Since we can’t see McNaught, we’ve been watching it on YouTube.com here and here and here.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Feb | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
![]() |
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Deutsch . English . Español . Français . Italiano . 日本語 . Português . Svenska . Mobile Version
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Davenport, homeschool dad, has his name on a court case that is supposed to be heard next Wednesday in front of the Most Notable Nine.
Davenport v. Washington Education Association has been combined by the Supreme Court with a similar lawsuit filed by the state of Washington against the union. Both cases involve the fees paid to the union by teachers who declined to join. (source)
Docket info at the Supreme Court web site.
Another article, from the NY Sun, seems to think that this is a big deal and that labor union leaders should be there. It looks like it’s about union dues and how they can be used/collected.
Catchy title, no? I stole it from the Daily Mail, but titles (of books, at least) aren’t copyrightable as I understand it. So I’m probably safe.
I think it’s a great way to more clearly examine the consequences of events if we ask, “What if Event X had never happened?”
Example: What if Henry VIII had never divorced Catherine, his first wife? First off, there would have been no Elizabeth I, daughter of Queen Anne (Boleyn). Without Elizabeth I, England may not have gained supremacy of the seas and Spain may have colonized the Americas, specifically the U.S. east coast, more thoroughly. Or possibly the French may have, but then that is more likely a discussion for the question, What if the Pope had given the Portuguese the land west of the Line of Demarcation?
So, that said, I liked the question posed by the Daily Mail, What If Britain HADN’T Joined the EU?
The question is posed because it’s been 50 years since the Treaty of Rome, when the EEC was first formed, and the article’s author, Christopher Booker, is taking stock. I remember learning about the EEC (European Economic Community) over and over again in 4th and 5th grade. I got so sick of it. I guess the textbooks my school was using those years were really into the EEC. It was supposedly the best thing in the world, that and collective farms in the USSR. Anyway, the EEC lives on, and we here in the States also live with the EU.
The article, remember I’m no expert in international relations, just a homeschooling mom — but the article indicates that not everyone in the UK is particularly happy with membership in the European Union (which is the new name for the EEC - it’s gone beyond just economics). The article discusses the reasons why Britain joined, why it seemed necessary at the time.
It then gives about ten ways that Britain would have been better off if they’d never joined. If it’s all true, it’s a sad commentary.
Here’s one of the reasons given as to why Britain would be better off if they’d never joined:
If we had never joined, we would still have retained the right to choose our own weights and measures. It would not have become a criminal offence to sell a pound of bananas.
What!? It’s illegal to sell a pound of something? Wow. That seems stringent. And yet they’re still allowed to print miles (as opposed to meters) on their traffic signs. There’s so much I don’t understand.
The article even draws Margaret Thatcher’s views into the discussion:
DRAWING on the experience of those 11 years when, as Prime Minister, she saw the real nature of the ‘European project’ at first hand, Mrs Thatcher wrote in her last book that the attempt to create a European superstate would be seen in the future as having been ‘the greatest folly of the modern era’.
She went on to say that for Britain, ‘with her traditional strengths and global destiny’, to have become part of it, would come to be seen as having been ‘a political error of the first magnitude’.
So, what I wonder is whether or not Britian can get out of the EU? What happens if they just quit? The article indicates that non-member Norway still trades with the EU, so if the UK were a non-member, you’d think they’d still be able to trade with the EU. So, can the UK just withdraw from the European Union? Maybe quickly, before they have to trade their pound notes in for euros? Or has the UK irrevocably given their country to Brussels?
Links that are also good:
- History of the European Union (includes reasons why Britain was hesitant about joining)
- European Union Timeline (at the BBC site, nice, interactive)