Sunday, September 30, 2007

Dieppe (Moncton Area) Life Chain


There were about 40 people present - not bad for a small city like Moncton.

The public was quite supportive. We stood near Champlain mall. There were plenty of people driving to, from and by the mall and we got quite a few honks and thumbs up. With little or no hostile gestures. Last year there were a few teens yelling "pro-choice" out of the car window and making fun of a woman who was praying the rosary. None of that happened this time.

Similar rallies were held today in many other cities across Canada. Thousands of people lined up at their hometowns' busiest streets, raising their voices in support of the babies that are denied the right to life. How many hearts did we touch? Time will tell. But I'm thankful to those who took their time and came to our life chain to raise their voices in defense of the most vulnerable members of our society - the unborn babies.

Saturday, September 29, 2007

What About Me?

What wrong have I done, to you, that I deserve this fate? What great burden, was I? You couldn’t even wait, to see what I looked like. The devil's Instrument cuts me in pieces — like piercing thorns. This torment of pain, why? What have I done? I could have loved you, so easily. I didn’t get a chance, for my hand, to touch yours. Your warm body has fed me, now you cast me out, like some tumorous disease!

You have taken all of my life away. All of it! All that was to be possible — gone! Where do I go? I am lost! I am nobody! I am no more! This miraculous gift, thrown into the garbage. I am garbage; bleeding; tormented by the devil's hand.

My Blessed Mother gathers up my pieces; and weeps! She has no words — only tears of sorrow, for another, another, another! The devil has won again, and again, and again!

What choice did I have? There was only one of me, to be; no other just, like, me! EVER!

You, don’t hear my torment — do you?

These piles and piles of pieces, now fill the Inn. It is full! There is no more room at the Inn — again!

This is the Holocaust! It again rages on! This time, it is just children — tiny, tiny, small, children! The devil speaks. Who cares to stop him? Again the shadow of evil portrays the priority of luxury!

Love? You could not do this, and love! NEVER! In a moment's pleasure, I was made to be. In a moment's curse, I am gone! What about me?

How sad, I have no birthdate. No party — no friends. I belong to no one — I am incomplete. Pieces of me just float — nowhere to rest. I don’t know who I am — I have no name. I have no purpose — I have been cut off, from my spiritual destiny.

Maybe I was to be, a police officer — to protect you; a healer of the sick; a leader of government; a teacher; a taxpayer. So many things I could have been.

Mom, I could have held your hand when you needed someone. I could have given you a flower, or card, and shared life together. You would have been proud of me, because I really cared, about you! I could have; I would have; but now I am nothing!

We shall meet again; my tears of compassion wait for you. In purgatory, you shall search for my tiny parts, putting me together, piece by piece. How long shall it take? Eternal work, perhaps! Searching through so many piles of parts, how will you find me? I will look for you. I know what you look like. We were meant to be, from the beginning. You will understand my torment when you see me. What will you say to me — even if you, could look at me?

Could you take my pieces down from my tiny little, cross? Could you take out my thorns one by one and give me rest? Maybe now could you love me? I wait and wait!

My spiritual pieces float — clinging for peace — but the devil's darkness, chases me!

What about me?

No PRESENT! No PAST! No LIFE! No CHANCE! No CHOICE! Only — NOTHING!
(E-mailed to me by Sr C├ęcile F. LeBlanc)

P.S. Remember, Canada's Life Chain is tomorrow (September 30th). Please join us in silent prayer and witness for the unborn child and mother. Help save moms and babies from the horrors of abortion.

Friday, September 28, 2007

Student Union Silences Pro-Life Group

On Wednesday, September 26, the Memorial University of Newfoundland Students' Union Board of Directors (MUNSU) met for its regularly scheduled meeting. One of the highlights of the agenda was the proposal to ratify, or give official club status to, Memorial University of Newfoundland Students for Life (MUN for LIFE). When it came to this point the meeting, everyone was hesitant to speak. The chair asked for a motion to approve and one was not tabled. A motion to deny was put forth and the flood gates holding back the conversation opened wide. Every speaker, except for one, identified themselves as pro-choice and echoed the comments of the previous speakers. The motion to deny ratification passed nearly unanimous. MUSNU signaled the death of free speech on a university campus.

The dominate arguments brought by MUNSU personalities to deny MUN for LIFE their rights were 1) MUNSU is a local of the pro-choice Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) 2) MUNSU could not ratify a group in opposition to its beliefs.
Union membership is mandatory for full-time students. Students have no option to quit or form an alternative union. Thus pro-life students that are discriminated against by the union leaders have only one option - try to vote in new union leaders. Those who are going to support the right to life and the freedom of speech.
In November 2006 the Carleton University Students' Association passed a motion to silence pro-life student groups on their campus. As a result, Carleton Lifeline's ratification was placed in jeopardy. A heated debate, which attracted national media coverage, ended in Carleton Lifeline's membership increasing and work continuing.
The only reason poor-choicers try to block the debate on fetal rights is because they know they have no chance of winning it. So let the debate begin at the Memorial University of Newfoundland.
To respectfully contact the MUNSU executive and voice your opposition to the decision:
James Farrell, External Director, munsu@munsu.ca
Bradley Russell, Student Life Director, studentlife@munsu.ca
Stella Magalios, Campaigns Director, campaigns@munsu.ca
Stephanie Power, Advocacy Director, advocacy@munsu.ca
Nick Eisnor, Finance Director, finance@munsu.ca
Phone: (709) 737-7633 Fax: (709) 737-4743
Mail: MUNSU, Suite 2000 - University Centre, MUN, St. John's, NL A1C 5S7

To respectfully express your concerns to the university administration:
Dr. Axel Meisen, President and Vice Chancellor of MUN, president@mun.ca
Dr. Lilly Walker, Dean of Student Affairs and Services, lwalker@mun.ca

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Pro-Life News Bytes

40 Days For Life campaign has started in US. It focuses on 40 days of prayer and fasting along with peaceful vigil at abortion facilities. Vote Life Canada calls on the Catholic Bishops of Canada to join their fellow US Bishops in supporting the Nationwide 40 Days for Life Campaign aimed at ending abortion.
Giuseppe Gori, the leader of the Family Coalition Party of Ontario interviewed on TVO by Stev Paiken.
"When the family prospers - society prospers."
"Our major issues are: Life, Family, Education..."

