Saturday, October 31, 2009

Gardasil — Vaccine May Be More Dangerous Than The Disease

Less than 10%, maybe even less than 1% of vaccine side effects reported:
October 28, 2009 ( - A researcher with Merck Pharmaceutical who helped develop the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccines, Gardasil and Cervarix, has revealed that the controversial drugs will do little to reduce cervical cancer rates and may cause more illness than the disease they are intended to prevent.
Dr. Harper told CBS News on August 19, 2009 that "young girls and their parents should receive more complete warnings before receiving the vaccine" and that a girl is more likely to die from an adverse reaction to Gardasil than from cervical cancer.

A report by Steven W. Mosher and Joan Robinson of the Population Research Institute (PRI), who attended Dr. Harper's presentation at the Conference on Vaccination, states that although her talk was intended to promote the vaccine, it left many of the health professionals wondering if the drug should be given at all, considering its "poor promise of efficacy as a vaccine married to a high risk of life-threatening side effects."

Gardasil, Dr. Harper explained, is promoted by Merck, the pharmaceutical manufacturer, as a "safe and effective" prevention measure against cervical cancer. The theory behind the vaccine is that, as HPV may cause cervical cancer, conferring a greater immunity of some strains of HPV might reduce the incidence of this form of cancer. In pursuit of this goal, tens of millions of American girls have been vaccinated to date.

However, "I came away from the talk with the perception that the risk of adverse side effects is so much greater than the risk of cervical cancer, I couldn't help but question why we need the vaccine at all," said Joan Robinson, Assistant Editor at the Population Research Institute.
PRI's Steven Mosher concluded the report on Dr. Harper's revelations by offering some thoughts on the intense promotion of Gardasil by not only the manufacturer of the vaccine, but by state and country government agencies.

"I think that they see Gardasil as what one might call a "wedge" drug. For them, the success of this public vaccination campaign has less to do with stopping cervical cancer, than it does with opening the door to other vaccination campaigns for other sexually transmitted diseases, and perhaps even including pregnancy itself.

"For if they can overcome the objections of parents and religious organizations to vaccinating pre-pubescent - and not sexually active - girls against one form of STD, then it will make it easier for them to embark on similar programs in the future.

"After all, the proponents of sexual liberation are determined not to let mere disease - or even death - stand in the way of their pleasures. They believe that there must be technological solutions to the diseases that have arisen from their relentless promotion of promiscuity. After all, the alternative is too horrible to contemplate: They might have to learn to control their appetites. And they might have to teach abstinence."
Politicians achieve their goals, big pharmaceutical companies make their money and various special interest groups try to trick people into believing that they can do anything they want as long as they have the vaccine. But it's the little people that fall for their lies who end up paying the price.

Someone Should Have Told Them That Halloween Is Today

Torontonians, hold your ghost stories, Halloween costumes and trick-or-treating until next Friday. A group of Grim Reaper suit fans is planning a march in your city on November 6.

As for the rest of us - here's a funny sketch, generously offered by a Swiss website 24 Heures. (H/t Big Blue Wave.) Call me an 'islamophobe' if you must but to me, extremists in black hoods aren't any different than those wearing white ones.

Friday, October 30, 2009

Advance Polls Open In Cumberland - Colchester - Musquodoboit Valley

As well as in other three Federal constituencies that are going to elect their new MPs on November 9th. Voters willing to cast their ballots early can do so today (October 30th,) tomorrow (October 31th) and on Monday (November 2nd). Obviously, as a Social Conservative, I focus on Cumberland - Colchester - Musquodoboit Valley, where the CHP leader Jim Hnatiuk is running.

And it looks like the people in the riding are quite supportive to Jim's message. Moreover, when The Amherst Daily run an online poll - Jim Hnatiuk came first with a stunning 17-point lead over Scott Armstrong. Oh, I know, this is just an online poll, which is as scientific as all those "global warming" and "climate change" myths. But it still shows that Jim has some name recognition in his riding:
Since Mr. Casey stepped down, the seat has no incumbent. No other party has addressed the very real concerns expressed by voters over the issues of ballooning government, fiscal accountability, increasing taxes, job security, or policies to strengthen families. Mr. Hnatiuk is the only candidate who will defend both fiscal and social conservatism.
Here's a report on all-candidate debtate in Pugwash, that took place a couple days ago. Yes, Jim was there. And there are two more debates scheduled - in Truro (November 2nd) and in Amherst (November 3rd).

As the polls open for the advance voting, I wish Jim all the best. Hopefully, voters in Cumberland - Colchester - Musquodoboit Valley don't miss this historic opportunity. Hopefylly they throw their support behind the leader of Canada's only pro-life, pro-family political party, instead of merely increasing one of the major parties' seat count by one.

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Alex Schadenberg Speaking In Halifax Nov.27 & 28

Forwarded by e-mail by Mary Best:
Alex Schadenberg is the executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition - Canada, the Chair of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition - He is on the forefront of the move to prevent the legalization of euthanasia in our country.

Alex will be speaking in Halifax on Nov 27 to the doctors and medical professionals on the topic of caring versus killing and on Nov 28 to the general public on the topics of euthanasia, assisted suicide and the new eugenics.

Because of Bill – C384 is currently before the Canadian Parliament these are extremely timely talks that everyone should hear.
Bill C-384 is currently #8 in the Order of Precedence for Private Member Business. By the time Alex comes to Halifax, the bill will have been voted on. (And, hopefully, defeated.) Still that doesn't make Alex' speech any less relevant, as attempts to legalize euthanasia will continue and, obviously, we must know how to counter our opponents.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Legalizing Euthanasia? But Why?!

Even if deep changes in society have created a growing demand for the legalization of euthanasia - that doesn't make it right, Margaret Somerville says in her Ottawa Citizen column:
Not one of the bottom-line conditions usually linked with calls for legalizing euthanasia -- that a person is terminally ill, wants to die and we can kill them -- is new. These factors have been part of the human condition for as long as humans have existed. And our capacity to relieve pain and suffering has improved remarkably. So, is some other cause the main one?

I suggest it's profound changes in our post-modern, secular, western, democratic societies, and their interactive and cumulative effects. To make wise decisions about whether or not to legalize euthanasia, we need to identify and understand these changes.

Individualism: "Intense individualism" (sometimes called "selfish individualism"), which needs to be distinguished from "healthy individualism," dominates our society. This entails giving pre-eminence to rights of personal autonomy and self-determination, which favour acceptance of euthanasia.
Materialism and consumerism: Another factor favouring euthanasia is that our society is highly materialistic and consumerist. It has lost any sense of the sacred, even just of the "secular sacred." That favours a pro-euthanasia position, because a loss of the sacred fosters the idea that worn-out people may be equated with worn-out products; both can then be seen primarily as "disposal" problems.

As one Australian politician put it: "When you are past your best-before or use-by date, you should be disposed of as quickly, cheaply and efficiently as possible." Euthanasia implements that approach.
Individualism, selfishness, materialism - that's a dangerous mix. Craig Carter, the author of The Politics of the Cross Resurrected blog is right in his review:
Although she never uses the term, her article is a good description of the culture of death. It shows how the death wish is deeply woven into the fabric of our society, rather than being an aberation.
Let's not forget that what the word 'euthanasia' refers to nothing but direct and intentional actions that cause another person's death. Those actions have no moral justification.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Upcoming Climate Treaty — Global Government And Global Carbon Tax?

