Sunday, August 31, 2008

New Oath For Doctors: Customer Is Always Right

Lea Singh wrote a great article in response to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) draft policy that would disallow conscientious objection for Ontario physicians, prohibiting them from expressing "personal judgments" about a patient's lifestyle.
A storm erupted not long ago when a Columbia University psychiatrist wrote that "My profession has been hijacked. I cannot do my job, my patients are suffering, and I am fed up." She was upset with the stringent political correctness in her profession, which dictated that she avoid being judgmental of her patients’ sexual practices. When they experienced problems due to their promiscuous behavior, she could only repeat, "Make sure you’re protected." Today, medical professions on both sides of the Atlantic are hardening this political correctness into an official code of conduct.
It may have always been part of the doctor’s role, but now it’s no longer acceptable for doctors to make us uncomfortable about our actions. We don’t want to hear about the dangers of promiscuous sexual behavior or the benefits of teen abstinence; still less do we want doctors to "preach" about the negative effects women often experience from abortion (or, gasp, about the humanity of the fetus). And least of all do we want doctors discouraging lesbians from artificial insemination, or young people from sex change operations.
Those are dangerous symptoms, but can the "progressive" establishment back down? Can they actually allow freedom of speech and freedom of conscience for our doctors? If they do - what will keep a physician from calling a baby - a baby, from calling a disorder what it really is - a disorder, from denouncing a bad lifestyle by telling a patient that he's made a bad lifestyle choice?..

And if the doctors are allowed to say all that - what will happen to the secular fundamentalist dogmas? How could they defend their theories that have absolutely no scientific basis if they can't silence the physicians? That's why some lawmakers in Britain are proposing jail sentences for talking a pregnant woman out of abortion. That's why Canadian pro-life hero Linda Gibbons has spent over 5 years in jail for peacefully protesting outside abortion mills in Ontario.

So what if what pro-lifers say is factually correct? If the Humanist Big Brother says that the unborn is a "blob of tissue" and that a mother and her unborn child are "one body" - you must believe it, no matter what; use all your doublethink skills - or else!...

Friday, August 29, 2008

Over 100 MPs Oppose Morgentaler Order of Canada

OTTAWA, August 28, 2008 ( - Campaign Life Coalition, the political arm of the pro-life movement in Canada, has released the names of 105 Members of Parliament who have come out publicly against the nomination of abortionist Henry Morgentaler to the Order of Canada. Also listed are 35 MPs who have publicly come out in support of Morgentaler's nomination.

The list of those opposed to the Morgentaler appointment includes MPs from all political parties represented in the House of Commons, except for the NDP.
Meanwhile the chief "justice" Beverley McLachlin tries to downplay her role in sneaking chief abortionist through the back door. She claims that her job as a chairperson was to “make sure the meeting runs well and fairly and that the vote is taken fairly - and not to weigh in for, or against, any particular candidate”. Well, it's hard to believe that a controversial candidate (to say the least) could be nominated with numerous violations of the Order Constitution and yet the chairperson has nothing to do with that.

Let's look at it again: Morguentaler gets nomiated to the Order of Canada despite an earlier promise from the GG office that this wouldn't happen. The nomination is approved even though at least two panel members oppose it. When the rumors about the nomination leak out to the public, the GG office openly mocks pro-lifers, giving out Campaign Life Coalition phone number to all those who called to express their outrage. The GG office remains silent about the nomination until the last minute, omitting the traditional announcement - and yet, the chairperson of the nomination panel who also happens to be the Supreme Court Chief Justice suggests that she wasn't involved; that all this just happened on its own...

If the inquiry shows that Ms. McLachlin is telling the truth, that she was truly unaware of what's going on in the organization of which she's a chairperson - then she is unfit for her job. If however it turns out that she lies, that she was well aware of the ongoing violations, but did nothing to stop them (let alone - that she was actually the one behind this whole backdoor deal) - then her place is in the court room, but not as a judge.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Betraying Victims' Families

Failing to recognize that there's more than one victim to an assault on a pregnant woman shows no compassion to the victims' families.
OTTAWA, August 27, 2008 ( - Monday afternoon, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announced that the Conservative government would table a bill that would make pregnancy an aggravating factor when a pregnant woman is assaulted or killed.

"This is not enough!" said Aydin Cocelli, brother-in-law of Aysun Sesen, who was brutally killed last year during her 7th month of pregnancy. "Pregnancy is already considered an aggravating factor. We ask the Canadian government to recognize that we are coping with two losses, two deaths."

"We were pleased that bill C-484, introduced by Conservative MP Ken Epp, acknowledged the fact that we have to cope with two losses. We had hope that it would bring recognition of our pain by the Canadian judicial system.
Meanwhile, at least 8 Conservative MPs have affirmed their support to the Unborn Victims Of Crime Act. Ken Epp, the author of bill C-484 has issued a statement, condemning the government's decision to sacrifice his bill to ideology and political expedience.
C-484 is crystal clear. It applies only when the pregnant woman is the victim of a crime. It doesn’t make the fetus a “human being” or a “person” under the law nor can it lead to that. It could never be used against the pregnant woman for any harm she might cause to her own fetus. Elective abortion is explicitly excluded. It’s only about abortion for those who cannot get past their strident ideology to feel any compassion for a woman who is such a tragic victim.
Ken Epp said that he won't withdraw bill C-484 even if an "alternative" bill is introduced by the government.

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Failing To Recognize The Second Victim

Ken Epp responds to government's decision to replace the Unborn Victims Of Crime Act with a go-nowhere alternative:
By simply treating pregnancy as an aggravating factor without recognizing a second victim in the crime, we reinforce the offensive notion that the unborn child’s fate is irrelevant. But the child’s death is very relevant to the mother (and other family members) who want her baby to live. As Mary Talbot, mother of Olivia Talbot and grandmother of Lane Jr. told the media, ‘It’s two people who died that day…I certainly put two people in a coffin.’