Life Chain is taking place in dozens of cities across Canada on September 30th. Approximately 30,000 people participate each year in this visual statement of solidarity with the unborn children, praying for our nation and for an end to abortion. Join the Life Chain. Help save moms and babies from the horrors of abortion.

Public Funding - Expect The Rules To Change

Some believe that funding of faith-based schools is a wedge issue between Ontario's major political parties. But the fact is, they all have the same goal - to integrate the independent schools into the public system.
In a Globe and Mail article from today ("Caucus dissent grows over schools policy"), John Tory admitted that he sees his funding promise as a way to conflate the private (or at least the religious-private) and public schools into a single "public" system.
What differs is the method by which this could be achieved. While the Liberals and the NDP would rather keep the status-quo and wait until the parents are tired of paying twice (for the public system they can't trust and for an independent school they send their kids to), the PC party prefers to accelerate the process by luring independent schools with public funds.

At first the conditions will be few - just follow the Ontario curriculum and don't teach creationism in science classes. But later the rules will change. Independent schools that take the funding bait will end up being stripped of their religious identity, becoming just ordinary public schools.
In 1988 Eden Christian College in Niagara On-The-Lake was facing very serious issues due to declining enrollment. The solution they pursued was to join the Lincoln County Public School Board as an alternative reli­gious school within the public board (as per the current Conservative proposal). Teach­ers' salaries almost doubled immediately and they were given a new computer lab. They eventually moved into part of a public high school building in nearby St. Catharines. There were no obvious detrimental 'strings' at the time, at least for the first year.

But within a few years things began to change. The public school board told them that they could no longer require students to attend chapel or take religious courses. Those would become optional before or after school programs. They could not hire teachers or principals on the basis of their beliefs, only that they were sympathetic to Christian be­liefs.

This year the public school board hired a non-Christian to be the school Principal. Within the first 3 years of becoming part of the public system they were ordered to re­move the word "Christian" from the school's name. They became Eden College. Last school year someone found out that teachers actually prayed in their staff meetings. That was outlawed too. In my opinion it would be extremely unwise to ignore this precedent when considering the Conservative plan.
But what about Catholic schools? This question is often used as a counter-argument; as a proof that it is possible for the publicly-funded schools to retain their religious identity.

Is that really so? It wasn't that long ago, when the court had ordered a Catholic school to let a perverse student attend the prom with his "partner". The ruling was based on the notion that a taxpayer-funded school can not "discriminate" against perverts - even if the lifestyle they promote goes against the religion taught at that school.

If that's not convincing enough - check the Life Site News and see how often does it happen, that a radical teacher or a board member pushes in abortion-friendly counseling or a lecture on "safe-sex" to which the school (a Catholic school) has no right to say no. That's what John Tory's proposal would look like. Schools may still be allowed to teach traditional values (only in religion classes, never in social studies), but they won't be allowed to live up to them.

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

If They Want Early Election - They'll Have One

The government made it clear that it's not ready to accept any ultimatums. If the opposition threatens with an early election - the Conservatives are getting their campaign buses ready. The first confidence vote on the Throne Speech is scheduled for October 18th. If the government loses - it's a big game of tic-tac-toe on November 26th.

Not many are excited with that prospective. Most of those who commented on the story don't want an early election. Some consider it a waste of taxpayers' money to hold elections that often; especially if it's unlikely to change the party standings in the Parliament. Others are simply not ready for an election or don't like the idea of having a Federal election campaign right after the Ontario election... Those who welcomed the possibility of an early election (looking forward for either a Liberal government or a Conservative majority) were greatly outnumbered.

So I don't retract my words - we'll have the campaign (or something quite similar) but there will be no election called. Here's a great comment posted by Craig:
A quick prediction:

After the throne speech, Dion is going to call a press conference and announce (in his typical mumbled stammering) that he "sees things in the throne speech that we can work on" and that because "Canadians do not want another election" he will support it.

Then he can pretend to save face and claim that he took a stand.
Exactly! Unless something extraordinary happens and the Liberal support jumps into mid-30s, the new campaign buses for the Conservative party are most likely to stay in the garage.

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

A Look At Christian School

Those who've never been to a Christian school can have a glimpse of what it looks like thanks to this article in the Toronto Star. I find it quite fairly written, even though expressions such as "infuse the Ontario curriculum with Christian values" do seem like criticism.

On the observation page the author Louise Brown adds:
The first thing that strikes you is how comfortable they are talking about God – the principal, the teachers, the students.

You compliment the school's forest where students build forts at lunch, and a teacher says, "Yes, it's truly a blessing."
Yet sending your child to the Knox Christian School costs $9,000 to $12,500 a year. The short-lived tax credit program brought in by Mike Harris' government used to provide the parents with $350 in provincial tax credit. McGuinty government canceled the program retroactively to January 1st 2003. If the program had been maintained, the credit amount would have been gradually increased to $1750 (in 2006 and afterwards), reducing the out-of-pocket expense for the parents to anywhere between $7,250 and $10,750 a year.

John Tory's proposal is to provide public funding to faith-based schools. That would cover larger part of the tuition. But the funding would come with plenty of strings attached:
Many like the idea but want to know if teachers must join a union or would the school have to hire non-Christian teachers?
It's already known that faith-based schools won't be allowed to teach creationism (or intelligent design for that matter) in science class if they want to qualify for the funding. Many suspect (and quite reasonably) that in order to qualify for public funds, the school would be compelled to give up its Chrisitan identity.
To Lawrence Hellinga of the Dutch Christian Reformed Church, who sent his four children to Knox and has two grandchildren there, John Tory's offer is a mixed blessing.

