Thursday, March 31, 2011

CBC's "Vote Compass" And "Hard Scientific Evidence"

The CBC's voter quiz tool known as "Vote Compass" has already been noted for its Liberal bias. Not just the bloggers, but even some in the mainstream media have noticed that the quiz is flawed and that way too many people who take the test discover that they happen to be "closest to the Liberal Party". The quiz also suggests that the respondents are "and furthest from the NDP", but, judging from the map that visualizes Canada's political spectrum, it's the Conservatives (whom the designers have placed in the far right fiscally and socially,) that are the furthest from everyone.

Finally, voters are invited to complete another questionnaire, to share their attitude towards politics and politicians and to answer a few more questions - like this one:
It really bothers me that hard scientific evidence isn't shaping public policy to the degree it should be.
Who wouldn't agree with that? But wait. When the CBC mentions "hard scientific evidence", what do you think they mean? Exactly! They mean Al Gore's "inconvenient truth" and the IPCC's "settled science". So what if there's more than enough evidence that global warming is a scam, that it's all about money, power and indoctrination, rather than about "hard scientific evidence". For them the science is settled, period.

So if you agree with their question - they'll take it that you agree with the climate change myth, agree with Kyoto, agree with carbon tax and all those other "green" policies which the left claims are based on "hard scientific evidence". If you answer "disagree" - then you disagree with science, you want public policy to be shaped by ideology (or religion) rather than by hard scientific evidence; then you're a denier, a reactionary, a Bible-trumper... Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Of course, one can answer "neither agree nor disagree" (and likely be told that he's "closest to the Liberal Party, and furthest from the NDP"...) but there is a better option - just close your browser. And remember that expecting an honest unbiased reporting from the CBC is the same as expecting to find a golden sovereign on the sidewalk. If the Conservatives return to Parliament with a majority and yet fail to privatize the CBC - that will be even worse a mistake than all their deficits put together.

Update: Ezra Levant weighs in on the CBC and the "Vote Compass":
Not surprisingly, the CBC has stonewalled requests to release their formula.

Why the secrecy? CBC spokesman Jeff Keay said there is no bias, "as far as we know." What does that mean? Has Keay even seen the formula? Whose word is he taking that it's fair?

Perhaps he's taking the word of Peter Loewen, the "director of analytics" for the Vote Compass. Loewen just happens to have been a policy adviser for Michael Ignatieff's 2006 Liberal leadership campaign.

No bias?
Straight and to the point.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

"Coalition" - It's Not The Name That Matters

Ezra Levant explains why Ignatieff's pledge not to form a coalition with the NDP and the Bloc should not be trusted:
Because even if Ignatieff loses the election (as early polls suggest), he doesn’t need a coalition to seize power. He can do what the Liberals and NDP did immediately after the 1985 provincial election in Ontario: Just grab power with an immediate non-confidence vote. No coalition needed, to hell with the voters.
They didn’t make a formal coalition. A coalition is a specific deal where cabinet seats are divided up and more than one party becomes an integral part of the government.

The Liberals and NDP just agreed that, as soon as Ontario’s legislature met, they’d join forces to vote non-confidence in the Conservatives and propose the Liberals should rule with the NDP’s support.
It’s clearly what Ignatieff — with his lieutenant, the same Bob Rae — is plotting to do again. On the first day of the campaign, Ignatieff had a disastrous press scrum where he repeatedly refused to rule out forming a coalition.

Even the left-leaning Toronto Star and CBC weren’t buying Ignatieff’s painful ambiguity on the subject.
Coalition or no coalition? That’s a lawyer’s trick; it’s a diversion. The real question is whether Ignatieff and the other parties will immediately vote non-confidence in a Tory minority right after an election. What that deal is called is not the issue.
That's why I hope we finally get a Conservative majority. Not to mention that it's about time for the Conservatives to be given an opportunity to be Conservatives, to be able to lead the country in the right direction without having to appease the opposition every time there's a confidence vote. Canada has already paid dearly for those 10-11 seats the government was lacking. It's time to give them the opportunity to repair the damage.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

"Human Rights" Commissions - Half-A-Century Of Power Abuse

Supporters of the "human rights" racket celebrate 50th anniversary of the Ontario freedom-snatching committee. To anyone else, not immune from being targeted by those Orwellian tribunals where "rules of evidence are not as stringent", this means nothing but half-a-century of escalating abuse of power:
In this province's oppressive nanny state, we still have the right to free speech -- so long as what you're saying is rubber-stamped by OHRC "commissar" (Steyn's word, not mine) Barbara Hall.