We voted down carbon tax a year ago. But it may return through the back door:
Will the upcoming Copenhagen climate talks usher in a one-world government?

Lord Christopher Monckton, the former advisor for science policy to Lady Margaret Thatcher, believes that if the U.S. signs any climate treaty coming out of the Copenhagen climate change conference in December, it could subject the United States to a global dictatorship. Monckton explains his concerns.

Christopher Monckton"[T]his treaty of Copenhagen, which is going to be negotiated by the states' parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in December, is going to...establish for the first time in human history a global government," he warns. (Please see poll at bottom of page)

Monckton contends that the word "government" appears twice in paragraph 38 of the draft, and that paragraphs 36 through 38 explain that the purpose of the treaty is to establish a world government. "Whose job," he explains, "will be to transfer wealth from the wealthy countries, such as the United States most of all, to Third World countries -- and the excuse for this transfer of wealth is so-called 'reparation.'"
In the US, at least they have some constitutional protections that would make it quite difficult to ratify such a treaty. But here in Canada, with the governing party eager to look more "environmentally conscious" and with the opposition parties all but excited about the opportunity to waste billions of taxpayers' dollars on yet another mondialist utopia, how fast do you think, a treaty like that is going to be ratified?

H/t No Apologies

Monday, October 26, 2009

Handheld Ultrasound: A Peek At The Future Of The Pro-Life Movement?

Who would dare to claim that the unborn is just a "blob of tissue" now?
SAN FRANCISCO, California, October 23, 2009 ( - New technology hailed as a stunning leap forward in modern health care may be about to give pro-life advocates unheard-of power to save a life - in the palm of their hand.

At the Web 2.0 summit in San Francisco this week, General Electric unveiled the ultraportable and user-friendly Vscan, an ultrasound machine about the size of a large flip phone. Dubbing it "the stethoscope of the 21st century," the company offered various scenarios in which the device could vastly advance the landscape of diagnostics.

For pro-lifers on the front lines, the new gadget could hugely improve abortion-bound women's access to ultrasounds, which have been found highly effective in helping mothers choose life for their baby. In the past, the sheer size of the devices has given pro-lifers a perennial puzzle over how to bring the heavy medical equipment into the paths of such women.

Thomas Peters of the American Papist blog was among the first to ponder the new invention as a potential "revolution in sidewalk pro-life counseling technology."

Chris Slattery, the founder and president of the New York pregnancy resource center Expectant Mother Care, called the breakthrough "absolutely awesome."
If that technology had been around back in 1960s, the wholesale slaughter on demand of innocent unborn babies (commonly known as abortion) would have never become legal.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Global Warming — An Urban Legend Becoming A Religious Dogma

Gators don't really live in the sewer and the climate doesn't really get any warmer.
I contend that the belief in human-caused global warming as a dangerous event, either now or in the future, has most of the characteristics of an urban legend. Like other urban legends, it is based upon an element of truth. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas whose concentration in the atmosphere is increasing, and since greenhouse gases warm the lower atmosphere, more CO2 can be expected, at least theoretically, to result in some level of warming.

But skillful storytelling has elevated the danger from a theoretical one to one of near-certainty. The actual scientific basis for the plausible hypothesis that humans could be responsible for most recent warming is contained in the cautious scientific language of many scientific papers. Unfortunately, most of the uncertainties and caveats are then minimized with artfully designed prose contained in the Summary for Policymakers (SP) portion of the report of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This Summary was clearly meant to instill maximum alarm from a minimum amount of direct evidence.

Next, politicians seized upon the SP, further simplifying and extrapolating its claims to the level of a “climate crisis”. Other politicians embellished the tale even more by claiming they “saw” global warming in Greenland as if it was a sighting of Sasquatch, or that they felt it when they fly in airplanes.
And, as if having the governments, corporations and NGOs aggressively marketing this urban legend as a scientific fact wasn't enough, we now have dozens of churches joining the climate change hysteria. It's sad to see that the climate change myth has officially become a religious dogma, not just for all the crazed environmentalists out there, but also - for some of our churches.

Prayers For Life Will Continue — Despite Pro-Abort Violence

Yes, some of those who can't stand a pro-life message are getting violent.
Day 31

1) Ground Zero Report:

On Wednesday night, there was a violent attack on one of our vigilers, a youth co-ordinator from one of our churches. The police were called and are investigating. He is going to the dentist to have work done on his teeth which were damaged in the assault.

Here are two reports from different individuals:

1) Basic details: 2 girls and 2 guys came across the street yelling at the victim and a female companion. One girl started breaking up signs. One guy punched Chris as he attempted to call the police and knocked the phone out of his hands. The female companion who was with the victim then called police. Chris was punched again. They took the signs and umbrellas and dropped them around corner.

2) I don’t know if you know yet, but there was a serious incident last night at the 40 Days for Life vigil. Two young adults were at the vigil site around 2am, when some young men came out of a bar, drunk and starting yelling at the young lady and causing a ruckus. The young man asked them to stop and they beat him up. He was beaten so badly that he requires dental work. He was actually replacing a female friend of his at the vigil. I don’t know if the people involved want their names mentioned. I can find out if I have the opportunity. Suffice to say that I know both of them and I got this information from the young lady’s house mate.
Those thugs and whoever sent them to the Ottawa's "Ground Zero" must be really desperate. Not sure if it's even theoretically possible to find those responsible for the assaults, let alone - bring them to justice. But their assaults won't discourage devoted vigil-keepers. Moreover - prayers for the unborn will continue even after the 40 Day for Life vigil ends:
The spirit of #40Days for Life will live on in Ottawa

A chapter of the Helpers of God's Precious Infants is being set up in Ottawa.

They will pray outside the clinic on abortion days, Wednesday to Friday, from 7:30 am to 4:30 pm.
Way to go, Helpers of God's Precious Infants! I wish you all the best.

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Christmas Gift Of The Year — The Bailout Game

Think about it as monopoly with taxpayers' money :)
Homeschooling parents, Shari and Jordy Sopourn, have developed an award-winning game called Bailout The Game. The game, a strategic satire of the Federal government’s handling of the current financial crisis, has already received the Toy Man's(TM) Seal of Approval, eco-Recognition(TM) Seal, Award of Excellence and eChoice(TM) Award.

What is the object of the game?
You are the Chief Financial Officer of a Bank; your institution is hanging on by a thread. You must reach Bailout Bank before it is too late. So, you take a chance and follow the money trail. Don't think this is going to be easy. You have to earn this Bailout! Along the way you will be forced to undermine the competition, endure the uncertainty of the stock market, avoid hostile takeovers, deal with the instability of the housing market and your bank may even be forced to take a bank holiday. Be the Bank, Lose Billions, Get a Bailout! Bailout The Game
The game itself costs $30 US.

Maybe we should develop a Canadian version for the Bailout game? There, instead of banks, we'll have the auto sector, the unions as well as government agencies whose primary goal is to advance Liberal social engineering... Considering that overspending on the Federal level alone is expected to remain way over $70B even after all the "stimulus" programs expire, it's about time for the Canadian version of Bailout The Game, called Sponsorship The Game.