"We don't just sprinkle Christianity on top of the curriculum. It's a lifestyle here and I'd feel quite leery about the government sending us money if they wanted to tell us what we can teach," said Hellinga.

"It's not one hour of Bible study. The whole school is permeated with a Christian flavour." Says principal Petrusma, "We do real school here".
Hopefully, their local FCP candidate finds an opportunity to let them know that there's a better solution to the issue. Under a Parental Choice System, proposed by the Family Coalition Party, the government would allocate a specific amount per child (in the form of a Child Education Cheque or a "Voucher") and it will be up to the parents to decide what school, public or private, should that amount be paid to.

Ontario currently spends about $9,400 per student in a school year. Applied to Knox Christian School tuition, that would bring parents' out-of-pocket expense to $3,100 or less, depending on their income. Instead of paying taxes to sustain a school system they don't use, each parent would pay his taxes to sustain a school of his choice - public or private, religious or secular. That's what I believe is a reasonable approach.

Monday, September 24, 2007

Campaign Resumes With The Throne Speech

But will there be an election this fall? I still doubt it.

Yes, we saw Gilles Duceppe coming up with an ultimatum to the Conservative minority government. Stephan Dion announced his conditions few days later. While Jack Layton hasn't yet outlined his plans for a vote on the Throne Speech, it's likely the NDP will vote agaist it. So it may seem like the opposition parties are determined to bring down the government. But will they actually do that?

Let's try to figure out who's going to benefit the most if elections take place in late November. The public opinion polls can produce different numbers, but overall results show that both the Liberals and Conservatives are slightly down, while the NDP has maintaned its support. Thus - even the NDP is unlikely to benefit from the fall election. The biggest winner is the Green party - its support is way up. But they don't have any seats, so they can't vote against the Throne Speech. The biggest loser is the Bloc, which is way down.

Some of the polls suggest the Block went down to as low as 5% nationally (barely a 20% support in Quebec). Others give the Bloc 7-8% (30% or so in Quebec). Still, that's an all-time low, not seen since early 1990s. The Block has just lost one of the ridings that used to be its stronghold since the party came into being; in another riding, the Conservatives managed to narrow the gap to just 5% (down from 32% gap on the election day). If Duceppe dares to bring down the government - he'll come back with the lowest number of seats ever.

Another player who obviously won't benefit from the fall election is Stephane Dion. First and foremost - his party doesn't have the funds for another election campaign. They still owe $3.6 million for the past campaign expenses. With the new financing rules they can no longer host $5000 a plate fundraising dinners or rely on a supporter's child to dig out $5400 off his piggy-bank. Plus, there are many in the party that are upset with Dion's leadership. They may not say it aloud, but there aren't going to help Dion either. (Let alone the rumors that some of them would even resort to sabotage, just to get rid of Dion.) It's obvious that unlike Lester Pearson and John Turner, Stephan Dion will not be given a second chance if he loses the next election.

And, finally, we've got the Conservatives. Some may suggest they could try to orchestrate their own defeat, in an attempt to win majority. Still, it doesn't seem like there is a possibility for a majority government. Moreover, after making quite a few concessions to the opposition, the Conservatives are risking to lose some of their traditional supporters. So far the government has already outlined its preferred date for the next election - October 16, 2009, as per the fixed election date legislation. And I would say - they better use those two years to show the small-c Conservatives that we've got a Conservative minority government, not a Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition.

So what can we expect this fall? It would be naive to assume that Harper won't react to numerous threats to bring down his government. Most likely, the Speech from the Throne will be composed in the way that it could be used as a government agenda in the Commons, if the opposition lets it pass or it could be used as a campaign platform if the opposition triggers an election.

One more thing we could expect shortly after a Throne Speech is the Economic and Fiscal update. With all the election talk in the air, this could become a mini-budget, just as it did in 2000 and 2005. Since the vote over the Throne speech would be just days away the government may simply have nothing to lose by bringing a series of broad-base tax cuts to a vote in the Commons. If the opposition lets it pass - we've got an accomplishment for the Conservative government. If not - it will be the Conservative party campaign issue and it will be Harper's turn to ask Dion whether or not he is going to repeal those tax cuts if elected.

Will the Liberals and the Block dare to go ahead and bring down the government in those circumstances? I doubt it. Most likely, they'll agree on a symbolic amendment, which would allow one of the opposition parties to save face. Or they'll vote against the speech, but with only half of their caucus present.

Saturday, September 22, 2007

Time To Level The Playfield

Feminists are furious. Some of their organizations could close their doors due to the SOW funding cuts. As it always happens when lefties have no arguments, some opposition MPs resorted to name calling, trying to present the Conservatives as some sort of "women haters". But does this 'status of women' agency truly represent all the women? It doesn't seem so. Somehow there are too many women (or girls for that matter) left behind.

First of all, I'm talking about 50,000 or so baby girls that are slaughtered by abortion every single year. Thousands of them are aborted just for being girls. Yes, it does happen in Canada and the perpetrators claim they're just running a business. Has anyone ever heard any SOW official speaking up against this wholesale slaughter on demand? No, the SOW actually claims abortion is a women's right. In their eyes, all those baby girls are neither women, nor humans.

Then, we have women who disagree with the feminist agenda, promoted by SOW.
I resent feminists speaking in my name, pushing for funds in my name, and then saying that a government that I agree with is hateful towards me for doing what I want.

Feminism should not be confused with the wishes of the female population of Canada.

I wish that the mainstream media would make that clear, and not leave unchallenged the idea that all women agree with feminists, or that feminists have some kind of inherent right to speak up for all of us.
Why would the Real Women of Canada be left out? Isn't that a women's organization? Only because they stand for the right to life and for the dignity of womanhood and motherhood, for the very same values Canada was founded upon. How much government funding do they get? Let's say it that way: if you take a minimum monthly wage, subtract all the government funding REAL Women received since the organization was established, you'll get precisely the minimum monthly wage.

