Stand Your Ground

Check out this article by Lorrie Goldstein:

The biggest alarm bell that should have gone off for media reporting on all this in 2011, was not just that the 2002 discussion paper was nine years out of date, but that it was written three years prior to the Jan. 1, 2005 start-up of the one, significant, real-world example we have of a cap-and-trade market in carbon dioxide emissions.

That’s Europe’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).

And a “scheme” is exactly what it has turned out to be — plagued by multi-billion-dollar tax frauds and built on a carbon credit system riddled with fraud and corruption.

Not only did the ETS not lower emissions — they kept rising until the 2008 global recession — the biggest losers were ordinary Europeans, hit with higher energy bills and retail prices, while the biggest winners were energy companies, speculators and organized crime.

While the authors of this 2002 report can be excused for suggesting a cap-and-trade scheme in carbon dioxide emissions might work in theory, it was absurd in 2011 to report on its findings, without citing the real-world experience with cap-and-trade since 2005.

Which brings us to the report’s argument government regulations won’t work as well as cap-and-trade.

Actually, it’s hard to imagine anything could be worse, or less effective, than cap-and-trade, including a carbon tax.
More >>>

Here's the solution that will work: forget about this Orwellian war on bad weather and start addressing real problems such as air and water pollution.

Yes, it was 5 years ago today when Stephen Harper's government made its first attempt to reform the Senate. That attempt failed, just like all those that followed. Later on, facing constant obstruction from the 3:1 Liberal majority and the prospective of the opposition seizing power and perpetuating their dominance over the Red Chamber, Harper had to fill all the vacant seats by appointment.

Senate reform was by no means a hot topic during the last Parliament, as the nation teetered on the verge of a snap election. So now, 5 years later, we're back to square one. But it's certainly not the Conservative government to blame.

During the five years that Harper headed a minority government, Parliament resisted Senate reform, though everyone more or less agreed that some sort of reform was needed.

The way the Senate works is that the party in power appoints mostly its supporters to the Senate. Minority governments give token representation to outsiders, but generally it's a patronage appointment. That's just the way it is.

Of course, it shouldn't be that way.
...
Since 1970, there have been more than two dozen efforts in Parliament to reform the Senate - all of which have failed. Harper wants an eight-year term for Senators, but no dice. A Senator is there until age 75, unless he/she commits some breach that gets him bounced.

To blame Harper for appointing defeated MPs or hacks to the Senate when his efforts for reform have been rejected, is silly, misguided and thoughtless.
More >>>

Stephen Harper did his best trying to avoid appointing new Senators for almost three years. How did the opposition respond? By introducing a Senate bill mandating timely appointments of new Senators. By considering to demand new Senate appointments directly from the Governor General. By threatening a constitutional challenge if there would be no other way to block the consultative Senate election bill... So they better stop complaining about Harper's appointments. (Especially Quebecers!) They got exactly what they kept asking for.

Now, however, once the Conservatives have a solid majority in both houses, we can look forward for the Senate reform to finally move forward.

Harper is using his first majority to mollify his political base by moving swiftly with legislation to dilute widespread criticism of delays on Senate reform.
...
Harper has promised to set term limits for senators - anywhere between eight and 12 years - and a contentious change that would allow the appointment of elected provincial nominees.

Constitutional watchers say it's unlikely the government would be hauled before a judge by setting terms, but could face a Supreme Court challenge over elections because provinces could argue that, while it would follow the letter of the law, it would not follow the spirit.
More >>>

First - let's bring in term limits and then... Hopefully we can eventually move to the Australian Triple E Senate model. And if all those who favor the status-quo keep trying to block the reform - how about putting the question to a referendum? It will pass by a 2:1 margin, resolving the dispute once and for all.

Because this is an episode that puts a bad light on their good intentions:

The movie relates one of the saddest episodes in Mexico’s history, when the communist government was trying to exterminate the Catholic Church from the country in the 1920s. The persecution was severe and many Catholics were killed. Some courageous Catholics fought back, however. Known as Cristeros, they had few weapons but lots of heart. Their rally cry was Viva Cristo Rey! (Long live Christ the King!). The resulting civil war is known as the Cristiada. Both the words Cristeros and Cristiada and derived from Cristo, the Spanish word for Christ.

The movie follows a group of Cristeros who took up arms defend their people against the an anti-Catholic, Masonic, secular dictatorship. It features an impressive cast. Andy Garcia plays the leader of a group of Cristeros. You’ve seen Garcia in blockbusters such as Untouchables, The Godfather III and the Ocean’s Eleven triology.
More >>>

But wait, the movie must have got it all wrong. They must have a bias of some sort. After all - it's a secular humanist progressive government we're talking about; guided by reason and common sense, they therefore can't act as a bunch of crazed fanatics. It must be those Christians to blame. After all this "Cristiada" of theirs sounds just like a crusade...