Does the Minister now tell Mary that, during the violent attack on Olivia and Lane Jr., her grandson was just an ‘aggravating factor’? That the brutal attack didn’t really lead to the death of Olivia’s not-yet-born but very much wanted baby boy? Lane Jr. was deliberately killed that day. At the trial, Olivia’s murderer told the court he shot Olivia in the abdomen ‘to get the baby.’
Is it the end of the road for the Unborn Victims Of Crime Act? It is - for the actual bill. If it doesn't die on the order paper once the election is called, it will most likely be dropped from the order of precedence or otherwise stalled for the remainder of the Parliamentary session. But once the next Parliament reconvenes (whenever that happens) - the Unborn Victims Of Crime Act could be reintroduced again. All we need is to elect more pro-life MPs to the next Parliament.

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson: No Room For Fetal Rights

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson is planning to kill the Unborn Victims Of Crime Act, replacing it with a government bill that would leave "no room for the introduction of fetal rights". But the bill C-484 has nothing about fetal rights in it. It merely defines a wanted unborn baby as a separate object which is valuable to the woman who carries him, so it proposes separate punishment for harming the baby while committing a crime against the mother. Nothing else. No personhood for the unborn and no restrictions on abortions - which the bill specifically excludes.

Still, even that was enough for the radical pro-aborts to launch a massive campaign of misinformation and fear-mongering. And with the opposition leader along with the bunch of corrupt health officials on their side, they forced the government to back down. The bill that defines a wanted unborn baby as a valuable object will be replaced with the one that only goes as far as defining pregnancy as "aggravated circumstances".

Compare it - assault under aggravated circumstances versus assault and manslaughter. What do you think is a suitable charge against a thug that assaults a woman, causing her to miscarry her child? But the government can't allow even a slightest chance of reopening the abortion debate. Not before an election campaign - that's for sure.
"Let me be clear, our government will not reopen the debate on abortion," added Nicholson who in the past was recognized as one of the more heroic and reliably pro-life Conservative MPs. "For this reason, and in the context of the government's tackling crime agenda, I'm announcing that the government will introduce legislation that will punish criminals who commit violence against pregnant women but do so in a way that leaves no room for the introduction of fetal rights."

This is the second time this year that Nicholson has betrayed and shocked Canada's social conservatives. In May he presented the Conservative government Justice Department's 50-page defense of the notorious subsection 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act that has permitted major assaults on freedom of expression and freedom of religion by the Human Rights commission kangaroo courts.

When asked if Epp was even told of the new legislation, Nicholson indicated Epp was not informed, or consulted on the matter, saying only that he would find out with everyone else.
Surrender, betrayal, swing to the left - is that the way to win an election? Whom are they trying to convince? The left will never vote Conservative, at least - not as long as Steven Harper remains the leader. They say it loud and clear. Even if they don't like the Liberals - they have the NDP and the Greens to vote for. Both are solidly "progressive", both are without the Reform / Alliance / NCC past.

So Harper, Nicholson & Co better don't count on the left-leaning voters. Not many of them (if any) will vote Conservative, no matter how "progressive" the party is trying to act. At the same time - traditionalist "small-c" Conservatives (those who reduced Nicholson's old party to a handful of seats and those who had been working hard to build the new party which gave Nicholson and his fellow Red Tories another chance) may simply stay home.

The Conservative party policy convention is about 10 weeks away. If the party establishment votes to keep moving in the same direction - they better think about changing Canada's electoral system to instant runoff or STV, since there most likely will be another split on the right.

Monday, August 25, 2008

Democratic Reform Bills - Blocked By Dysfunctional Commons Committees

From The Hill Times article:
There are currently six bills on the Order Paper that deal with democratic reform, but none have passed report stage, except one, since they've been introduced, died under prorogation, and reintroduced in this Parliament.

Bill C-6, the Visual Identification of Voters Bill, which would require a voter's face to be fully revealed at polling booths, is at the Procedure and House Affairs Committee, which hasn't met since the beginning of March.

Bill C-16, the Expanded Voting Opportunities Bill, which would add extra advanced voting days, is at report stage in the House, but hasn't been debated since Dec. 10, 2007, when the bill was reported back from committee to the House.

Bill C-19, the Senate Tenure Bill, which would limit a Senator's term to eight years instead of mandatory retirement at age 75, is at second reading in the House and has only received one day of debate on Nov. 16, 2007.

Bill C-20, the Senate Selection Bill, which would allow the Prime Minister to "consult" with Canadians on their Senate preferences, is currently at a special legislative House committee.

Bill C-22, the Democratic Representation Bill, which would change the formula for increasing the number of seats in the House after every 10-year census, is at second reading in the House, and has received one day of debate, on Feb. 18, 2008.

Bill C-29, the Loan Accountability Bill, which would limit where candidates in election or leadership campaigns could get loans from to financial institutions, is currently at second reading in the Senate and received its first day of debate last week.
Well, there's a great way to make the Parliament functional again. All that's needed is to declare at least those bills that have the highest support among the public (Senate elections and term limits, as well as visual identification of voters) - a confidence matter. If the opposition parties agree to stop filibustering - there will be no need to call an election before the scheduled date, which is still over a year from now. But if they choose to vote those bills down - they'll have to explain their decision to the voters.

Sunday, August 24, 2008

Unrestricted Abortion - A Cornerstone Of The Liberal Platform?

Interesting thought by Chuckercanuck:
Abortion is fundamental to the Liberal promise of a fairer, greener and richer Canada. It is isn't so much a hidden agenda as the hidden enabler of the hidden agenda.