Some may claim that at the very least SOW represents most of Canadian women. Even that appears to be doubtful in light of a fact that while the REAL Women of Canada manage to survive financially with not a rusty dime in government subsidies, a mere threat of funding cuts (as it appears, those beggars will get their handouts after all) puts SOW-run groups in a near-bankruptcy situation.

It's time to level the playfield. Of course, the government could oblige the SOW to get pro-life and pro-family women's groups on board - which would require more funds to accommodate the new partnership. Or the government could cut all the funds to special interest groups and let the taxpayers decide which organization (if any) they'd want to support. I find that the most reasonable solution. If SOW truly represents someone - then its supporters won't let it go broke.

Friday, September 21, 2007

Glass quarter empty or three quarters full?

Some may say the FCP is still 24 candidates short of running full slate. Yet, comparing to the previous elections - it's more than ever before. And it's much bigger share of the province as well - about 80%, compared to 50% or so in 1990-2003. While the mainstream media still tries not to notice the Family Coalition Party, Wikipedia gave the FCP a column of its own on the 2007 election page.

The Final FCP Tally: Candidates in 83 of the 107 electoral districts That's more than all other small party candidates and the independents put together.

Those who claim that voting FCP means just throwing your vote away, are lying to themselves and, unfortunately, to others. The only vote that is "wasted" is a vote cast for a party that doesn't truly represent one's views.

Family Coalition Party is the only political party in Ontario that supports family values and the right to life for the unborn. Family Coalition Party is the biggest Fiscal Conservative party because the Red Tory PCs can now barely pass as centrists. In 1990 several candidates received over 10% of the popular vote (the best was 13%). With the centrist and left-of-centre vote split four ways (between the PC, Liberal, NDP and Green Party), FCP candidates may only need twice as much to get elected. If Ontario pro-family voters vote their conscience - they will have MPPs representing them in the next Ontario Parliament.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Pro-Abortionists Attack FCP Supporter

From John Pacheco's campaign update:
PRO-ABORT VIOLENCE: The thugs were out last night. Apparently one of my supporters who has a standard FCP lawn sign was targetted. Her car windshield was smashed and even the interior was damaged. Total cost: over $2000. Police have been called in. It's getting nasty out there. Are we really surprised? The violence of abortion begets violence in society. There is no neat little demarcation point.
Poor-choicers don't want to forfeit their license to kill. When they realize that ridiculing and name calling doesn't work they resort to vandalism and violence. Then they complain that signs picturing an unborn baby are too intimidating.
SIGNS: The Returning Officer called today to know if we wanted an updated voters list. In the course of the conversation, he mentioned he had received complaints about the baby signs. Apparently, some people want to know... get ready for this... what the picture of an unborn baby has to do with the family. It sounds kind of ridiculous at first, but once you really start to think about, the complaint really does make perfect sense. There is really very little room for babies today in our culture. That's why our fertility rate is 1.5 children per couple (well below replacement level of 2.2). And that's why we are dying as a society.
Just to make things clear - we're not talking about signs displaying what's left of a baby after abortion. The signs simply display a 20 week unborn baby. One that has a beating heart and who can feel pain, just like any of us. He has a personality already but the government refuses to consider him a person. Family Coalition Party of Ontario is determined to end this discrimination.

To those who still don't get it: "My family includes unborn children."
(Suzanne Fortin,
FCP candidate for Nepean - Carleton.)

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Truth-Bashers Won't Let Go Of Free Dominion

Now they are suing FD for libel.

Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman believes that numerous postings in which he was called a professional complainer and a censorship champion are libelous. Is that so? What would you call a man who spends most of his free time silencing people he doesn't agree with? Especially if his efforts are only directed against white supremacists; never against radical muslims or racist groups run by visible minorities. (At least the wikipedia article doesn't list any of them among the groups Warman fought against.)

So, the man whose hobby can no longer be mentioned under a threat of being sued for libel, took his time to read the Free Dominion threads and dig out all the harsh language used to describe his judicial activism.
Connie writes: I just scoured that thread and it appears that all of the comments in the complaint, except one, were quotes from other sites posted by klinkxx (who we have banned). Strangely, Warman doesn't mention klinkxx in his complaint, only EdS (who wrote one comment).
The latter refers to Warman as "the proxy by which the B'nai Brith, CJC, CHRC works through". Warman claims EdS is accusing him of being controlled by someone else or by some other group. I don't think that "proxy" and "being controlled by" are synonyms. But I am sure that a system of self-imposed one-sided censorship known as political correctness couldn't function without self-hating activists like Warman helping to enforce it.

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Federal Election? Not likely to happen this fall.

Few months ago a Liberal blogger (sorry, can't remember which one) suggested that the government better orchestrates another by-election in a strongly Conservative riding, so the Conservatives don't end up losing every single by-election. Now it turns out that Liberals themselves needed that kind of advice.

I doubt any Liberal supporter could find a silver lining in yesterday's by-elections. Outremont has been a Liberal riding for decades (apart for 1988 election). It was expected that with Dion as a leader, Liberals would win back the support of Quebec voters - that didn't happen. There are rumors that Ignatieff supporters sabotaged the by-election and that there could be attempts to overthrow Dion's leadership. Looks like Dion will have to halt the election rhetoric and try to win back the support of his own party first.

The Bloc too, could hardly be called a winner. In fact, yesterday's by-elections place the party in a lose-lose situation. Supporting the Conservatives means supporting their primary rival. Yet if they vote against the throne speech - they may end up with the lowest number of seats ever. Most likely Duceppe is going to choose the lesser of the two evils and work out a compromise with the Conservatives that would allow the Bloc to save face.

So it looks like the new throne speech, outlining new priorities of the Conservative government, will eventually be passed - and the second legislative session of the 39th Parliament will last somewhat longer than it was predicted just weeks ago.

Monday, September 17, 2007

MMP - Pros And Cons

Here's a great summary of all the pros and cons of the Mixed-Member Proportional system proposed for Ontario.

As the discussion over the proposed system goes on, the main argument against the system is that party list candidates may be chosen by the party executives and voters won't be able to break the slate. I agree, it would be much better if the Citizens' Assembly was given few more weeks so they could design an open list system, which would give voters the option to choose what candidates from a selected party they'd want to support.