Here are a few quotes from the Wikipedia article on the Cristero War (while the text is still there):

This uneasy "truce" between the government and the Church ended with the 1924 election of Plutarco Elías Calles, a strident atheist.[14] Mexican Jacobins, supported by Calles's central government, went beyond mere anticlericalism and engaged in antireligious campaigns to eradicated what they called "superstition" and "fanaticism", including desecration of religious objects, persecution of the clergy and anticlerical legislation.[10]

Calles applied the anti-clerical laws stringently throughout the country and added his own anti-clerical legislation. In June 1926, he signed the "Law for Reforming the Penal Code", known unofficially as the "Calles Law". This provided specific penalties for priests and individuals who violated the provisions of the 1917 Constitution. For instance, wearing clerical garb in public (i.e., outside Church buildings) earned a fine of 500 pesos (approximately 250 U.S. dollars at the time); a priest who criticized the government could be imprisoned for five years.[15] Some states enacted oppressive measures. Chihuahua, for example, enacted a law permitting only a single priest to serve the entire Catholic congregation of the state.[16] Calles seized church property, expelled all foreign priests, and closed the monasteries, convents and religious schools.[17]
...
The government did not abide by the terms of the truce – in violation of its terms, approximately 500 Cristero leaders and 5,000 other Cristeros were shot, frequently in their homes in front of their spouses and children.[22] Particularly offensive to Catholics after the supposed truce was Calles's insistence on a complete state monopoly on education, suppressing all Catholic education and introducing secular education in its place: "We must enter and take possession of the mind of childhood, the mind of youth."[22] The persecution was continued after the presidency of Calles by President Lázaro Cárdenas, an anti-Catholic socialist, and did not relent completely until 1940, when President Manuel Ávila Camacho, a practising Catholic, took office.[22]

The effects of the war on the Church were profound. Between 1926 and 1934 at least 40 priests were killed.[22] Where there were 4,500 priests serving the people before the rebellion, in 1934 there were only 334 priests licensed by the government to serve fifteen million people. The rest had been eliminated by emigration, expulsion and assassination.[22][23] By 1935, 17 states had no priest at all.[24]
More >>>

Again, those aren't some foreign invaders suppressing a conquered nation. That's a secular socialist government practically placing its fellow countrymen under a military occupation in an attempt to force its own vision of progress. And, by the way, it all began with the new constitution which proclaimed superiority of the secular state over the Church.

Christians should also understand and appreciate how this film has some relevance here in Canada as the Secular State seeks to impose itself on the religious education of children, without the consent of parents.

Catholics are finally beginning to understand that in order to win the Culture War, we must win the mythology.
More >>>

And that includes dispelling the common myths about moral superiority and non-violence of the "progressive" secular "humanist" ideologies.

It was one year ago when the court ruled against section 13 of the Human Rights Act. The very section that criminalized speech "likely" to "expose people to hatred or contempt". The one that was designed to protect minorities, but was mostly used by one bureaucrat who kept filing complaints as a hobby. The one that used to have a perfect 100% conviction rate until Marc Lemire finally managed to beat the system a year ago.

Yes, section 13 hasn't been operative for a year now. There have been no "human rights" complaints prosecuted. And yet it doesn't look like anyone really suffers because of that - except for the professional "race measurers" who need this industry of phony grievances and professional victimhood to keep their big fat paychecks.

It sounds weird, but, judging from the Sun News Network report, it actually happened to a home owner in Cambridge, ON. The city officials cited "health and safety concerns" to explain their actions, but it's hard to understand how removing the staircase (which, the city insisted, was "2 inches too narrow") and forcing the residents to use a wobbly ladder actually addresses safety concerns.

It's also hard to understand how exactly those missing 2 inches justifies breaking into a house without any arrest warrant or a court order or any other paper authorizing the home invasion. The city however was so confident of its righteousness that they even sent the home owner a bill. For $5800. For all the "hard word" they had to do. It's hard to believe that Sun Network News isn't making this up...

Asks a school trustee who has realized that while all Canadians are equal, some happen to be more equal than others:

SARNIA – A short assembly hosted by the Gay Straight Alliance in a Chatham-area high school “crossed the line” and should only be allowed if other minority groups can do the same, says a trustee with the Lambton Kent District School Board.

David Goldsmith said he has no difficulty with any group promoting an understanding between itself and other students, but he wants other groups to have the same right.

