prove anything—just because it’s the only way to stay human in a world that would rather you weren’t.

We are all affected by death. I have lost friends, people I cared for, and my brother–a loss that we both felt deeply. I lost you too, Mom, multiple times. Some mistakes were mine; others, yours. For a while now, I have been terrified that our estrangement was a mistake. That when you died, it would break me.

These things are meant for the living, not the dead, and I suspect that most people will think I am a monster for speaking out here… but I am part of the living.

I won’t go into detail about what she did and didn’t do for us as a parent. I won’t pretend that I am not angry, either. Relationships are complex, and difficult. I want to explain how this estrangement came about.

We rarely spoke unless she needed something, but that wasn’t enough of a reason. I had honestly forgiven her for our childhood. As adults, we all did what we could to care for her, and when she lost her son, I know that it broke her. We all pitched in to care for her. She didn’t reciprocate. It was all one way. It always was.

Still, this didn’t stop us; we kept trying. I have never been good at caring for myself but having a kid has fixed something inside me. When I thought that she didn’t care about my daughter, I left. In some ways, I think I was wrong. In her own way, she cared about her, but I couldn’t risk my child being hurt by her, so I kept my distance.

I realise that what I am doing may be selfish. But I also want people to know that I don’t hate my mother. I want nobody here to assume that just because we didn’t speak, she was a bad person. I do not think she was.

She kept her kids fed and clothed. She gave me her sense of humour, her eclectic taste in music and culture. She thought that everyone should be treated equally, even if she struggled, like we all do, not to put some ahead of others. I forgave my mom for any wrong she ever did me and my siblings, and I understand that her past also made her unable to be the person she might have wanted to be. Even as I kept my distance, I didn’t hate her. Fear gripped me for my daughter’s sake, and my own. In many ways, we both failed each other.

Despite the distance I kept, I bear her no ill will. More than that, I love her. I hope that she is at peace now, and I am glad for anyone who was able to be her friend, past or present. To anyone who loved her and needs support, I offer the support I couldn't give her in life. With the resources available, she did the best she could - that's all anyone can ask.

Your son.

Dear Brother,

You know I was always afraid to answer a call. It's not that you managed to race me to the rotary phone. I let you believe that, slowing down on purpose.

Now that you're gone, I stand here laughing through my tears, remembering the tomfoolery. Growing up with you, my younger brother, was the best childhood anyone could have. Yes, we did fight a lot and snickered when the other got chastised by dad, or mom. But I wouldn't have had it any other way. Ever.

Brother, you always raced ahead, like the Virar fast local, even as I lagged behind like an all-stops train. It was also why I stand here today. The fateful night of 1st Jan.

The world was getting ready to ring in the new year when the other ring startled us-- the phone ring. While rest of the family slept, I awoke and, somehow, answered the phone. That was the last I, or anyone else, heard from you.

When the police called the next morning, I could sense the rising dread on dad's face. The journey to the station where we found your mortal remains was punctuated with sudden gasps of breath, a lot of praying, and forcing ourselves to stay positive.

You had fallen off a train, they said, although that was never confirmed. Far more sinister causes came to mind. None could bring you back. What was confirmed, for sure, was the fact that we had a gaping hole now. In our family and in our hearts.

This morning, mum called, and I dragged my feet to the phone. I knew why she had called, and as always, I was afraid to answer it.

Rest in peace.