At the same time, as Australian experience shows, less than 5% of the voters choose to "break the slate", rather than accepting the list as it is. Also, with the way the party lines are drawn, it's unlikely that a party allows someone whose opinion deviates from the party platform to be its list candidate. And finally, even if we can't have intra-party competition, at the very least, MMP makes it easier for us to vote our conscience. Instead of looking for acceptable candidates on the leading party list, voters are free to support a smaller party, that actually represent their views. I believe this evens things out.

Another advantage of the proposed system - is that it lets the newbies in. Political reforms won't be possible if we have no choice but keep electing the same old guys just because we find others to be even worse. If we want things to be done differently, we need a system that gives fair representation to broad range of political parties. Yes, we may disagree with one small party or another, but that doesn't mean people we disagree with don't deserve to be represented.
Related articles:

Sunday, September 16, 2007

Not Every Form Of Diversity Deserves Celebration.

Not all families are equal for the raising of children. Not every form of diversity deserves celebration. Canada's 2006 census, released yesterday, shows that marriage is in decline, and common-law unions and single parenthood continue to grow. And that is not good for kids. Marriage is still the best framework in which to raise healthy, happy children.
Can you believe this was posted in The Globe And Mail? Looks like the grim message of the last census is really getting through. Will it become the wake-up call for all of us, so we work together to strengthen traditional family and marriage? I hope so.

The online debate has been closed, but here's a comment worth highlighting:
Traditional marriage involves personal sacrifice and commitment as the couple struggles to raise children. We no longer live in a society that has values personal sacrifice, commitment or children. We value divorce, common-law marriage and abortion for we all want to be “free” of all moral ties and obligations that we have not personally chosen. Our tax system and our whole way of living in Canada makes it harder to be married than to be single. Why would anyone want to be in a traditional marriage for our society is so against it?

Saturday, September 15, 2007

They Call Themselves "Progressive"

So what kind of person has to label himself "Progressive?" Obviously somebody who believes he (or she) understands real progress better than the rest of us. Because if you are a Progressive it implies that everybody else, let's face it, is a Regressive, or maybe just a Stagnant. It's a smirky, self-flattering way of saying you're a lot better than the rest.
...

Like the preacher who is focused on nothing but sin, Progressives must emphasize the alleged flaws of other people. They need to pinpoint those flaws, to feel important. Because Progressives make it clear that the real obstacle to Progress is Other People. In fact, if you really ask a "Progressive" what other people are like, you're likely to hear that much of humanity is either ignorant or evil.
...

All of Political Correctness, the dominant cultural theme of the Left, depends upon such allegations and accusations. It is incredibly shallow and superficial - but it is also very effective as a power-play. If you can put the world at a disadvantage by implicitly accusing them of sin, you can also manipulate and oppress others, conscious of your own moral superiority. Evidence is not required. It is the pervasive McCarthyism of the Left.
Talking about progress and how how progressive were the trends that changed our society in the last 50 years or so, let's think of an experiment.

Let's say we meet a foreigner, who is absolutely unfamiliar with our culture. We take him to the video store, where we rent a typical movie from each decade - one from the 50s, one from the 60s and so forth. Once our guest watches these movies, we ask him to rank them - from the most progressive to the least. Which one, do you think will be rated the least progressive? Would the results be any different if instead of movies, we ask our guest to rank books, songs, artworks, magazines or anything else that leaves our high-tech out of the picture?

Somehow I have an impression that this hypothetical foreigner will find modern "post-Christian" culture regressing, if not - a dying culture. Am I being too pessimistic?

Friday, September 14, 2007

Truth-bashers sink to new lows

They tried to destroy Free Dominion forum with a "human rights complaint". They wanted to flood the forum with trolls. When those attempts failed, they created a YouTube site impersonating Connie Wilkins, the owner of Free Dominion.

The site was a user page, supposedly created by Connie, with Free Dominion forum logo used as a background and plenty of offensive videos (KKK etc) in the "favorites". Poor spelling was also noticeable.

The site was removed after Connie complained to YouTube. This impersonation site clearly shows the quality and character of our political opponents.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

They knew the answer

Some more information from the 2006 Census was made public yesterday by Statistics Canada. The families and household data (also named as "Family Portrait") shows that for the first time ever childless couples outnumbered families with children 42.7% to 41.4%. Looking at the marital status data (which for some reason includes 15 year-olds), we find out that 51.5% of Canadians aged 15 and over are unmarried. There are more single-parent families, the size of an average household is going down... In brief, thanks to the decades of anti-family policies, the traditional 'nuclear' family in Canada has hit rock bottom.

The CBC choose to conclude its article on a recently published data with a question. "Is there a price to pay for the rise in single parent families?", they ask. But the answer is right there, in the very same article:
In 2005, the median household income for two-parent families in Canada was $67,600. For lone-parent families it was $30,000 — meaning half of all single-parent families were bringing in less than that amount annually.
Thus - poverty is a price to pay for family breakdown. As simple as that.

The CBC could also dig into their own archives. Or lookup the same data on Stats Canada website. Yes, I'm talking about the age and gender information, which was published about 2 months ago. The news was grim: we are getting older; 10 years from now there won't be enough young workers to replace those that are going to retire. If the CBC put the data together they'd get a clear answer to their question: demographic and labour crisis (with the possibility of a severe crisis of Canada's old age benefit programs) is the price to pay for putting family values aside.

The CBC wanted the public input. They got some:
A family unit (whether single or not) comprises of individuals and as individuals, we have to ultimately take responsibility and never forget that first and foremost we are responsible for and accountable to our children.

We, as a society seem to have forgotten that and this is why we find ourselves debating our future...
, says SA from Mississauga.
What other answer did they expect?

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Faith or Funding? No, you can't have both!

Ontario PC Party spokesman made it clear: Faith-based schools that teach creationism in science classes won't be eligible for the proposed public funding, as it goes against the Ontario curriculum. The latter allows creationism to be taught in religion classes, but when it comes to science classes, schools must teach another theory - the evolution as the sole truth.