Friday, October 23, 2009

Pro-Abort Defense: "Let Morgentaler Make His Money"

Unfortunately this is not a joke.
Day 26: Evil Speaks

Sunday, October 18. It seemed to be a day when evil spoke. “Thank God for abortion!” was the message someone left on Suzie’s windshield while she prayed at the vigil. Such blasphemy.

“Leave Morgentaler alone, let him make his money!” exclaimed a driver after he’d slowed down to see what we were all about. Such cynicism about human bloodshed.
(From New Brunswick Right To Life e-mail communique)
Yes, the pro-aborts are running out of arguments and they're finally showing their true colors: It has nothing to do with "choice", let alone women's rights (Morgentaler's facility slaughters unborn girls as well as boys;) it's all about money and personal convenience.

Meanwhile, as New Brunswick Right To Life reports in its e-mail releases, over 300 people has taken part in the 40 Days For Life vigil in Fredericton. And, as result - at least one more baby was saved. Maybe more:
A woman approached along the street this morning, getting ready to go in for her scheduled abortion. She later told us that, seeing our signs, she just could not go through with it. She came in our pro-life house and asked to speak to someone. She had a long session with Martha. She has decided to have the baby and is exploring adoption! She cancelled her abortion appointment. Thanks be to the God of life! Please do support her in prayer, if you would. It’s a very difficult situation including medical issues for the mother.

She wasn’t the only one who changed her mind! Two other women entered the “clinic”, apparently for abortions. But they left without having them!
(From New Brunswick Right To Life e-mail communique: Day 28)
So, while the pro-aborts are worried about Morgentaler's profits, devoted pro-lifers not just in Fredericton, but all across North America are doing their best to save lives.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Exciting Opportunity to Help Make History!

From the CHP e-mail communique:
Dear CHP Friends,

We need your help and here is why.

Our Leader Jim Hnatiuk, and the CHP, have one of the most exciting opportunities given us in many years. A by-election has been called in the Cumberland-Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley electoral district in Nova Scotia, which is our Leader's home electoral district.

One of the CHP strategies that I have been promoting is that we put all of our efforts and all of our resources into these types of opportunities to try to get someone elected.

One of the things that makes this is a rare opportunity is not only that the former MP, Mr. Bill Casey has resigned his seat in the House of Commons, which means that there is no incumbent, but also that Mr. Casey was elected as an Independent MP, not representing any political party in the last election! He won that election with over 69% of the vote.

The fact that this EDA was willing to elect an independent MP shows that it could also be an EDA that would consider voting for the first ever CHP MP. The voters of Cumberland-Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley are looking for a strong voice to represent them, and our Leader wants to be that voice! What a blessing that would be.

There are only 20 days left in the campaign, so there is an urgent need to do all that we can to make this the best campaign ever. The CHP is putting forward considerable resources in the form of people and finances to help get Jim elected. Our Deputy Leader and Vice President are in Nova Scotia now and others are on their way. Since this election was called, we have not stopped praying for Jim and the efforts being made in this campaign in Nova Scotia.

So now, we are asking for your considerable help. We are asking you to respond by helping in any way you can.

Will you pray?
During election campaigns, we have a prayer e-mail that is being sent out each morning which you can subscribe to if you would like to know what the specific prayer needs are. To receive these e-mails, call the National Office.

Please do! Please join us in praying for Jim Hnatiuk, the CHP, the campaign and team, as well as our government.

Will you help make phone calls?
We are calling all the registered voters in this electoral district (ED), we have a short script for callers to use in our efforts to identify supportive voters. We need people who can make 100 phone calls to ID voter support.

Please do! Please call the campaign office at 1-888-VOTE-CHP if you could give some of your time to help.

Will you give financially?
For the next 10 days Jim is traveling the whole riding in a motor home to meet voters and make contacts. The ED is blanketed in signs. Brochures to introduce Jim and the CHP are being sent to every home in the ED. Radio ads were produced this morning. All this costs a considerable amount of money.

To give you some idea of the $33,000 in expenses expected so far:

Brochures and mailers$6,626.89
To mail them$15,000.00
Radio ads$8,700.00
Motor home rental$1,400.00

And this does not include advertising in the two daily newspapers in the riding, which we must do. And a fourth mailer should be part of the plan, along with more radio ads. So you can see that to win this election there is so much that has to be accomplished in a short time-twenty days.

To buy the air time for the radio, we have to pay in advance, and to mail the brochures, we have to pay Canada Post. The other parties will spend the maximum allowable, which will be approximately $80,000. If we hope to win the election, we must be close.

We are mounting the best campaign our resources will allow, but we could do more, and you can help. Please do!

As I mentioned the need is right now! You can donate by mail or online. Please send whatever you can help! To donate online, simply go to and click on "Donate".

To donate by mail, send your cheque payable to Carlleen Nixon official agent for Jim Hnatiuk-but mail it today. If it comes in late, after the election it cannot be accepted. You can mail it to CHP, 1107 Hwy 2, Lantz, NS, B2S 1M9. But if you mail a cheque, please call us and tell us it is on the way, so that we know the funds are available.

We are asking for you help today. Please do what you can.

If you have any questions or wish to offer your help in any way, please call the campaign office through the toll free number today!

Please join us in working together to get Jim Hnatiuk elected to the House of Commons!

Thank you,
Tom Kroesbergen
National President
Christian Heritage Party of Canada
Simply put - would you prefer a $100 out of pocket expense for the just cause or would you rather have the same $100 of your hard-earned dollars money wasted on ideologically-driven spending, on establishments like the SOW and the CHRC, on bailouts and vote buying, not to mention the mafia-controlled construction companies? I believe the answer is obvious.

Political party contributions of up to $400 a year are eligible for a 75% tax credit. Thus, donating $400 to Jim's campaign will reduce your Federal tax payable by $300. We're just 10 weeks away from the end of the tax year, so, if you file your return early - you'll get that money back in about 4 months.

Another alternative is to pocket the $100 and pay those extra $300 in taxes. How much of that money will be wasted? Program expenses for 2009/10 are expected to hit $241.9B. If however government spending had been capped at inflation+population growth since 1996/97 (when the budget was balanced,) program expenses for 2009/10 would have amounted to "only" $159.3B - that's less than 2/3 of what the government plans to spend this year. Pay extra $300 in taxes - and less than $200 of that amount will be spent on services that are more or less essential. The remaining amount (more than $100) will go towards wasteful spending - as described above. So, once again, what would you prefer - $100 out of pocket towards the just cause or more than $100 of your tax money wasted?

I donated $400. We need 199 more SoCons to do just that, so that Jim could run a fully-funded campaign in Cumberland-Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Abortion: The Fallen Angel's 'Hate Crime'

Great article by F. K. Bartels, published on the Catholic Online website.
How is it that the intentional killing of the innocent has become so entrenched in this society, when it is so plainly evil?

GLADE PARK, Colorado (Catholic Online) - The pervasive reality of abortion on demand in this secularist society is both horrific and perplexing. On the one hand, abortion is so utterly ugly that we can hardly imagine how people can participate in it; on the other, we are aware of the factors that seem to lead misguided and deceived women into undergoing the always deadly procedure.

We see the pressures exerted by a society which has bought the lie that there is no such thing as sin, but merely a flexible set of good or not so good choices which people are ‘free’ to make. We are aware of the fears which can descend upon a woman whose dire need for help is sometimes ignored or unexpressed. We are aware that men can pressure women into believing the lie that abortion is the “only choice”. We know that the abortion industry is driven by greed.