Stephane Dion wants to increase the number of abortions in Canada. By increasing the number of abortions in Canada, Stephane Dion will achieve the following:

More abortions means fewer Canadians by 2050 thus making radical cuts to GHG emissions possible.

More abortions means fewer daycare spaces required in the government-run baby factories.

More abortions might mean slightly higher health care costs in the narrow field of abortion, but huge savings in health care costs should the children have been born. Abortion is, as Liberals might muse, the best preventative health care that Canada's tax dollars can buy.

On big issues like childcare, health care and saving the planet, abortion is the silver bullet. So its no surprise that Stephane Dion wants to talk it up wherever he goes.
Chuckercanuck makes a good point. Stephane Dion's Liberals are typical politicians for whom next election matters more than next generation. So if on the short run it's cheaper to bring in an immigrant than to raise a child (plus it gives them a faithful voter) - they wouldn't care about some 100,000 aborted babies a year. After all, Liberal paradise on Earth (that green, multi-cultural, pleasure-filled heaven without God, which they keep promising us,) must come at someone's expense, doesn't it?

Saturday, August 23, 2008

More Opposition To Dion's Carbon Tax

Nova Scotia Premier Rodney MacDonald adds his voice in opposition to the proposed tax grab. Looks like Scott Brison didn't have much success in his attempts to sugarcoat Dion's tax trick:
HALIFAX — Premier Rodney MacDonald ramped up his fight against the carbon tax plan proposed by the federal Liberals on Thursday, saying Nova Scotia would be hurt by it because the province relies heavily on fossil fuels.

Carbon tax advocates say that by increasing the price of fossil fuels, people would be encouraged to use less.

However, Mr. MacDonald said fossil fuels produce 90 per cent of the electricity in the province and account for 60 per cent of its home heating.

He said the higher cost would only drive up the cost of everything else that depends on fuel for production or delivery.

"We, along with Alberta, are going to be most impacted," said Mr. MacDonald. "This so-called solution for the environment is no solution at all for Nova Scotia."
How much is the carbon tax going to cost an average Nova Scotian? Check out this calculator. Those are the costs you'll see directly on your utility bills. Other costs, such as higher grocery bills, higher vacation costs etc, aren't mentioned there unfortunately. Sure, Dion is proposing some tax cuts and refund checks - but will that be enough to offset the extra costs? Especially since the proposed refunds and tax reductions amount to less than 60% of the expected revenues, raised by carbon tax? Will it be enough to offset the GST hike, which Dion desperately needs to pay for over $62 Billion in spending promises, he has made since he became Liberal leader?

We can't afford Stephane Dion's carbon tax. We already pay more than enough to fund Liberal spending priorities. So we better stop the carbon tax before it starts.

Friday, August 22, 2008

Thought Police Would Rather Not Mess With Ezra

Another "human rights" complaint has been filed against Ezra Levant. This one is for republishing a letter against promoting homosexuality to children. It's the very same letter for which Rev. Stephen Boissoin was sentenced to a $7,000 fine and to a lifetime ban on criticizing perverse lifestyles; except that this time the CHRC investigator recommends that the star chamber doesn't proceed with the complaint.
I have more rights than Rev. Boissoin

Skim past those boring parts – the CHRC commissioners don’t read them, so why should you? Go to the good stuff. It starts at around page 7 of Kozak’s report, which is page 8 of the .pdf. Look at paragraph 20. Here we learn a new fact: Wells had complained to the CHRC about Rev. Boissoin, and the case against Rev. Boission was approved by the commissioners to move to the next stage: either a forced plea bargain (the CHRC calls it a conciliation) or the dreaded, 100% conviction rate tribunal.

Ignore for a moment the double jeopardy here – that Rev. Boissoin was prosecuted by the Alberta HRC, and then again by the CHRC, something that would never happen to, say, an accused murderer, but happened to an accused pastor. Look at what the CHRC’s investigator and political commissioners recommended: that Wells’s complaint against Rev. Boissoin be prosecuted by the CHRC.


Think about that. The CHRC’s investigator has recommended that I be let go for the exact same act of hate speech that Rev. Boissoin committed – and he wasn’t let go.

Just in case the double standard wasn’t clear enough, as paragraph 21 notes, I even declared that I was willfully committing a hate crime.
It's never easy to openly fight an oppressive establishment like those Orwellian tribunals with 100% conviction rate. But as we can see, courage and determination, sacrifice and effort are never in vain. The enemy is reluctant to strike. Way to go Ezra!

The complainer, one Rob Wells, is the very same radical anti-Christian bigot (quite rightfully described as "Fred Phelps of the homosexual lobby") who filed similar thought crime suits against Catholic Insight and against the Christian Heritage Party. The complaint against Catholic Insight magazine was recently dismissed. If the complaint against CHP proceeds to a hearing, I hope that Ron Gray follows Ezra's example and stands up for his constitutional rights, for his political vies and for his religious beliefs. Then the thought police won't have the guts to mess with him - just as they no longer have the guts to mess with Ezra Levant.

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Forcing Our Doctors' Hands

Ontario Orwellian Tribunal is getting some volunteer enforcers:
Freedom often isn't easy. Yet we have developed a very juvenile notion that unless our freedoms come with no obligations or consequences, we aren't really free, which is nonsense.

What the CPSO is proposing, in effect, is to set itself up as an enforcer for the new Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) by incorporating the Tribunal's concept of rights into the physicians' code of professional conduct. This would enable the college to discipline a doctor for political rather than medical conduct. Any Ontario doctor refusing to abide by the twisted definition of rights contained in the province's human rights code — in which some groups are more equal than others — could be deemed a bad doctor and decertified.

