 |
| Jaguar: S Type SVR from Staytuned.com |
A. Quebec is more deserving than Winnipeg?
I still do not consider myself an NHL fan. I am a fan of European football, Manchester United, Arsenal, and the UEFA Champions League. I am an observer of the NHL and not a follower like I was when I was younger. I still am not impressed by how the League is run, especially in regard to franchise location, although I like how the League is seemingly being somewhat forced into reevaluating that philosophy and recently relocated Atlanta to Winnipeg which had lost its team in 1996. Winnipeg lost its team due to a variety of economic reasons and the fact it had an old outdated arena and no prospects for a new one, or a local owner that wanted to continue losing money. It now has a newer arena and a billionaire co-owner. The League also has revenue sharing and a salary cap. Quebec also lost its team one season prior to Winnipeg for similar reasons including an old outdated arena and no prospects for a new one, and no local owner that wanted to continue losing money. When Winnipeg received Atlanta via relocation the Mayor of Quebec reportedly stated in the Montreal Gazette:
Montreal Gazette
'"Today we should be thrilled. The best thing that could happen to us is to see Winnipeg get its team. Usually, we could be next on the list," the mayor told reporters.'
The idea having been implied by the League which has also been discussed by the media in both Canada and the United States is that if Quebec, like Winnipeg builds a 15, 000 seats NHL size/type arena it will very likely be next in line to receive a franchise should one become available.
However, former Quebec Nordiques or Nordique great and member of the European Parliament Peter Stastny took a negative route according to the Winnipeg Free Press:
Winnipeg Free Press
'BRUSSELS, Belgium -- With apologies to Winnipeg, former Quebec Nordiques great Peter Stastny says Quebec City should have been first to see the return of the NHL.
Stastny even admits he was less than thrilled to learn that the Manitoba capital got an NHL club before Quebec City.
"Personally, I was sad," Stastny said Wednesday, adding that Quebec was more deserving of the distinction.'
Further
'Despite Stastny's assessment, Winnipeg had several advantages over its Quebec rival.
The Manitoba capital has a larger population and a completed, modern arena -- built mainly with private cash.'
My take is that, not knowing his heart (motives) of course, is that because he played for Quebec and because the NHL Quebec team, not the WHA team, did generally better than Winnipeg on the ice, he may think it sad that Quebec did not receive a franchise back first, and that Quebec should have received this distinction first.
This type of thinking comes across as entitlement philosophy as opposed to an earning based philosophy. Let us face it, entitlement philosophy it is often associated with both Canada and Europe more so than the United States, although it does exist there also. Winnipeg builds the 15, 000 plus seat/type NHL arena owned by suitable people that could own an NHL club in 2004 and in 2011 and Quebec still has not, although it is being planned and it does have suitable ownership. Winnipeg was in a position to purchase and properly support a franchise, Quebec was not.
Therefore, Stastny is philosophically mistaken.
Further, as side issues, I hope Quebec does receive either the next relocated franchise or the next one after that, if not Southern Ontario receives it. Actually when I a kid, I received Stastny's autograph, he was a nice man.
Political map of Canada, please click for magnification.
B. Rights
I tried to find a good definition of Entitlement in one of my philosophy texts but there was nothing suitable, and so I went to the 'Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy' which I used for my PhD and it is reliable and it uses the term entitlements is the context of defining rights. Rights are a type of entitlement by this definition and so I suppose are a useful example here.
Stanford
'Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states.'
The West? Is this tied to an attitude of entitlement too often?
C. The Work of Christ as Remedy to the Problem of Evil
From my MPhil (Wales) of 2003 Edited
I think, however, the philosophical discussion needs to be complemented by the theological remedy. I can understand Alister McGrath’s perspective on suffering as in many post-Enlightenment works the faith has been under attack because of the problem of evil. The attacks were of a philosophical nature and thus dealt with so, but ultimately the defence of Christianity comes down to divine revelation. McGrath stated in Iustitia Dei:
'The central teaching of the Christian faith is that reconciliation has been effected between and God and sinful man through Jesus Christ, and that this new relation between God and man is a present possibility for those outside the church, and a present actuality for those within its bounds. McGrath (1986: 1).'
Since to McGrath this is the central teaching, it makes sense in apologetics featuring the problem of evil, that the work of Jesus Christ in atonement which includes restoration and reconciliation, must be central. He thus thinks discussions on the problem of evil that do not deal with this in strong fashion, are lacking. Suffering was written to comfort those struggling with the problem of evil and to inform them that ultimate victory over suffering will be had through Jesus Christ.
McGRATH, A. (1986) Iustitia Dei, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
McGRATH, A. (1992) Bridge-Building, Leicester, Inter-Varsity Press.
McGRATH, A. (1992) Suffering, London, Hodder and Stoughton Limited.
Interestingly, those in Christ are entitled to punishment (Romans 1-3) but the atonement is for sin and the elect are in Christ (Romans 8, Ephesians 1), and those in Christ are saved by grace through faith unto good works.
D. Satirical look at career prospects
 |
| The job is in the tank |
 |
| Larry Potter |
 |
| Law but little order |