“I’m sure it was in the interest of diversity,” Goldsmith said at a school board meeting held in Sarnia Tuesday. “So, in the interest of diversity, when will Christian clubs be allowed to have an assembly?” he asked.
...
"The impression I received is that they felt this group had stepped outside the parameters of the Education Act, which says no group can attempt to indoctrinate other students in a public school," he said.
More >>>

I wonder if David Goldsmith has ever paid attention to the fact that T-shirts with anti-Christian slogans and images (those "bad religion", "down with the cross" or "Bible in the trash" T-shirts) are acceptable in most schools, while wearing a T-Shirt that says "be happy, not gay" may land one in trouble. And that's just one of many examples of the continuous marginalization of Christians in Canada. It's surprising that David Goldsmith only noticed it now.

It may surprise many of those clergymen, charity organizers and activists for whom "social justice" means focusing so narrowly on the material needs of society, that it leaves no room for the spiritual needs and values; but the word liberty appears sixteen times in the New Testament. Equality among men but twice: Matthew 20:12, pertaining to salvation in a parable which defends property rights; and 2 Corinthians 8:14. Make sure you remind them of that when they once again ask you to support a communist fraud masqueraded as charity.

The "social justice" folks better remember that even if some few passages of the Bible may be favorable to communism, the general spirit of its doctrines is, nevertheless, totally opposed to it:

Privately entrusting resources to St. Peter, in subservience to God, differs greatly from “robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul” through a distant bureaucratic apparatus inspired by the humanist god of power. The Bible never endorses involuntary socialism administered by secular governments.
...
Communism fails except as augmented by fear (and ultimately there too), because forging “New Socialist Man” remains forever beyond the state’s grasp. Only God can change men’s hearts. Our base instincts betray us. When we see someone slacking and still taking – we produce less. When we see others taking beyond their share – we take more too. Without private property and opportunities for profit through honest toil, living standards stagnate.

Any movement must deal with realities and thus superficial similarities with other systems will materialize, but properly understood, Marxism is the absolute denial of Christianity – precisely as Marx intended. Where Marxists seize power, Christians are always persecuted and atheism is enforced, usually at a steep cost.
More >>>

One of the most recent examples of the above is Brazil, where it quickly went from social justice to social engineering; where the very same religious organizations that originally supported the government's anti-poverty efforts are now being marginalized. Where the choice for many is now - conform or leave the country. Not for nothing did Bishop Fulton J. Sheen say that if the "social justice" crowd bothered to look for a patron saint - that would be Judas Iscariot.

Update: Pope to Social Justice Groups: Activity must be Competent and Transparent.

Even if there's still a long way to go, there are clear signs that the tide is turning:

1) Public Opinion

A majority of Americans surveyed in a recent Rasmussen poll, including a large percentage of those who identified themselves “pro-choice,” said they believe abortion is “morally wrong most of the time.” Last year, for the third consecutive time, Gallup found that more Americans accept the pro-life label, a result that led the polling firm to acknowledge “a real change in public opinion.”

One reason for this shift is the high-tech ultrasound machine that reaffirms what embryology textbooks have told us all along—that the unborn child is truly a human being. In a recent Washington Post editorial, Frances Kissling, former President of Catholics for Choice, advised abortion-rights advocates to shift strategies: “We can no longer pretend the fetus is invisible.” Yet few pro-choice activists seem to be listening to Kissling’s advice. They continue to cast themselves as the defenders of “women’s reproductive rights.” This worn-out strategy fails to resonate with a large number of Americans because it ignores the point of tension. The debate has moved on from “reproductive rights” to the more perplexing question: “What are the unborn?”
More >>>
H/t No Apologies

Here in Canada, the abortion debate is gaining momentum, whether the pro-aborts like it or not. The discontent with the current legal vacuum on abortion is growing and so is the grassroots effort to challenge the status quo. So, no matter how hard Harper tries to keep away from the abortion debate, he won't be able to block the debate on numerous pro-life wedge issues that could become the starting point towards bringing down abortion.

Joyce Green, president of the NB Catholic Women League talks about adoption, as a loving alternative to abortion.

Gerald Arsenault speaks on behalf of the NB Knights of Columbus:

Bishop Robert Harris explains the pro-life stance of the Catholic Church as he talks about each person's inherent right to be born, to see the light of day. There's a very nice surprise at the end :)

See also:
NB March For Life 2011 - Videos And Speeches - Part 1

NB March For Life 2011 - blog post

Our keynote speaker from Halifax, Julie Culshaw

NB March For Life 2011 - "Let Me Live" song

Opening speech by Elizabeth Crouchman, president of the New Brunswick Right to Life:

Sr. Cecile, the driving force behind the 40 Days for Life vigil in Moncton, shares her experience. Introduction speech by Peter Ryan, executive director of the NB Right to Life.