The article doesn't mention moral values. Apparently the same spokesman didn't say anything on the subject. So we can only guess whether faith-based schools would also be forced to adopt sex-education in its entirety as part of the Ontario curriculum, while teaching abstinence and traditional marriage too would only be allowed in religion classes (if allowed at all). We may even call it a "progressives' hidden agenda".

Anyway, the PC party press release confirms what I've already said twice on this blog: that public funding will cost faith-based schools their identity. It may be ok for some parents whose objective is heritage rather than faith. Yet many other parents will find that unacceptable:
He appears to have made no one happy - not his liberal secular friends and certainly not the majority of people of faith who want no part of the current establishment's secular and sexual propaganda. These are, after all, the two main reasons that faith-based schools exist. Money was not the object then. And it is not the object now. It is a pity that Mr. Tory cannot understand this. It would have saved him the serious embarassment he is currently experiencing.
The Parental Choice System, proposed by the Family Coalition Party, which would allow parents to choose the school, public or privately owned, for their children, using the government-provided Child Education Cheque (commonly known as "school voucher") to pay the tuition, makes much more sense.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

REMEMBER

Kevin Cosgrove's 911 call
(Courtesy of Jill Stanek.)

Remember the people who died - not on the battlefield, without bearing arms. They died because they were free and prosperous. Because a gang of savage moon-worshipers believed that American freedom and prosperity set a bad example for their own conutries.

Remember those who risked and sacrificed their lives to save others'. Those who stepped into the burning skyscrapers, knowing they're unlikely to get out. Those who carried their duty to the end. Remember those who died on battlefields months and years later, killing savage beasts in their own caves, so none of them ever dares to threaten our lives, our homes, our freedom.

Remember also the fifth column enemies. Don't forget an Egyptian diplomat who was smiling as he told the CBC interviewer that the US should blame its foreign policy for what happened that day. It was just hours after the World Trade Center towers collapsed and the dust over the ruins hadn't yet settled.

Remember - the entire world witnessed America being attacked by Muslim terrorists. Yet those were America's own homegrown "progressive", "compassionate", anarchist, anti-state, anti-West, anti-Christian and all other kinds of self-hating treacherous journalists who did everything in their power to spread the lies, rather than denouncing them. Thanks to their efforts billions of people all over the world believe that America is not only the one to blame for September 11 attacks, but that it had actually perpetrated them.

Remember. Because once forgotten, history repeats itself.

Ontario Election: Nominations close Sept.18

Nominations for Ontario provincial election close on September 18. Thus the candidates are given merely a week to get the paperwork done. While the three leading parties usually have nothing to worry about (since they've prepared everything in advance), it puts enormous stress on the smaller party candidates, let alone independents.

So far, there are 74 candidates running for the Family Coalition Party. That's slightly less than the Green party (85 candidates as of this morning) and almost 3 times more candidates than the Libertarian party has (Freedom and COR parties didn't post a list of candidates yet). 74 candidates - that's more than in the previous elections (let alone it's much bigger share of the province than before since there are less constituencies). Yet that's still 33 candidates short of a full slate and there's only only one week left.

Let's make it full slate this time. Attention Ontario Pro-Lifers: If you know of a possible good candidate, or if you want to run for nomination, please call: 1 888 613 2645. Thanks.

Sunday, September 9, 2007

Wishing All The Best To My Pro-Life Friends In Ontario

On every issue that is important to the family, our party is the only hope for pro-life, pro-family voters.

The Family Coalition Party is the only party for which you can vote with a clear conscience. Our party has written principles that do not change according to the political climate.

Do not be fooled by arguments against voting for us. The Family Coalition Party can grow larger and stronger with your support.
Ontario election campaign begins tomorrow. I'd like to wish all the best to my friends in the Family Coalition Party of Ontario, the only political party in Ontario that is unreservedly pro-life and pro-family. You've been doing a great job getting the word out and nominating full slate of candidates. I hope at least one of you gets enough votes to get elected, so Ontario pro-lifers finally have a voice in the provincial Parliament.

39th Parliament, 1st Session Summary

It's official. The first legislative session is over. When the Parliament resumes on October 16, a new session will commence with a new Throne Speech and a clean slate. The old bills will have to be reintroduced, but unlike the private bills that are automatically fast-tracked to the state they were before the prorogation, it's back to square one for the government bills.

So what was achieved during this session? Here's how it all breaks down:

Accountability and Democratic Reform:
It began with Bill C2, The Accountability Act, a complex piece of legislation aimed to combat corruption and keep corporate and union funds (as well as personal wealth) out of politics. Apart from C2, the government succeeded in passing bill C16, which gives us fixed election dates as well as bill C31, that tightens rules on voters' identification at the polls. (The latter however got watered down by the opposition and the Senate, so not all the measures were implemented.) Finally, there was the bill C48 to implement UN Convention Against Corruption.

Among the bills that didn't pass were bill C54, to close the loophole on political party loans, ensuring those loans don't become donations, bill C55 to provide more days and more locations for advance voting and bill C56 that would have reduced the penalizing effect on the three most populous provinces which results from the existing representation formula. Those bills were introduced just weeks before the Parliament recessed for the summer, so they didn't have much time to pass.

And, of course, we had the two Senate Reform bills, S4 and C43 that were stalled by the opposition. Hopefully the government gets them passed, so in the 2009 election we get the opportunity to elect our Senators along with electing MPs.

Public safety and anti-crime bills:
Those were fiercely opposed by the opposition parties whose ideology states that crime should be addressed by eliminating "the social cause", rather by tightening the sentences. The fact that their "social cause" lean-on-crime approach only resulted in much more crime is apparently beyond their comprehension. So we got a lot of those bills watered down and many more - purposely stalled by the opposition.

Among those that passed were: Bill C9 which denies conditional sentencing to those committing serious crimes, bill C19 which cracks down on street racing, bill C25 that combats money laundering and even bill C59 to penalize unauthorized recording of a movie.