Yet, still, how is it that the intentional killing of the innocent has become so entrenched in this society, when it is so plainly evil?
The answer to that question can be found in the writings of a man who was in charge of the propaganda in the Nazi Germany. Josef Goebbels wrote that "if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it". The abortion industry and its supporters of all stripes have mastered the art of telling and repeating big lies (as well as silencing those who insist on telling the truth) pretty well.

H/t Freedom Through Truth

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Informed Consent Rules Should Apply To Abortions

From the Concerned For Life blog:
Surely, we should have "informed consent" for every medical procedure in Canadian hospitals and clinics; however this 'given' is waived in the case of abortion. And no one seems to object to that.

Here, in Halifax, where abortions are performed in the Victoria General Hospital in a ward that has no name on the door, women and girls (many young girls) undergo blood tests, ultrasounds, and then suction aspiration abortions without true informed consent. Not only are they not made fully aware of the procedure and possible consequences, they are not even told who does the abortion or who assists in it. Doctors and nurses do not wear name tags, so I am told by a woman who had an abortion at the VG five years ago.

After World War II, many countries agreed to have a Nuremburg agreement, in which they stated that no medical procedure should be used on human beings without having been tested previously on animals. Guess which procedure has never been tested on animals? Suction aspiration abortion - the method used to perform abortions on fetuses from 6-14 weeks gestation. This procedure accounts for 95% of all abortions. Once again, medical wisdom is waived in the case of abortion.
We've already seen the outcry from the abortion providers in Quebec, when the provincial government decided to apply uniform health standards (including the requirement to have separate sterile operating rooms) to their clinics. Obviously, any attempt to extend informed consent rules (those that already apply to all other clinics) to abortion facilities will be met with even fiercer resistance. But why should abortion providers be exempt from uniform health standards?

Abortion is a procedure that kills a living baby. Our opponents don't believe that life of a baby that dies in abortion has any value. They claim that it's just an ordinary medical procedure and that it's up to the woman to "choose" whether or not she wants to have it. But if abortion is a "choice", as our opponents claim, then shouldn't that be an informed choice? Doesn't a woman have the right to know what consequences such "choice" may bring?

Monday, October 19, 2009

Cumberland — Colchester — Musquodoboit Valley By-Election — A Letter To The Editor

Sent by to the Amherst Daily News by Neal Ford:
The voters of CCMV have been given a real opportunity in the upcoming by-election with the candidacy of Jim Hnatiuk of the Christian Heritage Party.

Jim Hnatiuk's election can be the most powerful message that any by-election has ever sent Canada since the 1989 by election in Alberta that sent Deborah Grey to parliament, which began a movement which swept an old corrupt party out of power and launched a new one which held the Liberal government in check for several years with sound criticism and advocacy of fiscally and socially responsible policies. the Voters in CCMV have the opportunity to send another message of renewal to Ottawa.

Sending a message to sitting governments is one thing, but, since Jim is also a resident of the riding, he will be more accountable to the voters Also, as the leader of a national party, he will keep local interests in the forefront, and also serve as a new voice in parliament, representing a point of view that is rarely heard in that august body: Traditional Judeo-Christian ethics and values. Three of the four parties sitting in Ottawa now adhere to a secular progressive agenda, while the Tories occasionally pay lip service to those values, but do not back it up with action. Jim's election would give all Canadians who share those values a voice.

The choices facing CCMV voters in this by election are: Voting for yet another Tory MP who will serve as a rubber stamp for the government's agenda, voting for a Liberal or New Democrat, who are already represented in parliament, to the point of redundancy or for Jim Hnatiuk who represents a view shared by many Canadians who do not have a voice in the House of Commons. By sending Jim Hnatiuk to Ottawa, the CHP can emerge as a voice for disenfranchised Canadians that can over the short term become a new conscience of Parliament, and work toward keeping the feet of party in power held to the fire.

I ask the voters of CCMV to step up for their meeting with destiny and lead the way!
Meanwhile, several policy videos have been added to the video gallery of Jim's campaign website. Check them out:

P.S. Due to recent influx of trolls from a radical Marxist blog, comments for this blog post are closed.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

10 Reasons Why Pastors Avoid the Culture War

And not just pastors, but other clergymen too. Great essay by Doug Giles:
6. They don’t want to lose their tax-exempt status: Many pastors, priests and parishioners have been cowed into inactivity by the threatened loss of their tax-exempt status if they say anything remotely political. This can make pastors who don’t, or won’t, get good legal advice about as politically active as Howard Hughes was during the flu season.
Oh, we've seen that one plenty of times during the marriage debate, haven't we? And I bet you dollars to timbits, that things were quite similar during the abortion debate back in the 1970s and '80s. The government knows which strings to pull...

Gladly, not all the priests are like that. And there's hope that we'll see more of them in the future.

Saturday, October 17, 2009

Ontario Superior Court: Hospital Has Duty Of Care To The Unborn

Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice has ruled that Guelph General Hospital did owe a duty of care to an unborn child whose family claims that negligence during the baby’s delivery led to brain damage.

In a decision released Wednesday, Justice Wolfram Tausendfreund rejected an argument from Guelph General Hospital, three obstetricians and four obstetrical nurses that they had no such obligation in the case of Kevin Liebig, who was born eight years ago with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, or brain damage cause by oxygen deprivation.

“The duty to both mother and fetus in the maternal-fetal care scenario has long been established in Canadian jurisprudence,” he wrote.
The defendants argued that their professional obligation extended only to Susan and not to her unborn child.

They cited a decision that came down last year from the Ontario Court of Appeal, which found that doctors cannot owe a duty of care to unconceived children because their primary obligation is to their female patients.
But in his decision, Tausendfreund said the two cases are entirely different.
In other words, the unborn is, in fact, a patient. And, by acknowledging the difference from the other case, according to which, doctors cannot owe a duty of care to a child prior to conception (obviously, they could never know when a woman might become pregnant,) the court has in fact admitted that life begins at conception. So, even if the law doesn't yet recognize the unborn as a person, the hospital still owes a duty of care to the baby.

Too bad this only applies to wanted babies:
It's interesting that in Canadian Law, for the purposes of abortion, mother and fetus are one. But for delivery, they are not.
Hopefully, thanks to the recent ruling, we may see that changed. Hopefully, we can look forward for the judges and the lawmakers to acknowledge the self-evident truth: that a mother and her unborn baby are not just two separate patients, but also - two separate persons, both entitled to equal protection of the law.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Green Party To Youth: Your Parents Are War-Mongering Money-Grabbing SUV-Driving Freaks That F****d Up The Planet

I couldn't believe that this wasn't some sort of a hoax. As it turns out - this is real; this actually comes from the Green party website. Just go to, click on the "Young Green" button (just to the right of main frame,) and the scandalous poster will be the first thing to appear. (At least - it was there as of 21:30 Atlantic time.)

That's how the Greens appeal to the young generation. And the problem is not so much with the swearword (after all, that's not much different than the "flick off" campaign, once run by the Ontario Liberals,) but that the party in fact tells youth to reject their parents - for the sake of "Mother Earth" and to follow The Party - which knows best.