Sarah Hall, a pro-life student leader and a new mother, talks about reaching out to youth and advancing the pro-life cause on university campuses.

People of Bathurst didn't ask for an abortion clinic in their backyard. Ron Jessulat, a community organizer from Bathurst NB talks about the work they do to put an end to this wholesale slaughter of innocent unborn babies that takes place in their hospital.

See also:
NB March For Life 2011 - Videos And Speeches - Part 2

NB March For Life 2011 - blog post

Our keynote speaker from Halifax, Julie Culshaw

NB March For Life 2011 - "Let Me Live" song

A lovely pro-life song about unborn babies, performed by Gyles and Marilyn Baisley at the New Brunswick March for Life. I took the trouble to stick the Watch Me Grow posters on the video.

And let's not forget what Gyles suggested: next year when you come back - bring one person with you. Do this for 5 years - and we will stop abortion. That's what's going to change it one step at a time.

This year, we held our March a week after the National March for Life, so that people could attend both. There were about 300 of us - a typical turnout for the NB March (and, as Julie Culshaw noted - about 3 times the crowd they have in Halifax.) Our theme this year was: "A Child's First Right: Life."

The Legislature wasn't in session and most MLAs weren't even in Fredericton, so none of those who wanted to attend the March could be there; still 11 MLAs sent their messages of support. Thanks to the lack of politicians the rally at the Legislature was shorter, but no less informative. Our keynote speaker was Julie Culshaw, the organizer of the 40 Days for Life vigil in Halifax.

There were some encouraging news: the number of hospital abortions went down; there were 117 less of them in the past year. And the opposition to hospital abortions in Bathurst is growing. Hopefully the Chaleur hospital once again becomes a place that saves lives, not takes them away. Yet there's still a long way to go; there are still babies that perish in the hospitals in Moncton and Bathurst and in the abortion mill in Fredericton. Overall, about 27,000 New Brunswick babies have died since abortion became legal in 1969.

And this time we also had some special guests from the National Film Board. They were among those taking videos and they actually took their time to interview a few of us after the March. I saw them interviewing Julie Culshaw and then they interviewed... yours truly. We didn't have that much time, but at least I managed to give them some information from the pro-life prospective. The young girl who interviewed me said she had never heard about the link between abortion and breast cancer before. Well, hopefully she takes some time to look into it, because that's something women are never told by the proponents of the murderous "choice".

And hopefully, at least this time we can look forward for a decent coverage. It was sure encouraging that (unlike that G&M journalist last year) the NFB crew actually took their time to interview a few of us in the pro-life camp, so at least they have more information about the pro-life movement than those who keep clinging to their "anti-choice" cliche. So, while it's obvious that we're not going to get a Life Site News- style documentary, I believe that at least we can count on them not to resort to the usual tricks employed by the mainstream media, be that downplaying our numbers, ignoring our arguments or taking our words out of context.

P.S.
Here are a few videos of the March for Life by oldmaison333:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnOhZxrvg8E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXJbTEc9hKI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmlvpxNGC6k

Rev. Dr. S. Neville Gosman speaks at the Sussex Area Right to Life fundraiser. How do we respond when evil destroys the helpless?

Or at least they help reducing the costs associated with multiculturalism. Denmark has saved 6.7 billion euros.

Denmark's strict immigration laws have saved the country billions in benefits, a government report has claimed. The Integration Ministry report has now led to calls among right-wing populists to clamp down further on immigrants to increase the savings.
...
Pind was talking after the ministry's report -- initiated by the right-wing populist Danish People's Party (DPP) -- came to the conclusion that by tightening immigration laws, Denmark has saved €6.7 billion ($10 billion) over the last 10 years, money which otherwise would supposedly have been spent on social benefits or housing. According to the figures, migrants from non-Western countries who did manage to come to Denmark have cost the state €2.3 billion, while those from the West have actually contributed €295 million to government coffers.
More >>>
H/t Lumina

Now, I wonder, what are the numbers for Canada? Considering that under our current immigration programme a mere 17% of the principal applicants are selected through the points system and that many departments and programs almost openly discriminate against immigrants from the Western countries to make room for "humanitarian" cases, the numbers should be close to those of the UK, where the cost of multiculturalism amounts to £8.8 billion (~$15B).

Will the government get the message and start fixing our immigration system? Or will they choose to cut essential services instead (or to run deficits for longer time) rather than making unpopular decisions out of fear of losing the immigrant votes? Hopefully they take advantage of the long-awaited majority, stop worrying about the next election for a while and start thinking about the nation's future instead.

Update: According to the Fraser Institute report, immigration costs Canada $23 billion annually. So it's actually even worse than in the UK. Next time someone tells you that immigrants built Canada - remember that those were self-sufficient immigrants, that were willing and able to pay their own bills and to become part of the host society.