This is yet another example of the tyranny of human rights commissions over our daily lives. Should these new rules be adopted next month, an Ontario doctor could be barred from practicing medicine not because he or she is unethical or incompetent, but merely because he or she fails to share the same political view of rights and morality as the HRTO (and the brass of the CPSO).
One more question, which wasn't asked in the article: if we force doctors to perform elective injurious procedures against their will (let alone - contrary to the Hippocratic oath) - do you think they'll be eager to do a quality job? Instead of having a freedom-snatching committee enforcer holding a gun to the doctor's head, wouldn't it be safer (let alone - simpler) to just look for another physician, one that is willing to perform those procedures voluntarily?
The college is not seeking justice, it is demanding conformity. It is not striving for "choice" for patients and doctors, it is attempting to force acceptance of one political and moral view on everyone.
Secular fundamentalists can't stop complaining about Christians allegedly trying to force their religious beliefs on them. The truth however is - it's the secular fundamentalists that have been forcing their views on us.

Let me reiterate: Whatever rights and freedoms we still have left - we've inherited them from the days preceding Trudeau's "human rights" legislation. Once the so called "human rights" act had been passed and Orwellian tribunals (commonly known as "human rights" commissions) had been installed - we became second class citizens; since then our constitutional rights and freedoms have been continuously taken away to empower special interest groups.

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

"If There Is No God"

Great essay by Dennis Prager:
We are constantly reminded about the destructive consequences of religion – intolerance, hatred, division, inquisitions, persecutions of "heretics," holy wars. Though far from the whole story, they are, nevertheless, true. There have been many awful consequences of religion.

What one almost never hears described are the deleterious consequences of secularism – the terrible developments that have accompanied the breakdown of traditional religion and belief in God. For every thousand students who learn about the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem Witch Trials, maybe two learn to associate Gulag, Auschwitz, the Cultural Revolution and the Cambodian genocide with secular regimes and ideologies.

For all the problems associated with belief in God, the death of God leads to far more of them.

So, while it is not possible to prove (or disprove) God's existence, what is provable is what happens when people stop believing in God.
Well said! History has given secular humanists their chance - and look at the mess they've got us into. Socially, morally, spiritually our society is far worse off than it used to be a couple of generations ago. Fancy gadgets, brain rotting music and TV shows or any other dubious pleasures the secular lifestyle can offer, turn out to be poor substitutes to spiritual fulfillment, they can't compensate for the lack of peace in the family, in the community or at workplace...

And another thing: Whatever rights and freedoms we still have left - we've inherited them from the good old days when the society was still guided by Judeo-Christian principles. Secularists were only capable of eroding our constitutional rights and freedoms by awarding more power to unelected bureaucrats and more privileges to special interest groups.

Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Setting The Stage For Forced Abortions And Euthanasia

Don't be surprised if you find a newspaper article claiming that majority of Canadians actually support the new code of conduct, that would deny Ontario Physicians the freedom of conscience. CNews took the trouble to run an online poll on the issue and they got the results they wanted.

In their opinion, all the moral dilemmas that physicians face in their profession, could be summarized with a simple question - whether or not physicians should have the right to refuse medical treatment if it is against their beliefs. Notice the words "medical treatment". One may think we're talking about knee surgery or appendix removal. No wonder over 60% of the respondents voted "No". Picture yourself in their place - they read the question, they think - why should anybody be refused medical treatment because of physician's beliefs - and they vote "No". If anything - we should be surprised that only 61% of them did so...

It's not the first time the mainstream media is setting the stage for yet another radical change in social policy. Just like during the marriage debate, the mainstream media has already answered the main question for us. So they don't ask us whether or not injurious and murderous procedures such as abortion, euthanasia or so called "sex change" could ever have anything in common with medical treatment. They don't even bother to name the "treatment" in question. Instead of asking us whether or not physicians should have the right not to be involved in abortions and euthanasia, they word the question to downplay physicians' freedom of conscience, encouraging people to vote against it. And they get their desired "No" vote, setting the stage for forced abortions (at first) and euthanasia (once legalized).

Monday, August 18, 2008

Stop Bending Over Backwards To Accommodate Every Other Culture But Your Own

A great video and a passionate speech on common sense. It's designed for the US audience, but most of it applies to Canada as well. We may have 2 founding languages (so "one country, one language" won't work for us) and a lesser share of illegal migrants, but we still have activist judges and lawmakers subverting common sense and bending over backwards to accommodate special interest groups at everyone else's expense. Tolerance is the last virtue of a dying society. (Aristotle.)

Sunday, August 17, 2008

Now This Kind Of Racism Is "Progressive"

Canada's top bureaucrat has ordered departments to target visible minorities in his latest recruitment drive to hire another 4,000 new university and college graduates by the end of March.
Mr. Lynch's plan didn't specify what proportion of the new hires should be visible minorities, but recruitment will have to be in large enough numbers to start "closing the gap in representation of visible minority Canadians in the public service." To do that, the plan says visible minorities will have to be recruited in numbers beyond their proportion of the workforce.
But what about the actual job skills of the people that would be hired? Shouldn't people be selected based on their skills, not their origin? Don't worry, the top bureaucrat got that covered:
Each of the new 4,000 recruits must have a personal learning plan, including what training they need to master English or French early in their careers.
Well, that says it all, doesn't it? This whole affair has nothing to do with helping skilled yet underemployed groups to realize their potential. This is about creating token jobs for people whose only asset is their skin color. This is about some bureaucrat who's never received a single vote in his life and his utopian dreams to make the workforce mirror the general population.

I could imagine the public outcry if a certain company decided to hire mostly whites. Such hiring policy would be immediately denounced as racist - and there would be no denying it. But when a top bureaucrat orders public service departments to hire mostly non-whites - that kind of racism is apparently considered to be perfectly acceptable. At least I haven't seen much outrage so far.