And what about the party leader? Is Elizabeth May aware of this appalling slogan? According to the press release, she is, and she is very proud of the "Young Greens" team:
By Elizabeth May on 15 October 2009 - 6:18pm

I am proud of the youth active in the Young Greens. For that matter I am proud of youth engaged in any political party and in work in social movements --- whether Amnesty International, Engineers without Borders, Oxfam, Greenpeace, Sierra Youth Coalition, World Vision, Otesha, the list is long.
Obscenity is a subjective concept. Our culture is steeped in the F-word. John Baird used it on Toronto. (He did apologize). Trudeau may have said it, but it came out “fuddle duddle.” The Young Greens have used a version with asterisk inserted to make a point. To get more youth engaged. And what they are saying is fundamentally true. How many of us in the boomer generation can honestly dispute the fact that our generation has done an unacceptable amount of damage to this planet?

How should youth respond? Go to the mall? Do drugs? Party til the whole mess goes away? Or get active and engaged and call for meaningful engagement in the political process?

I am proud of them for choosing the latter.
Notice that this was published on October 15th - after the scandalous poster had been on the Grunenjugend "Young Greens" website for at least several days. Kate from Small Dead Animals, mentioned that Ms. May was "suddenly and uncharacteristically unavailable for media interviews" at that time. Well, as it turns out - she was available for the press release. And, judging from the press release, she doesn't see anything wrong with the campaign tactics used by the youth wing of her party. If anything - she's proud of it.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Newspapers Weigh In On McGill Disgrace

Yes, the story actually went beyond the blogosphere. At least two major newspapers have commented on the sorry state of freedom of speech on university campuses. Here's a National Post article by Tim Mak:
Choose Life, McGill’s pro-life group, went ahead with the event, titled ‘Echoes of the Holocaust’, despite its tenuous interim club status and a notice of censure from McGill’s student council. Unfortunately, Ruba never had a chance to speak – he spent several hours being shouted and sung down by pro-choicers before the event was ultimately cancelled.

When the administration at McGill refused to block the event, McGill’s student union castigated them for a “calloused disregard of its need to protect its students”. Protect students from what? Dissenting opinions? It is as if the union is under the delusion that the administration had herded lines of students into the lecture hall for some sort of mass indoctrination event.

But these are university campuses nowadays, ruled by an arrogant minority on the left, who despite their paucity, believe they speak for everyone. "I don't think that this type of talk should be allowed to happen at McGill," said Eisenkraft Klein, one of the protestors arrested, in the McGill Tribune. "This is student space. This is not public property."
And we also have the Winnipeg Sun columnist Joseph Quesnel warning Manitobans not to be like McGill on free speech:
At McGill and other universities groups of self-appointed 'philosopher-kings' high on hubris decide what ideas students should be exposed to.

At this recent event, the presenter was never able to present his case, as the mob drowned him out with barnyard tunes and obnoxious questions.

Universities are not the property of noisy students; they are publicly-funded institutions. Witnesses say it took two hours for protesters to leave. Police officers took their time expelling them, which was disrespectful to those attending the event.

It is unfortunate, as in many universities, McGill must endure student unions bent on preventing free speech, as the Students Society of McGill University censured the event beforehand and threatened the group with loss of funding. Clearly, this climate encouraged the mob action that transpired, as did campus newspapers questioning its legitimacy.

Pro-life groups in Manitoba should bring representatives from the Centre for Bioethical Reform to their campuses. Bring the battle for free speech here.

If the same thing happens university alumni and the public should demand public universities take a stand for freedom of expression. Moreover, campus security and police should be readily available and empowered to remove mobs much earlier if this behaviour continues.
Can we hope that university students in Manitoba follow the advice and make a stand for freedom of speech and for fetal rights? Not very likely, considering the kind of folks that control those so called "student unions". But that doesn't mean we should stop trying.

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Denying Life-Saving Treatment To Prematurely Born Babies — Eugenics Is Back?

Or is it just a new "pro-choice" trend?
FLOWOOD, Mississippi, October 14, 2009 ( - In a case echoing the tragic story of Britain's Sarah Capewell and son Jayden, a Mississippi mother says that her neonatologist refused to help her baby daughter survive because he believed she was too young, at 22 weeks 4 days gestation, to merit intervention.

Necie Franklin of Flowood, Mississippi, told (LSN) that Dr. Kenny Robbins of River Oaks Hospital refused to treat daughter Jessa Mackenzie after she was born suddenly in May, because she was three days shy of 23 weeks gestation - at which point he would have considered treating her at the hospital's Level II neonatal intensive care unit.

Franklin said that Jessa gasped for breath twice while in her arms, but was told by nurses that it was "just a reaction" - leading her to believe the child had died. Only after Jessa had been taken away, says Franklin, did she learn that the child still had a heartbeat.

Franklin, who says she has lost a child to a premature birth before, said it "shocked" her when Robbins said he would not help Jessa breathe.

"I looked at him and said, so you're telling me you're not going to do anything for my daughter?" said Franklin. She says Robbins "simply flat out refused."
No, they don't believe that life begins at birth. They believe that life begins when they find it convenient. No matter what the law says, for those who reject the right to life as inalienable right from conception to natural death, there's no difference between a 224/7-week baby in the womb and a 224/7-week "premie"; they wouldn't mind destroying the former and they won't lift a finger to save the latter.

Hippocratic Oath? What Hippocratic Oath? It was abandoned decades ago...

40 Days For Life in Fredericton: Real Love Does Not Take A Child’s Life

Abortionists can also be someone's family doctors. And their patients, those that were lucky to be born, may even consider them "caring":
One of the women spoke about how several of her friends use to have the abortionist at Morgentaler’s as a family doctor when she practised in Saint John. They remarked how “caring” she was. I’ve heard the same of two other former abortionists who were ob-gyns: people said they were “caring.” It’s amazing how otherwise caring people can have such huge blind spots. Abortionists think they’re doing the pregnant women a service. They just don’t seem to really see the innocent child whose life they take, nor the lifelong suffering they leave mothers with.

Real love does not take a child’s life. Sooner or later many abortionists seem to come to realize this. Spiritual blindness can be healed. We pray this to come to pass for our “Dr. R.” Lord, have mercy on her.
(From the New Brunswick Right to Life e-mail communique)
Then we also have those "doctors" who perform abortions at the Dumont hospital in Moncton and at the Chaleur hospital in Bathurst. They too are likely to be someone's family doctors; and their patients too may find them nice and caring - if they were lucky to be born, of course. Those in the womb - for them it's a different story. They may end up feeling the full extent of such "care". But those babies are voiceless.

Monday, October 12, 2009

Then How About Exposing Students To A Pro-Life Display?

In its article entitled "The battle over Boo Radley", The Globe and Mail discusses whether or not parents should be allowed to decide what their kids read in school. Interestingly enough, one of those who believes that parents shouldn't be allowed to exempt their children from controversial books, happens to be the co-chair of the local Catholic Parent Network. Here's how she explains her position:
Murielle Boudreau, co-chair of the Greater Toronto Catholic Parent Network, said that exposing children to controversial books gives parents an opportunity to discuss important issues at home.

“If it's out there, in my opinion it's better to expose the child and explain whatever it is, rather than not to expose them,” she said. “… If you really have objections you should do home schooling.”
For a detailed review of the article, check out the The Politics of the Cross Resurrected blog. Myself, I have only one question: Would Ms. Boudreau have the same opinion, if the controversial material was, let's say, a pro-life display?