From SoCon or Bust blog:

To: CBC Ombudsman, Kirk Lapointe
...
Dear Mr. LaPointe,

On May 12, during the CBC’s nightly program “The National”, CBC reporter Laurie Graham reported that 5,000 people attended the March for Life on Parliament Hill. CBC’s online article repeated the falsehood which can be read here:
...
The reported number was a gross distortion of the truth, since the real number of participants exceeded over 15,000, as the analysis in this blog post makes evident:
...
As you can easily see, the CBC’s reporting is a gross misrepresentation of reality, and it once again calls into question the political slant of the CBC in not reporting the facts.
More >>>

Sign the petition. It's about time we demand the CBC to be honest in its reporting.

P.S. Apparently the government is preparing a new budget instead of the one that the opposition decided not to support. It should be unveiled in June. Hopefully they'll have the guts not to offer any extra funding to the CBC.

What is there in the NDP constitution that they have to hide it? Ezra Levant looks into the NDP's missing constitution. It turns out, the famous section of the preamble which condemns profit is just the tip of the iceberg. That there's no mention of freedom, no mention of democracy, instead there's plenty of mention of socialism and struggle, plenty of anti-western rhetoric, plenty of calls to nationalize what the NDP can't modify and control... No wonder they don't want you to read their constitution. But they sure want you to live it.

And here's something else on the newly elected NDP MPs from Quebec; those lucky ones that cared to show up at a nomination meeting when their friends were busy having fun:

Alexandre Boulerice, the NDP's new MP for Montreal's Rosemont-La Petite-Patrie riding, proudly confessed to QMI Agency he continues to campaign for Quebec Solidaire, the provincial leftist party that promotes independence.
...
Cree leader Romeo Saganash, the NDP MP for the northern Quebec riding of Abitibi-Baie-James-Nunavik-Eeyou, has also openly supported the sovereigntist cause, as has former union activist Claude Patry, the new NDP representative for the Jonquière-Alma riding.
...
"We have people from all the provincial parties on our team," he said, and added the NDP didn't choose candidates based on their position on the independence question.
More >>>

Could it happen that some of them eventually choose to cross the floor to the Bloc, so that the latter could regain its official party status? Or maybe we should then look forward for the NDP to invite the remaining Bloc MPs to join their caucus? If they no longer consider the independence question to be of any importance - then why not?

When you’re already as far left as a society can become, switching from the Bloc to the NDP is no great feat. You still get to promote blood-sports like abortion and euthanasia. You still get to pretend that marriage was an invention of religionists and that enabling and entitlement are the Canadian values that draw peaceful multiculturalists from around the world to our cod-forsaken shores.
More >>>

And going from Quebec Solidaire to the NDP is even easier.

Just 4 years ago, the CBC reported about "1500 anti-abortion protesters" gathering at the Parliament hill where they were greeted by "a handful of MPs, mostly - Conservatives, none of them - in cabinet". (Just to remind you, the 2007 National March for Life attracted about 7,000 participants.)

Well, now the "consensus media" is being challenged by the Sun News Network, so we finally have a decent coverage of the March for Life and of the abortion issue itself.

OTTAWA - The majority of Canadians believe there should be some restrictions on abortion, according to a poll conducted ahead of Thursday afternoon's annual March for Life on Parliament Hill.

The results fly in the face of the political consensus in Canada in which all major party leaders at the federal and provincial levels are committed to the status quo.

In Canada, there is no law on abortion and the procedure is funded with tax dollars through the health system, another issue where the country differs from their political masters.
...
Abacus surveyed 1,007 adult Canadians on April 28 and 29. The poll found 59% of Canadians believe there should be some restrictions on abortion as pregnancy proceeds.

More than one quarter of Canadians, 27%, said that human life should be protected from conception onwards, 21% said there should be protection after three months of pregnancy and 11% after six months. Only 22% agreed with the status quo which is no legal protection until a child is born.
More >>>

It's sure encouraging that this time we have at least one TV network that doesn't distance itself from the abortion debate. The article I quoted was first illustrated with a photo from the last year's March and I was delighted to see Sun News Network updating the picture just a couple hours after the 2011 March took place. While I haven't seen any reference to the actual number of participants (according to Life Site News and SoCon or Bust, there were over 15,000) - at least we have a TV network that doesn't try to downplay the numbers the way CBC does.

So, the abortion debate has hit the TV waves. What about the Parliament? We've heard Harper with his suggestion to change hearts rather than laws, but how can you change hearts if you are not allowed to tell the truth about what abortion truly is? Will Stephen Harper at least allow an exchange of opinions on the issue or will he keep worrying about those "hidden agenda" accusations?