Do you think it's ok for skilled graduates to be refused jobs only because they weren't "lucky" enough to be born with the "desired" skin color? Are you comfortable with being served by someone who knows little if anything about his job, let alone - by someone who barely speaks English or French? Finally, do you believe it's ok for $150-$200M of taxpayers' money to be used to create 4,000 token jobs for people with little or no skills? And if your answers are "no" to all of the above - then why are you silent?

Saturday, August 16, 2008

Persecuting Pro-Life Doctors In The Name Of "Human Rights"

Ontario "human rights" tribunal is getting ready for a wave of complaints against physicians for whom one's right to life matters more than someone else's personal convenience.
Ontario physicians are being advised that they are expected to give up freedom of conscience if they wish to practice medicine in the province. The expectation is set out in Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code, a draft policy document from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

The document responds to legislative changes, which, according to the Chair of the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, will see a twenty-fold increase in hearings before the Tribunal - from 150 to 3,000 cases per year.

According to the College, the Tribunal may take action against a physician who refuses to provide or refer for procedures that he finds morally objectionable. The College strongly suggests that the physician’s freedom of conscience and religion will be ignored because there is no defense for refusing to provide a service in such circumstances.
What else could we expect? Once we as a society got comfortable with the concept of human rights that does not include protecting life from conception to natural death, we shouldn't be surprised that the very same concept of human rights does no longer include freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. Once Canada accepted the notion that one's personal convenience takes precedence over baby's right to life, then we shouldn't be surprised that other special interest groups too want their desires to take precedence over one's right not to be involved. And if selfishness and immorality have been declared "progressive", then we shouldn't be surprised that laws and legal precedents that push our society down the suicide path are brought forward in the name of "progress" and "human rights".

Friday, August 15, 2008

Morgentaler Award Challenged Before Judicial Council

A coalition of more than 40 pro-family and religious groups in Canada has now filed a formal complaint with the Canadian Judicial Council over Henry Morgentaler’s nomination to the Order of Canada. Specifically, the complaint deals with the role played by Canada’s Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin in the nomination process. Justice McLachlin chaired the panel that awarded the Order to the abortionist.

The complaint cites six violations of the Constitution of the Order of Canada, and also says McLachlin has compromised the very integrity of the Supreme Court and Canada’s judicial system by her behaviour.
All I can say is - finally! Time to shed some light on this backdoor deal which gave Canada's highest civilian honour to a chief abortionist. Six protocol violations would be quite hard to conceal. So I hope that once the investigation is over, not only the CM (Canadian Murderer) Morguentaler will be stripped of his award, but also the Chief "justice" McLachlin will be forced to resign. She can't remain the chair of the nomination panel once she's shown such blatant disregard for the Constitution of the Order of Canada. And she can't remain Chief Justice of the Supreme Court either.

They Like "Choice" But They Don't Like The Pictures

Those who believe that abortion is a "choice" apparently don't like when someone else shows them what exactly is being chosen. They find that "graphic and disturbing".
St. Thomas police are consulting with the Crown Attorney's office about possible action against anti-abortion protesters whose graphic signs yesterday upset some local residents.

The group Show The Truth Canada held a demonstration during the lunch hour at Talbot Street and First Avenue, one of several in the region by the group of about 30 people travelling in a bus.
St. Thomas police said the demonstration was peaceful but police were inundated with complaints.

"Some of the pictures on their signs were graphic and disturbing," said Const. Anders Nielsen.
Hmm... I wonder why would they be that disturbed with those pictures... After all - there are plenty of billboards out there that drivers may dislike for one reason or another. Looks like it's their conscience troubling them. Looks like deep down inside even the most radical of them realize that it's a child, not a "choice". But they don't want to let go off their dogma, so they believe that banning abortion pictures could solve the problem.

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Those Generous Liberals From North Pole, Saskatchewan

Guess what - Santa and his elves must be Liberal supporters. Or so it appears in the December 2006 quarterly report, posted on the Elections Canada website. Conservative Queen blogger discovered eight contributors from three different provinces, all having the same postal code - H0H 0H0.

That's a fictional postal code which Canada Post has assigned for letters to Santa Claus. There are no real postal codes in H0 range because there can't be rural postal codes (that have 0 as their second character) assigned to the city of Montreal (which has all the codes beginning with H). Surprisingly enough, some people can actually reside in a non-existing postal code and send their checks to the Liberal party from there.

I know there is a constituency that is split between Toronto and the "905" belt, but I've never heard of a constituency split between three different provinces which (to the surprise of some Liberals) do not border each other... Could someone please name the MP for that particular constituency? I tried to enter H0H 0H0 on the Parliament website - it gave me no results :(
The difference in treatment offered by Elections Canada to the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party continues to be obvious. It seems that, in the eyes of Elections Canada and Chief Electoral Officer the Liberals can do no wrong. This has reached the point were the Liberals have submitted laughable and erroneous information to the agency, with no apparent castigation or punishment.
Double standards? You bet!

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Big Brother To Screen Catholic Magazine

As if being hauled in front of a freedom-snatching committee wasn't enough, Catholic Insight magazine has been blacklisted by Heritage Canada.
Of further note is the continuing campaign of harassment against Catholic Insight by the branch of Heritage Canada responsible for funding Magazine Publications which has quietly placed Catholic Insight on a "Watch List" for "questionable content". Heritage Canada is the government ministry which also oversees the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

Sources close to Father De Valk have confirmed that this report - dated 21/03/2007 "Report to Director, Periodical publishing Policy and Programs - Questionable Content Complaint: Catholic Insight" prepared by Sara Mayes, has resulted in Catholic Insight being required to submit a copy of each issue for screening.
Could there be a better example of double standards towards Conservative Christians? A Catholic publication gets black-listed for advocating traditional Christian beliefs. But Heritage Canada, just as any other department that deals with the mass media, is by no means eager to blacklist a newspaper which publishes classified ads like "Man seeking boys.... age not so relevant". Let alone blacklisting "Xtra" or any other paper trash that promotes perverse lifestyles to anyone including school children.