But there were plenty of others that didn't pass, among them: Bill C10 that would have enforced minimum sentences for firearm-related crimes, bill C27, dealing with the dangerous offender designation, bill C32 to increase the penalties for impaired driving and the bill C35 to reverse the onus in bail hearing for firearm-related offenses. Next time someone gets shot in your neighborhood, thank the Liberals, the NDP and the Block.

Some other bills that passed:
  • Bill C14 that simplifies citizenship requirements for children adopted abroad.
  • Bill C24 that resolves the softwood lumber dispute with the US.
  • Bill C36 which simplifies the requirements for CPP and OAS benefits.
Among other bills that didn't pass were:
  • Bill C22 to raise the age of consent from 14 to 16.
  • Bill C30 the used to be Clean Air Act. It was mutilated beyond recognition by the opposition parties that substituted anti-pollution measures with carbon taxes and other Kyoto-related scams.
  • Bill C44 that would extend the Canadian Human Rights Act provisions to the native reserves, giving aboriginals more legal tools to hold their governments accountable.
  • Bill C57 that would close the loophole in a skilled worker visa program, so strippers and prostitutes could no longer qualify as "exotic dancers" whose skills are "in demand on Canada's labor market".
  • Bill C62 to ensure the effective operation of Wage Earner Protection Program, to close the remaining loopholes which allowed the companies to use bankruptcy as an excuse not to give workers their last paycheck.
Overall - not bad for a government that is 30 seats short of the majority. Hopefully, some of the bills that didn't survive the first session, get passed in the second (or become campaign issues if the opposition parties choose to bring down the government). And it would be nice to see the Conservatives seizing the policy initiative and advancing Conservative priorities more vigorously than they've done so far.

Friday, September 7, 2007

Pro-Life Blogger Detained - Media Coverage

VOCM Radio Interviews Eric Alcock On His Arrest By Police Yesterday For Defending The Unborn. The host was by no means friendly to the pro-life cause, blasting Eric with tricky questions and often not letting him even finish the sentence. But Eric did get a chance to say a few important things during this 10-minute interview on the busiest talk show program in the province. That will sure get at least some people thinking.

Here's how the story got covered by the CBC. After praising the conference for a couple of minutes the newscaster mentioned that some unknown protester was arrested. In the update next day the Cheater & Bluffers Co changed the story, claiming the police was only "removing an unwanted visitor from private property". Not a word about who this "unwanted visitor" was, let alone explaining how did Eric become "unwanted" once the Coalition had invited him to the conference.

Thursday, September 6, 2007

Quebec Mennonites Move To Ontario

Mennonite families from Roxton Falls are moving to Ontario, after their community school was deemed illegal by the Quebec government. Unlike Quebec, Ontario gives private schools more freedom when it comes to choosing the curriculum and the teachers. The province has 69 Mennonite schools that host about 3,300 children - so there will be enough room for the Mennonite children from Roxton Falls.

Yet the Mennonite families still hope they will eventually be able to come back.
He hasn't sold his home. Neither have the other families who have moved to Ontario to join another Mennonite congregation. They hope a deal can be reached with the Quebec government to reopen the school, located in the church building.

"We think that having freedom of religion grants us the right to have our own school. Across the rest of Canada and the U.S., it's been granted to us. So we're hoping to receive the same thing here like we have in other provinces," he said. "If the right is granted to us to continue having our own school, then we'll move back."
Definitely, the situation can't be left as it is. If Quebec government is allowed to crack down on independent schools, it may trigger a chain reaction in other provinces. If we want to preserve our right to educate our children in the manner we see fit, we must offer Roxton Falls Mennonite community all the help they need.

Wednesday, September 5, 2007

Pro-Life Blogger Detained At Religious Conference

Here's what happened to Eric Alcock, the author of the Vote Life Canada blog at the conference staged by an anti-poverty group named Religious Social Action Coalition:
I should have suspected something was cooking when I walked inside the building and around the corner were two police officers in full uniform. It was about five minutes before the conference was due to start. Walking past them and into the Conference room, it was only perhaps two minutes before a burly looking gentleman approached me with outreached hand, asking me my name, to which I responded. Immediately he grasped my hand tightly as if to hold me in that exact position while informing me that I was not welcome there and that I must immediately leave.

I was rather stunned at this rare gesture of welcome and advised him that the Coalition’s announcement that was issued indicated that it was a public event and that all were welcome. He said he would call for the police to remove me if I did not leave immediately and then motioned to another man who was listening to the conversation to fetch the police. I asked the burly gentleman why I could not stay and he told me that I had said some very bad things about them in yesterday’s press release and that I must immediately leave.

By that time the police arrived, telling me that my invitation was rescinded by these people and that I must immediately leave the premises, which were private property, or failing that, I would be removed by police.
Yes, RSAC did actually invite Eric to the press conference, apparently in search of support from the Newfoundland pro-life groups. Eric accepted the invitation, pledging his support just as soon as the Coalition calls for legalized abortion as the number one voting issue in the upcoming NL election. Apparently, once the RSAC found out that they can't just get a free publicity from the pro-lifers, they rescinded the invitation. And they kept the police ready to drag Eric out before he convinces anyone of their own that fight against poverty is meaningless until the society values human life more than pleasure, convenience and politics.

Tuesday, September 4, 2007

Too White To Vote

Here's an interesting story I found on the web. It happened in Nova Scotia on January 6th, when election was held for the South Shore Regional School Board "mandatory" black member. While ethnic quotas, set-asides and other programs under which jobs (especially in the public service) are awarded based on candidates' origin, rather than their skills have become common, the South Shore Regional School Board went even further. Segregating candidates apparently wasn't enough for them, so they decided to segregate the voters as well.