As Harper could have learned from the recent debates, these accusations will follow him no matter how many times he commits to keep the status-quo. So he might as well stop kowtowing to the pro-aborts and bring the debate to the Parliament. There are more than enough pro-life measures that even some in the opposition could support - from gendercide abortions and the unborn victims of crime to the question of abortion funding. All it takes is just some courage and some leadership. And, of course, some respect to free speech.

P.S. Check out SoCon or Bust and the Life Site News for the extensive coverage of the March for Life in Ottawa. Here, in New Brunswick, we'll have our provincial March for Life next week, on Thursday, May 19.

Meanwhile, the 40 Days for Life Momentum webcast reports that 3 abortion facilities have recently closed their doors. Here's another great news right in time for the March for Life.

Is there a difference between Islam and Islamism? Geert Wilders believe it's the same thing:

Geert Wilders' refusal to deploy those three letters is the reason that the 47-year-old Dutch politician travels with bodyguards, and cannot sleep in the same house two nights in a row. For Mr. Wilders, the problem plaguing Western societies is Islam, full stop. Terrorism, tyranny, the subjugation of women -these are not perversions of Islam, as he sees it, but rather its very essence.

"The word 'Islamism' suggests that there is a moderate Islam and a non-moderate Islam," he told me during an interview in Toronto on Sunday. "And I believe that this is a distinction that doesn't exist. It's like the Prime Minister of Turkey [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan said, 'There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam, and that's it.' This is the Islam of the Koran."

"Now, you can certainly make a distinction among the people," he adds. "There are moderate Muslims -who are the majority in our Western societies -and non-moderate Muslims."

"But Islam itself has only one form. More >>>

Jonathan Kay is not the only one to find this somewhat controversial. Even Ezra Levant comes to the same conclusion as he interviews Geert Wilders on Sun News Network. While it's obvious that the challenges that Holland faces today are challenges that we will face tomorrow, Ezra says in his closing statement, that he can only go 80 or 90% of the way that Geert Wilders does. And yes, Geert's suggestions of forcing Muslim children into public education do sound awkward. After all - today it's the Muslim children and guess whose turn it will be tomorrow?

But meanwhile it's the Christian children that are being forced into state-run schools and even daycares. And so far, it's the islamists and their allies from the left that use nuisance law suits as way to intimidate outspoken people into silence, while taxpayer-funded institutions all of which should be dedicated to free speech, condemn, threaten or cancel events because they don't like the speakers. So, let's not be afraid of debating controversial subjects.

P.S. While the Blogger was down, Ezra Levant posted his full interview with Geert Wilders (and Brooke Goldstein). his full interview with Geert Wilders. Follow the link or just watch it on YouTube.

You don't have to be a Catholic, a Christian or a SoCon to understand that chemical trash (aka "the pill") has side effects. It's just common sense - when you tamper with natural biological functions of a human body - damage will be done. For the most skeptical - just listen to female co-workers (in their 20s or early 30s) complaining about their health (much more than some 60- and 70- year olds tend to) and eventually mentioning that it has a lot to do with their "birth control" (which they can neither change nor stop taking).

And here's yet another self-evident fact: some of those side effects end up being passed along to the children.

The widespread use of oral contraceptives is a troubling issue because these types of drugs devastate beneficial bacterial flora in the gut leaving it vulnerable to colonization and dominance from pathogenic strains such as Candida Albicans, Streptococci and Staphylococci among others. By the time a woman who has used oral contraceptives is ready to have children, a severe case of gut dysbiosis has more than likely taken hold….
...
Children with imbalanced gut flora are particularly predisposed to autoimmune disorders in the form of allergies, asthma, and eczema. In more severe cases of gut dysbiosis, learning disabilities manifest such as ADHD, ADD, autism, dyslexia, dyspraxia and others.
More >>>
H/t Jill Stanek

What else could we expect? You pollute the environment in which the child develops in the first months of his existence - of course all that pollution will affect his development. Again, it's just self-evident common sense.

It's obvious, that when the education is state-run and when the teachers have to be members of a union, there will be more than enough of them willing to put the union interests first. In light of the demise of the Catholic education system in Ontario, it's not surprising that, in addition to monopolizing their point of view on social issues and morality in public schools, socialists want to step up anti-capitalist indoctrination as well:

Saturday morning on May 7, the University of Toronto's Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) will play host to a teachers' conference aiming to "mobilize teachers to resist neo-liberalism."