Usually, that's their main argument - pictures of unborn babies shouldn't be allowed, because they could be seen by the children and then parents would have to explain what abortion is. And, to make sure that kids never raise the controversial question at home, (until their "sex ed" teachers explain them that abortion is a cool way to make sex safer and that it's every girl's Charter-given right,) everything that mentions life in the womb is considered controversial. Including plain text signs "abortion kills children".

But, if exposing children to controversial material means an opportunity for the parents to discuss the subject and to present their point of view - then how about exposing high-school students to information that life begins at conception, so that they could discuss fetal rights with their parents? Let's start with the Watch Me Grow brochure, which, so far, has been deemed either "too controversial" or "too politicized" to be distributed in high schools. I wonder if Ms. Boudreau, as well as all those who believe that there's nothing wrong with exposing students to controversial literature despite their parents' wishes, will welcome this lovely brochure about fetal development in the public school libraries.

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Worries About Climate Are Being Manufactured By The International Left

Check out this article by Michael Coren. Looks like the science is nowhere near settled when it comes to "climate change":
There are, however, an increasing number of peer-reviewed and intensely credible scientific minds who believe conventional thinking on global warming is nonsense.

One such being Lord Christopher Monckton, former science adviser to British prime minister Margaret Thatcher and a world-renowned scholar.

He was in Canada recently and appeared on my television show. A man of compelling wit and eloquence, he has defeated so many environmental activists -- he calls them "bedwetters" -- that few of them will now debate him.

"Al Gore has refused several times. Here is a man who is paid $300,000 per speech and has his staff control all of the questions that are asked. People ask why he is so committed," Monckton said. "Simple. He was a failed politician worth $2 million; he's now a famous activist worth $200 million!"

According to Monckton there are more than 700 major scientists who steadfastly refute the notion that the climate is changing to any worrying degree, that global warming is a reality and that the planet is in danger.

"It's all about the need of the international left to rally round a new flag."
And then we have this interesting story: It turns out that some UN "experts" on climate change, in an attempt to find some scientific facts that could confirm their theory, had to rely on a graph from... Wikipedia.
What started as a brouhaha in the blogosophere has turned into a minor embarrassment for the United Nations in the climate debates. As first reported on, the origin of a graph used in last week’s UN climate report, published to coincide with the summit in New York attended by President Obama and other world leaders, was not an august team of scientists working around the clock, but rather Wikipedia.

Perhaps equally surprising was the revelation that the graph’s author was not a climatologist, but instead an obscure Norwegian ecologist, Hanno Sandvik, who claimed no expertise regarding the data used in his graph.
But I guess they were in such a hurry to save the planet from overheating, that they just didn't have the time to find out who was the author of the graph. Climatologist, ecologist - what's the difference? The graph shows what the warm-mongers want to see, so it is 100% reliable, isn't it?

Saturday, October 10, 2009

Why Canada Became A Welfare State

Great essay by Brian Lee Crowley:
The reigning political consensus that characterized this country right up to the birth of the New Canada in 1960 took a quite different view of the role of the individual, of government and of the effects of government intervention on people's character than the one that prevails today. The view that predominates today on both sides of the border is of Canadians as kinder and gentler than their American neighbours, more willing to use the power of the state in pursuit of public goods, more welfare-minded, more socially left wing. It is also a view that could establish itself only by defeating and then consigning to a trunk in the never visited attic of our collective memory the older view that had defined Canada for almost the first century of its existence and for many decades prior to 1867.

This revolution in Canadians' intellectual and moral self-understanding was fed by many tributaries. We were certainly well plugged into the broad intellectual currents washing over Western civilization. For instance, the influence of Marxism, some branches of feminism, post-structuralism, and other "radical" philosophies in the universities and elsewhere helped to create fertile soil for new ideas across the West, while simultaneously demonizing the bourgeois virtues. Vietnam and the counter-culture produced a vibrant movement of protest and questioning of authority throughout the Western world, including the authority of traditional values and behaviours.
That's quite an interesting rebuttal to a claim that socialism is a Canadian value. The essay is quite long, but worth reading.

Friday, October 9, 2009

CHP Victory In Cumberland / Colchester / Musquodoboit Valley — Let's Make It Happen!

The possibility of electing the first Christian Heritage Party MP to parliament has presented itself in a big way:
Christian Heritage Party Leader, Jim Hnatiuk, became the first candidate to register for the by-election call in the federal riding of Cumberland--Colchester--Musquodoboit Valley (CCMV).

The businessman and retired military officer says, "I'm ready to serve the constituents of CCMV with a strong voice, just as Bill Casey did. I'm proud to live in and serve in a riding where the voters are not afraid to speak with an independent voice, and choose the candidate that will best represent them in Ottawa.

"CHP Canada has policies that would strengthen Cumberland-Colchester Musqudoboit Valley, and I believe this by-election will be about more than what the "major" parties have to offer. Voters here have proved that they are willing to look for and choose the candidate who has the best blueprint for governing. Our campaign will be about offering 'Better Solutions' to the serious issues that face us. There are better ways to 'do' politics in Canada, and I believe voters are ready for those better solutions," says Candidate Hnatiuk. "I believe voters are going to look hard at the policies to determine what is best for them and the country. And I believe voters will discover that the CHP's policies are the best.
This looks like the best opportunity we've had in years to give a strongly pro-life, pro-family party a voice in Parliament. The by-election takes place in the new CHP leader's home riding. The riding itself is not just a Conservative stronghold, but one of the most Socially Conservative ridings in Canada. And, with the official Conservative candidate being a social Liberal, Jim is the only pro-life, pro-family candidate in the riding.

But what about vote splitting? What about all those objections such as "your activism can ruin our chance to win majority" or "because of your activism we can end up with a Liberal government"?

Well, let's not forget - it's a by-election. It's not going to change the balance of power. Even if the Conservatives win all the 4 seats (which is extremely unlikely to happen,) that won't give them majority. And vice-versa - even if every single seat is won by the opposition parties - they'll merely get what they used to have several months ago. Vote splitting or no vote splitting, it will still be a Conservative minority government with Stephen Harper remaining Prime Minister and Michael Ignatieff — the Leader of the Opposition.

If anything - vote splitting can actually help Jim win the riding. After all - it's the moderate/centre/left camp that is going to have as many as 4 candidates on the ballot. Considering that there's no incumbent; considering that lower turnout usually benefits smaller parties (such as the NDP and the Greens,) this could become a close 4-way race. And, if Jim's campaign team succeeds in making it a 5-way race, then even 22-25% support could be enough for victory. Number-wise, for a riding with 68,000 registered voters (of which only 20,000-25,000 voters are likely to come to the polls,) that means - ~4,500 to 6,500 votes.

Can a CHP candidate expect to get that many? Jim Hnatiuk received about 1,400 votes in the 2006 election, placing ahead of the Green party candidate. That was a general election, when the question who would become the next Prime Minister was crucial. Then, being on Harper's team mattered more than the candidate's personal views, because a Conservative loss in just 11 constituencies could have resulted in yet another Paul Martin's government, but this time - in coalition with the NDP. And yet even then, Jim Hnatiuk managed to win ~1,400 votes.

If he could win that many back then, he can look forward to win 4-5 times as many now, when the balance of power is set, when lower turnout gives more weight to an individual vote and when it's values and policies that matter, not merely electing yet another backbencher to someone's team. And, when it comes to values, policies and the proposed solutions, Jim Hnatiuk is a candidate that both Social and Fiscal Conservatives can count on.