This was by no means an easy job. In their greatest dereliction, neither Elections Canada nor Elections Nova Scotia have yet prepared a separate electoral roll for visible minorities. So the school board had to develop their own guidelines:
To cast a ballot, people must have children who consider themselves African-Nova Scotian or they need to be the children of African-Nova Scotians themselves.
Yet when it actually came to voting, it was up to the poll clerks to decide who is black enough to cast a ballot for a "mandatory black member" and who isn't. While the board pledged to make the polls "available and accessible to the entire range of voters" and printed over 44,000 ballots, only 31 residents were allowed to vote. Few more voters (as the failed candidate Gordon Warrington claims - mostly his supporters) showed up but were turned away from the polls because their skin was too light.

Shall I mention that this whole charade cost taxpayers $30,000? Shall I add that a previous attempt to elect a "mandatory black member" for that same school board ended up with half of the ballots being declared invalid by the judge?...

Next time the South Shore Regional School Board wants to bring a member of a visible minority group on board - they better just appoint him. I think it's better than having an election in which all but 30 residents (out of 44,000) are too white to vote.

Monday, September 3, 2007

Overpopulation? We've heared that already!

Now:
Paul Watson, president of the Sea Shepherd organization (and former Sierra Club board member), posts regular diatribes against population on his web site. In a May 4th editorial, he insists that human beings act "in the same manner as an invasive virus" on the earth. "I was once severely criticized for describing human beings as being the 'AIDS of the Earth,'" he went on. "I make no apologies for that statement."
(Life Site News, August 27, 2007.)
Then:
Preaching in Southern England, reverend William Snow, PhD claimed that the world is threatened not by wars but by overpopulation... He proposed creating an international parliament which would define individual country's birth quotas for each year.
(From a newspaper of 1953)
HOW TO SAVE HUMANITY FROM HUMANITY
by Samuel Yakovlevich Marshak.
(Translated from Russian.)
He preaches death in exaltation:
- It's not a war that you must fear.
Our threat is overpopulation,
If kids are plenty - end is near.

He sends his message to the nations:
- Let's have a body for the Earth
That will decide on baby quotas
And who's permitted to give birth.

He calls for death, he calls for violence
Without realizing it
That he's the only one the planet
Is overpopulated with.
(1953)

Tough choice for Newfoundland

If you look at the public opinion polls in Newfoundland, it may seem like the campaign which Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams has been waging against Harper's government is paying off. The provincial PC support is at unprecedented levels and it's projected that party will sweep every seat except for a couple of NDP strongholds in the upcoming provincial election.

But this strategy could backfire. Danny Williams was so preoccupied blasting the federal Conservatives that he didn't realize what the alternative may be like.
Fabian Manning said Liberal policies will at least still if not kill the Hebron, which the Newfoundland and Labrador government expects to deliver at least $16 billion in royalties over a 25-year production period.
...
Manning said the Liberal-supported Bill C-288 "certainly creates some major problems for the Hebron project," since it calls for what he called "drastic" reductions in carbon emissions within four months.
...
"If anybody thinks [Bill C-288] is not going to drastically reduce economic activity in this country … they're dreaming in Technicolor," Manning said in an interview.
Of course, the Liberals were quick to denounce those predictions as fear-mongering. (As if global warming hysteria itself wasn't anything but fear-mongering.) And of course the Cheaters, Bluffers & Co were there to strengthen the Liberal point of view.
Remember now what this "news report" is purportedly based upon - a claimed risk to Newfoundland oil development posed by Liberal demands for implementation of Bill C-288.

We received the opinion of a sociology professor.

We received the opinion of a weatherman.

As a bonus prize, we received results of June public opinion polling in Newfoundland.

Did we hear from an economist? No.

Did they interview an industry expert? No.

Did they ask Chevron? No.

Did the CBC make any effort at all to determine if the concerns of the Conservative MP quoted were valid?

No.

And that is why we mock you.
Fabian Manning is doing a great job trying to counterbalance the anti-Conservative rhetoric from the provincial government and the media. Yet with the media doing their best to ensure that the Conservative support doesn't rebound, it's up to the provincial government and Danny Williams himself to do the damage control.

Newfoundland PC party will be re-elected with a near-clean-sweep majority on October 9th. What will be their next step? How is Danny Williams going to make sure the protocols of the learned elders of Kyoto are not used to strip Newfoundland of its natural wealth? How is he going to backtrack on over half-a-year of bashing the Federal Conservatives? What tactics will he use to convince the people Newfoundland and Labrador that a cap (not even a claw-back) on equalization payments is still better than having the oil projects halted under C288 and other Kyoto implementation bills the Liberals are likely to pass? Or will he choose to just let the things happen and hand all 7 Newfoundland seats over to a party that will turn Newfoundland into an eternal dependent in exchange for a notion that a province of 500 thousands and shrinking is doing its best to prevent the entire planet from overheating?

It's going to be a touch choice for Danny Williams. And a tough choice for Newfoundland.

Saturday, September 1, 2007

Free $100 checks are no better than free cheese

What will you do if you receive a check from a company you've never dealt with? Are you going to cash it right away or will you try to contact the company to find out what is the check for? If you choose to cash the check immediately - you're trapped in a 5-year contract at highway robbery prices.
The Niagara Centre MPP alleges Direct Energy is violating the consumer protection act by sending residents $100 cheques that enter them into five-year contracts if cashed. Direct Energy denies that's how it works.

"It appears to have no terms attached because as you can see from the cheque, there's nothing on the face of it or on the back of it that indicates you're signing a contract," Kormos said.

A letter that comes with the cheque indicates "in fine print" that once it is deposited, the person will be enrolled in a five-year electricity flat-price protection plan, he said.

Kormos said the plan enters the resident into a contract at 8.59 cents per kilowatthour for five years, when the current residential electricity price is 5.3 cents per kWh. Most people don't calculate their energy based on kilowatts, he said, so the impression is 8.59 cents is a great price.
A difference of 3.29 cents per kilowatt adds up to way over $100 a year for someone who lives in an apartment. For those who live in a house, the extra cost would be several times higher. Considering that it's a 5 year contract, the cost of a free $100 check adds up to at least $600-700; often - to a couple thousands of dollars. That explains why Direct Energy mails those out, doesn't it?