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

40 Days For Life — In Ottawa

It's always great to see a new pro-life initiative to be launched here in Canada.
Pro-life advocates in Ottawa to launch groundbreaking 40 Days for Life campaign

OTTAWA, ON, August 11, 2008 ( - On September 23rd, Ottawa area pro-life advocates will join together with people of faith and conscience from many other communities from coast to coast to kick off the area's own version of the groundbreaking 40 Days for Life campaign.

40 Days for Life is an intensive pro-life initiative that focuses on 40 days of prayer and fasting, 40 days of peaceful vigil at abortion facilities, and 40 days of grassroots educational outreach. The 40-day time frame is drawn from examples throughout Biblical history where God brought about world-changing transformation in 40-day periods.
Too bad the website for Ottawa campaign is not ready yet (the link on LifeSite is broken and I couldn't find it on Well, there's still some time till September 23rd.
Update: As of Aug.19, the website - - is up and running. Signing up for the vigil hours will be available soon.

Monday, August 11, 2008

Dion's Green Shift May Break Canada Apart

If Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion occupies 24 Sussex Drive after the next federal election and implements his carbon tax - the plundering of Alberta and Saskatchewan to benefit Ontario and Quebec - he might well have set the stage for the dissolution of Canada. Coincidently, the legal avenue for a province to separate was created by Dion himself eight years ago with the Clarity Act.

Dion's Green Shift plan would impose a carbon tax on energy producers to the tune of $16 billion per year, to be offset by other tax reductions. But a disproportionate share of the burden would fall on Alberta and Saskatchewan. In short, the cost of this tax to each family in the two prairie provinces would be a whopping $6,000 a year compared with $1,300 per family of four in the rest of the country.

Pierre Trudeau's Liberal government extracted about $100 billion in today's dollars out of Alberta when it implemented the National Energy Program in the early 1970s. One of the architects of that looting, then energy minister Marc Lalonde, said the whole idea was to transfer as much wealth as possible from Alberta's oil boom to Ontario and Quebec.

But the Trudeau Liberals were not stupid enough to say this at the time. This time around, however, the Dion Liberals freely admit this is precisely what they hope to accomplish.
Very typical of the federal Liberals. First they turn regions against each other, fueling separatist movements from coast to coast. And then they claim that they're the only ones to keep the country together.

Is it a coincidence that both referendums in Quebec took place when Liberals were in power? While the Conservatives (the old PC party just as the current Conservatives) tried and try their best to rework the federal-provincial relationships in a manner that would take the interests of the regions into account, the Liberals just imposed their own agenda on the country - be that the National Energy Policy for Alberta or the kitchen deal to "patriate" the constitution - which Quebec refused to sign.

Last time, Liberal campaign slogan was "choose your Canada". Judging from their actions, Conservative campaign slogan should be "choose Canada". Because if Dion's Liberals take power - it's not going to be libérez-nous des libéraux, but "libérez-nous des fédéraux" from coast to coast.

Saturday, August 9, 2008

Morguentaler Sues New Brunswick Over Abortion Funding

Court of Queen's Bench Judge Paulette Garnett has granted Morgentaler "public interest standing" to represent women in his lawsuit against the province.

Morgentaler, 85, is trying to force the New Brunswick government to pay for abortions at his clinic in Fredericton, but it has steadfastly refused to do so.
About 700 women a year pay between $550 and $750 for abortions at the Morgentaler clinic. The cost depends on how far along they are in their pregnancies.

Under provincial legislation, the government will pay for abortions only in a hospital setting, providing two doctors have certified that it is medically necessary.
So the 700 above-mentioned abortions are purely abortions on demand; they can't pass as medically necessary even under the watered-down rules set by the province. Is there any reason why taxpayers should be forced to pay for elective injurious procedures? Let alone - to subsidize an establishment that takes away babies' lives...

Nearly 7000 babies were slaughtered in Morguentaler's abortuary since it had opened in 1994. Instead of granting CM (Chief Murderer) Morguentaler the right to seek free services for his customers, the court should have overturned its earlier decision, allowing NB government to kick the chief abortionist and his murderous franchise out of the province.

Friday, August 8, 2008

Liberal "Negative Option Billing" In Guelph

In case you forgot - "negative option billing" meant that a phone or a cable company could add some specialty services to your account and then wait for you to call in and opt out. This practice was banned in 1999. But MPs that drafted the bill apparently couldn't imagine a political party recruiting its supporters through negative option billing:
Oops... Several residents in Guelph returned home after the long weekend to an unexpected surprise... Liberal candidate Frank Valeriote's sign on their lawn. The problem is, they never requested one!

Looks like another "oops" in the Guelph Liberal campaign... seems like they've been caught in a little signage fraud! Well, "fraud" might be too strong a word to use... but with the number of complaints piling up, one has to wonder if there's something more organized to it. (Got this little tip from one of my many sources in town)
Interesting logic. No sign on the lawn? Let's put a Liberal sign on it. If the owner is on vacation - then why would he care? And if he's back and he doesn't like it - well, not a problem, let him just call the campaign office and they'll send someone to remove the sign...

And, of course, the Liberals could always count on the media not to make a fuss over it. If it was the Conservative team installing signs on someone else's lawns - all major newspapers, radio and TV stations, let alone - Liberal bloggers would be ripping them to pieces...