Thursday, October 8, 2009

McGill Disgrace On Video — "Academic Debate" As Pro-Abortion Thugs See It

If a picture is worth a thousand words, this video is worth a million.
H/t Big Blue Wave. Check the Campaign Life Quebec channel on You Tube for the remaining videos. Quite similar to what happened in Halifax. And for the umpteenth time - "I told you so" to Kathryn Sawyer and others who naively believe that poor-choices can actually come up with some sort of logical arguments against fetal rights; arguments that would allow them to confront a pro-life speaker in an open debate.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

José Ruba's Presentation "Echoes of the Holocaust" Hosted By Choose Life McGill — Hijacked By Pro-Abort Jackboots

They couldn't (or didn't even want to) come up with a pro-abortion speaker to confront José Ruba of the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform in an open debate. (Despite the plea from one of their own.) They failed in their attempt to coerce the campus pro-life club to cancel the event. Despite their censorship motion and the threats to permanently withhold all funds to Choose Life McGill, the pro-life presentation started as planned. And, apparently the pro-abortion jackboots from the "students' society" failed to convince their college-mates to boycott the presentation in large enough numbers. So they did exactly what their fellow pro-aborts in St. Mary's University in Nova Scotia had done back in February - they started screaming and chanting, drowning out the speaker, thus bringing the presentation to a halt:
Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform representative Jojo Ruba's presentation at McGill University, hosted by Choose Life McGill, was hijacked for over 2 hours tonight by pro-abortion protesters.

As the presentation got underway, about 20 protesters began shouting and singing children's songs. They then crowded around the vacant podium (Mr. Ruba having absconded) and continued signing for the better part of an hour, at which point police arrived. Two protesters were taken, but many were left behind. When the police left, protesters resumed and disrupted the presentation (which had fitfully resumed) until the two hour mark, at which point event organizers were informed by campus officials that time had run out and the room had to be closed for the night.

Protesters then filed out, along with most of the audience. A police officer showed up again, answering some questions for the campus media.
I said that before and I say it again - it's time for a law suit. Not a "human rights" complaint, (unlike our opponents we better show respect for the right to due process,) but a full-scale law suit. While Choose Life McGill should sue the "student's society" for discrimination and harassment, CCBR should sue the campuses (of both McGill and St Mary's) for lack of adequate security. Because, if a campus agrees to rent out premises for a presentation, it's their responsibilities to ensure that the presentation doesn't get hijacked by a bunch of loud-mouth thugs who reject the rules of a civilized debate.

There should have been a security guard to inform the protesters that unless they take their protest outside, they'll be responsible for whatever penalties the presenting group might demand for the breach of contract, along with legal fees and other expenses. This wasn't done; once again the campus officials chose to side with the thugs rather than with those who had the legal right to be on premises at that time. Therefore, the campus should pay the price.

Euthanasia Bill (C-384) Debated In Parliament

From the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition blog:
On Friday, October 2, 2009, Bill C-384 -- the private member's bill introduced by Francine Lalonde (BQ) to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide in Canada -- received its first hour of debate in the House of Commons.

Parliamentary procedure states that a private member's bill receives two hours of debate before being voted on at second reading. C-384 is tentatively scheduled to receive its second hour of debate on November 16, 2009.

Eight Members of Parliament spoke on C-384. Two spoke in favour - Francine Lalonde (BQ), Serge Cardin - (BQ); six opposed the bill - David Anderson (CPC), Hon John McKay (Lib), Jacques Gourde (CPC), Hon Marlene Jennings (Lib), Joe Comartin (NDP), Paul Szabo (Lib).
6 MPs speaking against vs 2 in favor - I like those numbers. Of those speaking against - 3 Liberal MPs and 1 New Democrat - that too is encouraging, hopefully, we can count on a large number of Liberals and even some New Democrats to vote against the bill.

But that doesn't mean that the defeat of C-384 is certain. There are more than enough MPs that support the bill and they'll do their best to save the cause. First and foremost - they'll try to use those 6 weeks they have before the second hour of debate to win the support of the undecided or "middle-of-the-road" MPs, with a promise of some vague compromise. That shouldn't be allowed to happen. We should make it clear to our MPs that no compromise is acceptable, when it comes to human life. Bill C-384 must be defeated.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Pro-Aborts Respond — With Censorship And Threats

About a week ago, Kathryn Sawyer published a letter in McGill Daily, calling on a "pro-choice champion" to come out and confront Jose Ruba at the pro-life presentation on campus. Her appeal was quite reasonable.
If the club is lying, if the club is wrong, here is your chance to prove it! Stand up and formally, publicly, voice your well-reasoned and well-supported pro-choice views in a balanced, moderated space.
But it was quite naive for her to expect such a "poor-choice champion" to confront a pro-life speaker in an open debate. As I suggested in my earlier blog post, pro-aborts simply have no arguments against us. So when the time comes - they'll either boycott the presentation or try to shut it down. They did both:
The Students Society of McGill University (SSMU) voted 25-2-2 to censure an event entitled "Echoes of the Holocaust" at their meeting last Thursday, October 1st. The event, scheduled for tomorrow, October 6th, has been organized by Choose Life, a pro-life club on campus, and will carry on as planned.

The presentation, hosted by a university-sanctioned club, Choose Life, is to be given by Jose Ruba of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. His presentation, titled, "Echoes of the Holocaust" outlines how societies have justified and perpetuated great atrocities, including the Holocaust and abortion.

Natalie Fohl, president of Choose Life says, "The Holocaust was a major affront to the dignity of the human person, and resulted in a horrific loss of life. Choose Life, through this event, fully recognizes that reality. Moreover, we recognize that abortion is also an affront to the dignity of the human person, and that the denial of personhood to the unborn is unjust and arbitrary."

At the meeting, SSMU Councillors accused Ruba of comparing women who have had abortions to Nazis and therefore violating their Constitution and Equity Policy. The speaker has clearly stated, however, that he does not make this comparison.

Though the students' society cannot directly stop the event, they have promised to punish the club for hosting the presentation. The motion passed was amended to include a resolution that by continuing with the event despite the censure, Choose Life will be automatically ineligible for funding from the SSMU for the remainder of its existence.
Just what I thought would happen. Censorship and intimidation - those are the pro-aborts' only arguments. But you don't win a debate by silencing your opponents.

As for the Choose Life club - I command them for their decision to go along with the presentation despite the threats. And if the "students' society" jackboots actually go ahead and cut their funding - I believe, Choose Life should sue them. After all, if the "students' society" is officially a pro-abortion organization then pro-life students should have the right to opt-out and get their membership dues back. If however the "students' society" is supposed to represent all students, regardless of their views, then they have no right to withhold funds from student clubs just because they disagree with their cause.

Monday, October 5, 2009

Are You A Racist? A Frank Conversation (Discussing Affirmative Action)

Check out this entertaining video commentary, which discusses the rationale behind affirmative action, using one of America's most troubled and under-performing groups as example. (I'm talking about celebrities of course. :)

I wish Pajamas TV allowed embedding, that way the clip could be posted here, but since they don't offer that option - just follow this link. H/t No Apologies.