A group that calls itself Educators for Peace and Justice is presenting a conference titled "The Sanctuary Schools Forum" which claims, "Our schools, and especially our students and their parents, are increasingly under attack.
More >>>

In reality it's the parental rights that are under attack, as the governments step up efforts to ensure that no child escapes state-mandated indoctrination. It's not enough that Quebec's lecture in "isms" (aka "Ethics and Religious Culture") is obligatory to all children, regardless of the school they attend (if any); that parents who disagree have to go all the way to the Supreme Court. But the courts now have the right to force parents to bring their children back to public schools. Moreover - they can actually force children that are under the mandatory school age into a daycare. (That very same 50-cent-a-day state-run daycare, of course.)

This saga began late 2009 when this family was reported to Youth Protection Services, likely by their school board. They were first taken to court early in 2010. In a subsequent court appearance, their children were ordered to attend the local public school as a “temporary protection measure”. There followed multiple legal procedures and four days of trial, followed by a four-month wait for the judge’s decision, all of which took their toll on this family.

After refusing to hear our expert witness, as well as evidence on the value of homeschooling versus public school, the court ordered that the children attend the local public school. They went on to order that the younger children attend daycare, even though they are not yet of compulsory school age.
More >>>

Again, no surprises here. Get them while they're young - it's a known marketing trick and quite an effective one too. As for the rights of the parents - heck, in just ten days we may actually find out that opting out from the state-imposed propaganda is no longer a right...

Not so long ago, Bell dropped EWTN from its satellite network. Now, they're trying to gouge Sun News Network on carriage fees:

OTTAWA - The operators of Sun News Network filed a complaint Friday with Canada’s broadcast regulator against Bell Canada.

The complaint alleges Bell gave the all-news networks it owns — CTV News Channel, CP24, and Business News Network — “undue preference” and put the fledgling Sun News Network at “undue disadvantage” in their carriage fee disagreement.
...
The complaint filed with the CRTC says even though Sun News asked to be paid a carriage fee that is less than what Bell’s all-news outlets charge, Bell still considered the fee excessive.

“I don’t know how one can come up and say that what we’re asking for is excessive if it is below, for instance, CP24,” says Lavoie. “I am not criticizing the work that CP24 is doing, but it doesn’t have a fraction of the infrastructure that we have in place. It’s not at all the same level of services that are offered.”
More >>>
H/t SoCon or Bust

And, here's another interesting report - by Ezra Levant, about how the mainstream media (or the "think-alike" media, to be precise) plays its own politics, runs its own election campaign with its own rules. As if we had a political party known as The Media Party:

The film is based off a story called "A Letter from an Aborted Child," which had been used for nearly 10 years by Father Stephen Lesniewski for use to show women in a time of indecision. He estimates that over 500 babies have been saved because of his efforts in utilizing the aforementioned piece. Upon its' great success, Fr. Stephen decided to have a film produced with the hope that the overall message would reach an even larger audience.
...
To Be Born is about a young woman faced with an unplanned pregnancy that seeks to have an abortion. In the midst of the procedure, she finds herself in a regrettable situation when she hears her unborn daughter begin to describe the chilling details of what is happening to her.
(To Be Born.com)
H/t Jill Stanek

For the umpteenth time - it's the baby's life we're talking about.

If we want to stop being marginalized; if we are fed up with having to bite the bullet and vote for the lesser evil every time there is an election - we better step up efforts:

Many Christians believe that the Church has been asleep while other, more sinister values and principles have slowly crept into some of the highest places of governance in the nation. Some believe the Church has suffered from a spiritual stupor that has left them politically impotent and, according to the polls, basically irrelevant to Canada’s future. Does the Church have a role in helping reshape the nation’s future? Can it rise from silence to become a voice again? What does engagement look like?

If it is to rise, it must reject a faulty theology. Unfortunately, for generations Christians have been put to sleep in the pew by ministers who have bought into an indifferent and impotent message. Regardless of their social standing on the totem pole of influence, I believe that ministers still have a key role to play in rousing citizens to wake up, get up, and stand up for people and positions that will make a difference.

To have any effect at all, Christians have to stop functioning as though “separation of Church and province” really means the “separation of righteousness and nation.” The early Confederation Fathers did not believe that. They believed that Biblical principles established the foundation for righteousness in our nation.Many founding fathers were people of prayer and carried high levels of Biblical conviction. The scripture references etched into the architecture of our parliament buildings attest to that fact. They say that Gothic architecture was “engineered for heaven… intentionally drawing our eyes upward as if in a posture of worship…humbling man and glorifying God.”
More >>>

In other words - if we don't promote our values, who will? And no, we better not sit back and count on the Conservatives to do all the dirty work and to deliver all the desired legislation on a silver platter.

(While we were preoccupied with the election campaign...)

