I never would’ve chosen activism. I’m not a big fan of people in general. I’m an introvert. I prefer to keep to myself. But I had to do this. Because this isn’t just about smoking.

This is about what it means when a municipality, under the guise of public health initiatives, responds to public pressure — not to create meaningful protections, but to preserve the illusion that they’re listening. And in doing so, they choose to disregard the constitutional rights of some of the very public citizens they’re supposed to serve.

If we win in Calgary and I stop there, I’d be doing the same thing they’re doing — saying it’s okay to strip choice from people just because they’re poor. And the truth is, most of those affected probably don’t even realize what they’ve actually lost. Because they think it’s just about smoking.

But there’s more to it than that.

There’s a lot the government and municipalities bank on you not knowing. That includes your constitutional rights. And when they assume you don’t know? That’s not just neglect — that’s dismay. Dismay at your financial status, your disability, your age. They assume those things make you less intelligent. That you’re ignorant of the laws meant to protect vulnerable demographics.

And for those of us who do know — they assume we’re too poor or too disabled to do anything about it.

This illusion sets a precedent. It says we are lesser than. It says it’s okay to treat people with differences badly, as long as you don’t get caught — or as long as you package it as a “public health initiative.”

If we’re not as intelligent as the general public, then the general public is smart enough to read between the lines.

And we’ve already seen the outcome of that precedent.

We’ve heard it in the ableist comments from members of the public — and public employees. Comments like:

“If you’ve got money left over after rent and bills, the government gave you too much.”

It doesn’t matter if someone’s low-income working, on Income Support, or AISH. That’s what they say.

They judge what food we should buy. What we should spend our money on. What we should buy for our kids. They say a low-income child with a Nintendo Switch means you’re getting too much money.

And if you don’t believe me, really take the time to read the screenshots I posted in the Facebook group. Unfortunately, I can only post one of them here on the petition update.

These are comments from members of my own community, in a private Facebook group for our neighbourhood.

And the seriously twisted part of all of this?

These attitudes — these judgments — were directed at me because of my circumstances. Because I live in Calgary-subsidized housing. Meanwhile, I’m one of the admins of our Community Pantry Facebook page — a space where I’ve both received food support, and provided it to others in need. That’s the kind of hypocrisy we’re talking about.

Now unfortunately, I don’t have every single screenshot from that thread — I was juggling ongoing advocacy tasks, media communications, and a chronic pain flare at the time. But before I could finish collecting the comments, I made sure to respond to the group admin — the one who claimed no one had said anything negative to me.

She told me she hadn’t judged me. That the only one saying anything negative was me, because I used the terms “low-income” and “poor.” She accused me of throwing out “buzzwords” for calling the policy oppressive, discriminatory, and ableist — and insisted it wasn’t any of those things.

But the truth is, she was speaking to me from the very prejudice we’re fighting against. She didn’t take the time to read or consider the constitutional concerns I laid out. She decided — based on her own bias — how I and others like me are allowed to feel.

And here’s a newsflash:

If someone in a vulnerable demographic says something feels ableist, discriminatory, or oppressive — that is fucking valid.

It’s bad enough they want to take away our choices — options the general public still has. But now we’re expected to give up our right to even feel how we feel about it?

She tried to sugarcoat all of this by ending her comment with, “I wish you the best with your campaign.” As if she ever really fucking cared.

So I responded respectfully and pointed out that the other commenter in the thread was clearly displaying many of the same attitudes — the very same ones she was claiming didn’t exist.

Apparently, she didn’t like that. She deleted my entire post.

This is why I’ve been calling out the Mayor of Calgary. Not because I hate her. But because people have a right to ask: is her support for the LGBTQ community real — or just a play for votes?

The pattern we’re seeing in Calgary exists across Canada.

And behind the smoke and mirrors of government messaging is a deeper truth: our individual voices and votes don’t carry enough weight on their own. Not unless we all vote the same — and let’s be honest, that’s never going to happen. And it shouldn’t. People deserve choice.

But elected officials, whether part of a party or independent, are still accountable to us, the people. They work for us. Not the other way around.

We are accountable to federal law — not individuals. And that law is for everyone. Not just the people they decide are “worthy.”

Even the government is not above the Constitution.

The Constitution is what holds them accountable to us.

This hill doesn’t end in Calgary. Even if our personal fight ends here, I’m not getting off this hill. I said I’d die on it. And I meant it.

Because this fight was never just about us.

It’s for every Canadian who’s been quietly stripped of their rights — and told they should be grateful for it.