Sunday, October 4, 2009

Life Chain — Despite The Rain

Unlike so many previous years, it was raining on the first Sunday of October. Yet, despite the rain we had about 65 people coming (I stand corrected, 65 not 40) - which is a better turnout than what we had in some of the previous years, when the sun was shining, but fewer people were aware of the Life chain and fewer yet took their time to show up.

Life Chains were held today in over a thousand of cities across North America (in Canada alone there were more than 150 chains held) and, thanks to those who came, we were able to get the pro-life message out. As always, the people were quite supportive, we've received a lot more honks than thumbs down or angry yells. It was actually quite funny to see one of our opponents trying to get noticed by making duck sounds at us, as he drove by. Well, if our opponents can't find any other arguments - that means we're on the right track.

But seriously - what other arguments could they come up with? How could they disprove a self-evident fact that abortion stops a beating heart? Sure, not everyone likes to be reminded of that. And yet - we must break the silence. After all, even here in New Brunswick, about 1000 of those little hearts are brought to a halt by abortion every single year.

Saturday, October 3, 2009

Pregnancy Resource Centers — A Passion To Serve, A Vision For Life

Reducing Abortions: The Untold Story of America's Pregnancy Resource Centers

WASHINGTON, D.C., September 30, 2009 ( - A groundbreaking report detailing the impact of thousands of pregnancy resource centers across America has been released by the Family Research Council.

(Click here to download the .PDF report.)

The report, entitled "A Passion to Serve: A Vision for Life" lays out in detail the manifold contributions of the nation's pregnancy resource centers to their communities, particularly to women, children, and families. The nature and scope of the pregnancy centers' mission is outlined in statistical summaries, case studies and personal testimonies. The report includes the accolades of several public leaders of diverse backgrounds celebrating the movement's unique contributions.

According to the report, pregnancy centers now assist an average of 5,500 Americans daily with sexuality-and pregnancy-related concerns. The report was introduced in the nation's capital Thursday by the Family Research Council as well as presidents from three national pregnancy center networks that represent more than 2,300 cross-affiliates in all 50 states.
And what kind of reward do they get? The US Congress is considering cutting aid to pregnancy centers. And here in Canada, a crisis pregnancy center may end up being picketed by radical feminists that accuse it of "misinforming" women... Just because they tell women that there are alternatives to abortion. (Yeah, I understand, Pregnancy Resource Centers drive the abortion business down.)

Friday, October 2, 2009

Doctors: Legalized Euthanasia Threatens Care For Terminally Ill

Dr. Jose Pereira, a University of Ottawa professor and the head of the university's palliative-care program, explains his concerns about bill C-384:
The legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide in Canada could reduce the level of care available to those with terminal illnesses, two Ottawa doctors warn.

"We need to improve care, not terminate it," Dr. Jose Pereira told reporters at a news conference Thursday.
He said he is concerned about a private member's bill to legalize euthanasia after his experience in Switzerland, which already allows the practice.

While working at a hospital in Geneva, Pereira said, he noticed that a few months after the hospital began offering assisted suicide, community-based palliative care services were shut down and the number of palliative-care physicians at the hospital was reduced.
Pereira's concerns were echoed by Dr. Jean Bartkowiak, president and CEO at Bruyère.

"We must not abandon these vulnerable people through assisted suicide and euthanasia, but instead embark on a quest to find better ways to maintain their dignity and quality of life," he said. He added that hears daily about patients recovering from dire situations, and said people should never lose hope.
Pereira said there are "serious flaws" in the bill:
  • It isn't limited to people with terminal illnesses, but also mental illnesses.
  • It allows people to refuse appropriate treatment and choose euthanasia.
  • It doesn't define "terminal."
  • It allows people to consent to assisted suicide if they appear to be lucid, a qualification Pereira said is "too ambiguous."
He added that other jurisdictions have found it hard to put in "foolproof safeguards" to prevent people who don't meet the criteria — such as people with depression — to be eligible for euthanasia,

Pereira also expressed concerns about what legalizing euthanasia would mean for doctors.

"It's taking a way the right of most physicians to say, 'No, this is not something that we do.'"
Hopefully, Members of Parilament that are still undecided (or that are leaning towards supporting the bill) take those arguments in consideration when a vote on C-384 actually takes place.

Liberal Motion Defeated. Are They Done Yet?

A joke that's been repeated for almost a year, is no longer funny. Hopefully, now, once the Liberal motion is defeated, they finally stop trying to trigger an early vote (at least for a little while) and let the Parliament work for a change.

And, if they are so eager to test their strength in an election campaign - well, there's a series of by-elections coming. Some of those ridings have been vacant for months because it just wouldn't make sense to call a by-election when a general election could have been called at any moment. Now, with the election talk on hold (and the deadline for one of the by-elections approaching,) let's see how all those trends and opinion polls materialize into actual votes - even if it's just 4 ridings. If anything, the fact that the by-elections can't change the balance of power, will only encourage people to vote their conscience.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

40 Days In Fredericton — A Baby Saved! Maybe Two.

Yes, we walk by faith, not by sight. And yet, seeing the results of our efforts, is sure encouraging:
There were 7 or 8 “escorts” outside the abortion site. It wasn’t long before women began arriving for abortions. Over the next three hours we noticed at least 12 going in (they normally stop going in about 10 a.m.)

But two of the 12 soon came back out! In at least one case a change of heart was apparent. This one couple walked down the street and went in the front door between 8 and 9. I took note of them because he was a large young man. Of course we were praying hard for each and every one we saw going in.

They couldn’t have been in there more than 20-25 minutes. To my pleasant surprise out they come the front door and walk away up the street! They weren’t in there long enough for an abortion, for sure. It’s unusual to see someone come out again so soon and leave. Usually that would signify a changed mind. Did this one? Maybe! They didn’t look our way or speak to anyone so it wasn’t clear. God alone knows, we entrust them to Him.

The other one was more clear. Between 9 and 10, as most of us stood in the rain across the street from abortion site, Marti, who has much experience counseling pregnant mothers at the Women’s Center next door, stood a short distance from the “clinic.” I prayed that she would somehow get a chance to speak to a woman going for an abortion. I left the prayer site about 9:45 and went in our pro-life centre.

Not long after 10 I met a beaming Marti in the kitchen. “A baby was saved!” she said. She recounted how this mother and daughter (the baby’s grandmother and mother) passed by her going toward the abortion site. Marti was able to speak a few kind words about how they didn’t need to go in there, help was available next door etc. Marti said she felt an “unctioning of the Holy Spirit” as she spoke. The two women, however, continued on and entered the “clinic,” with escorts gathered around.

But 5 minutes later they re-emerged! The escorts seemed a little flustered to see them leaving. They passed by Marti’s way again. The older woman looked at Marti intently and said, “Thank you.” It was obvious something had happened! The Holy Spirit had gotten through! They proceeded into the nearby parking garage. When their car came out and passed by, the young woman looked Marti’s say and smiled. The power of prayer and love made manifest.

A child saved, maybe two! Who can even begin to measure the value of this? Thank you, Lord, for your faithfulness. And thanks to all who prayed.
Hopefully, it was both babies that were saved from abortion. And I hope there might also be a couple of women who didn't even show up to their appointments because they had noticed our vigil and chose to let her babies live...

Let's keep praying. And let's not forget that the Life Chain is this Sunday. Let's be there; let's come together in a peaceful and prayerful public witness for the unborn.