Linda Gibbons, a peaceful pro-life witness, who has been arrested more than 20 times for ignoring the "temporary" (17 year old) "bubble zone" injunction and who has spent almost 2.5 years in jail since her last arrest - for the very same crime, will have her case going all the way to the Supreme court.

The Supreme Court will consider the question of whether the Crown can use the criminal courts to enforce orders emanating from civil or family proceedings. Gibbons’s lawyer Daniel Santoro expects the Supreme Court to hear the case this Fall. Santoro told the Catholic Register that, “if we’re right, it won’t be possible (to charge Gibbons or others) anymore.”
More >>>

Will the Supreme court be eager to address the injustice or would they rather let the sleeping dog lie? We shall wait and see. But hopefully, they'll make the right decision and remind the law enforcement that they better learn to distinguish between a group of aggressive hoodlums with stones, metal rods, knives and cans of spray paint and peaceful witnesses with nothing but rosaries or brochures or plastic fetus dolls in hand.

Phew, that was close! Just a few days ago, political analysts were predicting an NDP-led coalition outflanking the Conservatives, as the Tory lead started to erode. Now at least we can take a deep breath. Not only the Conservatives stayed in power - they finally have a majority; finally, our Conservative government, has been given a chance to govern as real Conservatives. Hopefully they don't blow that chance.

Looking at the broader picture - this is 1993 upside down. The 1993 election gave us the Bloc Quebecois as the official opposition - this one reduced the Block back to a handful of independent MPs it started from. (You have to have 12 seats to have an official party status in the Parliament.) Back in 1993 the right-of-center vote split in half, with the larger part choosing to abandon the traditional, mainstream, center-leaning party for a stronger, more vibrant, straightforward, hard-line challenger, which then greatly outpaced the used to be front-runner. Now we had the same thing happening on the left - the Liberals went down (although not all the way to 2 seats) and the NDP surged ahead to the official opposition status...

...And the Conservatives won a majority!!! I still can't believe this has actually happened; that I won't wake up tomorrow just to realize that this was all a dream... 165 or so seats - the threehundredeight.com regarded this as a ceiling, as a best case scenario that was extremely unlikely to happen - and it suddenly happened.

Or maybe not so suddenly? Those last 6-7 weeks, they were just too crazy. The Conservatives tried to avoid an election at all costs - in the end, they won a majority. The opposition was eager to bring down the government; they didn't even wait for the budget vote, teaming up together to pass their "contempt" motion. As result, the Block got obliterated, the Liberals suffered their worst defeat since Confederation and the NDP, in spite of more seats and the official opposition status, can no longer hold the government by the throat as they used to...

What a crazy shuffle. The more the Liberals tried to position themselves as NDP-lite, the more left-leaning voters chose to go for the real deal. The more Duceppe was yelling about Harper's hidden agenda (hidden so well that nobody can find it now,) the more Quebecers realized that there isn't much of a difference between their local fleur-de-lis-tinted socialists and just ordinary, mainstream socialists. As result, Canada's political landscape now resembles that of Manitoba or Saskatchewan, where the major players are the Conservatives and the NDP with the Liberals being nothing but a minor party of a few undecided centrists.

Ironically, the orange crush ate up about half of Quebec's Conservative caucus. Yes, believe it or not, not only the Conservatives were able to win majority with little (if any) help from Quebec, but they also managed to lose some of the nastiest "red Tories" on the way. I'm talking about those three that voted against the Unborn Victims of Crime Act - Sylvie Boucher, Josée Verner and probably the most socially perverse, pro-abortion, anti-family Conservative MP - Lawrence Cannon. Adieu, unholy trio, the Conservative caucus will be much better off without you.

And obviously, Canada will be much better off without all that blackmailing from the opposition; without those demands to accept their agenda - or else; without having this constant threat of a coalition coup or yet another early election hanging like a sword of Damocles. Those looking forward for a re-vote will have to wait all the way until October 19, 2015.

P.S. Here's another historical parallel - with the Social Credit. That too was a quasi-socialist, Quebec nationalist party. (Or, to be precise, that's what it had become by late 1970s.) They too tried to bargain government survival in exchange for more money to Quebec. They too decided that an early election (just months after the previous one) would be better than holding their appetite. And they too - suffered a crushing defeat in the following election, losing all their remaining seats. (By 1979, Social Credit had only 6 of them left.) A defeat from which they never recovered.

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Monday, May 30, 2011

Sunday, May 29, 2011

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Friday, May 27, 2011

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Sunday, May 22, 2011

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Friday, May 20, 2011

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Monday, May 16, 2011

Saturday, May 14, 2011

Friday, May 13, 2011

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Monday, May 9, 2011

Sunday, May 8, 2011

Saturday, May 7, 2011

Friday, May 6, 2011

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Monday, May 2, 2011