I wonder if it's possible for the landlords to sue the Liberal sign crew for trespassing. Judging by the number of those who found unwanted traces of Liberal activity on their lawns, this might as well be a class action suit.

Thursday, August 7, 2008

Guilty Or Not — You'll End Up Broke Anyway

Finally - some good news and a great victory for freedom of speech. Ezra Levant is off the hook. Alberta "human rights" commission dismissed the complaint. But there's still the matter of legal costs. This whole "human rights" farce was quite costly for Ezra Levant, let alone the taxpayers. The only one who got away without paying a dime was the complainer.
Some 900 days after I became the only person in the Western world charged with the “offence” of republishing the Danish cartoons of Muhammad, the government has finally acquitted me of illegal “discrimination.” Taxpayers are out more than $500,000 for an investigation that involved fifteen bureaucrats at the Alberta Human Rights Commission. The legal cost to me and the now-defunct Western Standard magazine is $100,000.

The case would have been thrown out long ago if I had been charged in a criminal court, instead of a human rights commission. That’s because accused criminals have the right to a speedy trial. Accused publishers at human rights commissions do not.

And if I had been a defendant in a civil court, the judge would now order the losing parties to pay my legal bills. Instead, the Edmonton Council of Muslim Communities won’t have to pay me a dime. Neither will Syed Soharwardy, the Calgary imam who abandoned his identical complaint against me this spring.
So if you want to get back at someone who's hurt your feelings - just file a "human rights" complaint against him. Don't worry, you won't have to pay anything for it - the defender will. Guilty or not, he'll still be facing tens of thousands in legal costs... Just don't forget that someone else might as well file a "human rights" complaint against you.

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

Exposing Their Agenda Is "Discriminatory"

Simon is thirty-three. He is, I suppose, exactly the person that families worry about. He is a primary school teacher, and an active member of several social service agencies that deal with children, including Big Brothers. He has taught for ten years in four different schools and has formed sexual, loving relationships with boys in each of those four schools and in each of the service organizations of which he is a member, including Big Brothers. He has never been caught.

Simon is tall, genial, getting a little soft around the middle; a generous, rather private man with few close adult friends and a much wider acquaintance among the young. His lover, David, is twelve and in Simon's class at school. David writes poetry to Simon
That text could be found on the "Canadian lesbian and gay archives" website among many other articles about what they call "intergenerational" or "boy-loving" relationships. Nobody hides them. A radical homosexual from the University of Calgary "proudly" provides the links to those texts on his website, where he claims that such relationships are acceptable. But when Bill Whatcott photocopies a classified ad that reads "Man seeking boys.... age not so relevant" and distributes those photocopies in his neighborhood - a "human rights" tribunal finds that "discriminatory" and fines him $17,500 for hurting perverts' feelings and self-esteem.

The media will gladly report a child abuse case in which a Catholic is involved. But don't expect them to quote the above mentioned text; don't expect them to give the public any hint that those who don't feel bound by gender often don't feel bound by age. And if someone dares to expose the true agenda of militant homosexuals - through flyers or newspaper articles - there's always a freedom-snatching commission with 100% conviction rate to find that "discriminatory" and to impose heavy fines for doing so.

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

Curiosity Before Birth

We know that baby's heart starts beating 18 days after conception. (Yes, that's 18 days, not 18 weeks!) We know that long before birth, the baby can move and feel pain, that he can hear and recognize mother's voice... And guess what - an unborn baby can also show curiosity towards the world around him.
During the surgery, doctors entered the amniotic sack using a kind of miniature "telescope." Occasionally, to their surprise, a fetus will actually grab on to the scope in the middle of the procedure.

"The fetus will reach up and wonder what this scope is," Moise said. "And even though his or her eyes are fused so they can't really see the scope, they'll grab the scope sometimes because it's an object in their cavity."
Surgeons aren't the only ones to notice the curiosity shown by an unborn baby. Abortion providers notice that too. Sometimes it even happens that a baby manages to grab an abortion provider by the finger during the so called "partial birth abortion". John-Henry Westen, the founder of Life Site News told us that story at the last year's pro-life conference.

"Partial birth abortion" means that the baby is being pulled by the legs until he's half-way out and then the abortion provider uses his scissors to break the baby's scull. But that time apparently he had pulled the baby too far, so the baby could get his hand out and grab his executor by the finger. The man's hand jerked, pulling the baby out completely. And the baby breathed. Yet in the eyes of the murderer wearing white robe, this baby was still nothing but a "blob of tissue". So he put the baby back in (as if that could make the baby "unborn again") and stabbed him with the scissors, taking away his life.

Curious or not, the baby was "unwanted" and that sealed his fate in the society of unchoice.

Monday, August 4, 2008

Orwellian "Spies" Are Now Called "Climate Cops"

After having failed to convince the adults that so called "global warming" exists, eco-crooks are recruiting children, asking them to report "energy crimes" committed by their parents.
A new website campaign designed by a British power company recruits children through games, badges and cartoons to enlist as "Climate Cops," actively keeping records on their parents and neighbors for violations of "energy crimes" against the planet.

The "Climate Cops" website encourages children to investigate family and friends and "then build your 'Climate Crime Case File' and report back to your family to make sure they don't commit those crimes again (or else)!" The site also warns children that they "may need to keep a watchful eye" to prevent future violations.

A link on the site for teachers to download free materials for building lesson plans indicates the website is targeting children from ages 7-11.

The so-called crimes children are to watch for are listed on a poster (visible at right) and range from leaving the tap running and failing to use energy-saving light bulbs to running the dryer on a sunny day and putting hot food in the refrigerator.
So, the trendy political movement is stepping into Orwellian territory. The next thing we should expect is some sort of "carbon police" that would be rounding up "energy criminals" and "re-educating" them by all means necessary...

Sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory? Maybe. But it is possible to notice some Orwellian connotation in this whole "global warming" / "climate change" hysteria. It seems to have the same purpose as Orwellian "permanent war" - to make people work harder without letting them benefit from the fruits of their labor. In Orwell's Oceania, people were forced to settle for lower rations to help the war effort. The eco-crooks want us to settle for much lower standards of living for the sake of their environmental utopia. If we give in - then "eco/though police" and Room 101 will follow in no time.

Sunday, August 3, 2008

Canadian Judicial System - Independent Or Simply Unaccountable?

Guess what - it's now ok for those willing join the police force to have a criminal record. One may still think that requiring applicants to be law abiding is just common sense. But the judges don't think so:
MONTREAL- The Montreal Police Dept. violated the Quebec Charter of Rights when it refused to hire a police applicant who had been convicted of theft, the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled.

In a 6-2 ruling, the nation's highest court found that the would-be police officer, whose name is protected by a publication ban and is identified in the judgement only as N, had seen her rights infringed when her application to the force was rejected on the grounds she did not require the "good moral character," required by the department's hiring regulations.
But we can allow a handful of folks who have been convicted of minor crimes to join the police force, can't we? After all, the "social cause" soft-on-crime approach has proved to be working, hasn't it? The crime rate has never been that low... Or has it?
Here are some figures you probably didn't see widely quoted in the media earlier this month when Statistics Canada released its 2007 data on falling Canadian crime rates.

- First, violent crime is up 320% since 1962, when modern records first started being kept.

- Second, property crime, which many victims don't even bother to report anymore, is nonetheless up 75%.

- Third, the overall crime rate is up 152%.
Not that long ago, Stephen Harper's government proposed some reforms to the process of appointing judges. That also included appointing few representatives from the police to the committee - so that the police would have its say on who's being appointed judge. The opposition objected the reforms, claiming they would infringe judicial independence. Well, if judicial independence means complete lack of common sense and accountability, if it only results in judges putting criminals' rights ahead of victims' rights (let alone - maintaining law and order) - then sacrificing such "judicial independence" is the risk I'm willing to take.

Saturday, August 2, 2008

Three Cheers For Home-Schooling

From Herbert E. Meyer's article "Political Prisms":
Let's also throw our political, moral - and financial -- support behind the single most encouraging, most under-reported development in American education. I mean the home-schooling movement. Today, between two and three million American children have been withdrawn from public education and are instead being educated by their parents. Armed with curricula material that is vastly better than what our public schools are using, these parents are giving their kids a first-class education in history, economics, literature, math, and just about everything else. No wonder that so many home-schooled students are winning national spelling bees, acing college-entrance exams -- and being offered scholarships by universities that previously looked down their noses at these students.

By the way, you can spot a home-schooled kid in a second. It isn't just that he or she is so well-behaved, and so comfortable in the company of adults. It's that these home-schooled youngsters have their heads screwed on so straight; they love our country, know how lucky they are to be Americans, and have a genuine intellectual interest in learning how the world works. As these kids grow up and start their careers, they'll run circles around young Americans who were indoctrinated rather than educated.
Sure, homeschooling requires time, effort and lots of patience. But the opportunity to educate children without age segregation and peer pressure, without indoctrination and without interference from the unionized charlatans from the ministry of education - is worth the commitment.

Friday, August 1, 2008

They've Aborted All Their Children. Now They Want Ours.

"Be right wing and multiply" - that's how Peter Schweizer titled his National Post article. But the facts are - it's not really the "right wingers" who need encouragement from Mr. Schweizer. And that's what the article is about.

Most of the facts outlined in the article are well known. We know that many self-absorbed liberals would rather pamper themselves than have children. Mr. Schweizer just adds some statistical data: Over half of the women of childbearing age (15 to 44) in liberal bastions such as the District of Columbia, Vermont and Massachusetts are childless. Or as they proudly call themselves - "child free". If there's anything there that surprises me - it's that they still manage to maintain a fertility rate of 1.47 children per family. Especially now, when on top of the usual selfishness we also have all those phony environmentalists with their myth that "babies are bad for the environment".

And, since the trend is clearly noticeable, no wonder that some of them begin to worry about their political future:
This birth gap presents a quandary for politically active liberals. Not wanting to be inconvenienced with raising their own children, they still want to see their ideas perpetuated. Professor Darren Sherkat of Southern Illinois University worries that because conservatives "who have lots of children" are not being matched by those on the political left who "may well not have kids," these demographic trends will push the country in a more conservative direction. (Data indicates that 80% of children end up adopting the political attitudes of their parents.) To counterbalance this trend, he argues for increasing immigration and expanding the black population. He also hopes that childless liberals will "be able to reproduce themselves in strangers," by taking on jobs as teachers, writers and other people of influence. The idea is to let conservatives raise their children, while liberals influence them through the schools and universities.

Another lefty concurs: "I'd say that the author of a popular book has far more aggregate influence than do one set of parents. So if the book is very popular and captures the imaginations of kids, presto, you've done a lot to insure that the ideas that are important to you live long after you pass on… If it's the ideas that matter then I suppose that there are ways that folks like you can propagate the ideas without having your own kids be your lab rats."
So they've aborted all their children and now they want ours, which they look forward to indoctrinate through public schools and popular books.

That however is unlikely to work. As the "progressive" culture drifts further and further away from traditional family values; as it becomes more of a socially perverse than "socially progressive", it will become harder for someone raised in a traditionalist family to accept its dogmas. Even if a child (or a teenager) does get briefly excited with the personal freedom (not to say - personal anarchy) which "progressive" culture offers, he'll have a hard time handling the spiritual emptiness and moral depravity that come with it.