Of course teacher's unions support the sex trade. Duh.

I suppose it would be really easy for me to write stuff on this blog accusing people of shit while providing no evidentiary links or demonstrate that I've done the appropriate research--but then that would be lazy, dishonest and diminish my credibility.

Unfortunately, not everyone takes that so seriously.

Over at NW Republican, Coyote accuses the Vancouver Education Association of denying a teacher's request to send her fair share dues to a charity that is trying to eradicate the child sex trade.

The obvious inference is that the Vancouver Education Association supports the child sex trade.

The noninference is that the VEA didn't allow the contribution because the founder of the charity is a Republican.

Both of these accusations are very serious.

The author of the piece provides three hyperlinks within the body of the post. None of them provide any evidence to support the accusations. Further, nothing within the body of the post tells the reader how the author came to this knowledge or how the reader can verify the accusations.

I recognize that the groupies of NW Republican are anti-union. That's more than obvious. But they shouldn't have to make stuff up to prove their point. Or at the very least, they should provide evidence to back up their accusations.