Last year Hall commented on a Maclean's article by Steyn, "The future belongs to Islam." Responding to a complaint by the Canadian Islamic Congress, Hall stated, correctly, the OHRC has no jurisdiction to hear the case. Then she went on to condemn Steyn and Maclean's for Islamophobia.

Steyn was as scathing as ever when he spoke to a committee on government agencies here on Monday.

He described some recent ludicrous OHRC rulings as, "incompatible with a free society."

Of course he is right. And once you allow the Halls of the world to define the limits of freedom of speech, you are heading down a slippery slope. It is vigourous debate that makes a free and civilized society, not timid censorship.
The author of the above article suggests that the committees could still be used to "mediate in cases where people are refused accommodation...". But can we really rely on a mediation of an establishment where the rules of evidence don't apply, where implied grievances take precedence over facts, where the defendant is presumed guilty until found innocent? Can we really expect their mediation to be fair and unbiased?

And the other way around - if we're talking about real discrimination, not mere hurt feelings, why can't such a case be mediated in the court of law? I'm not saying that our courts are perfect, but, compared to the "human rights" commissions, the courts are far more unbiased, and offer far more respect to one's right to a fair trial.

Monday, March 28, 2011

Abortion: Still #1 Cause Of Death In Canada

H/t Island Breezes:

On Jan. 29, the National Post ran a full-page feature article on the causes of death in Canada. Most of it was a graphic presentation, using proportionate-sized circles, showing how people died in 1967 and 2007. The National Post article stated, “Death is life’s one and only inevitable event, and it comes in many ways – officially, there are 999 causes.” However, as Interim reader and advertiser, Cambridge lawyer Paul Vandervet wrote to them in an unpublished letter to the editor, it did not include abortions. So there are 1,000 ways to die and the illustration and story did not include the number one cause of death: abortion.
Meanwhile, as the election campaign goes on, we once again have a choice between the Prime Minister who wants to avoid the abortion debate by any means possible and the opposition that regards unrestricted abortion as a "human right", that voted to reaffirm their support for the wholesale slaughter of innocent unborn babies as recently as a year ago and that is led by a party whose (luckily former) leader proposed to enshrine unrestricted abortion in the Charter. It's a nasty choice and the situation isn't going to get any better unless we work hard to turn the tide.

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Early Election - An Opportunity Missed

The UK is going to have a referendum on voting reform coinciding with local elections. We could have had a referendum on directly elected Senate; in the worst case, we could have both questions (whether the Senate should be elected and whether it should be abolished) put on the ballot. Well, it's too late for "could-have"s now.

As for the election itself - the best outcome in my opinion would be a Conservative minority with the CHP holding the balance of power. That is extremely unlikely to happen and definitely not because of the lack of momentum on the Conservative side. (Here's yet another missed opportunity.) So I hope for the second best outcome - which is the Conservative majority. Darn, these lacking 10-11 seats have cost Canada some $10B each. It would be great however if the CHP could still elect at least 1 candidate for a change. After all, the Conservatives do need someone to remind them their traditional voting base should not be taken for granted.

P.S. Here's an interesting video on Michael Ignatieff: Does he truly come from a family of penniless working class immigrants?
Well, if you look at it, £25,000 of the early 1920s may worth some $2M in today's money, but apparently it could still be referred to as "nothing in their pocket" compared to what Ignatieffs used to have back in tsarist Russia. I only have one question: if Ignatieff realizes that his family lost everything when the commies took over Russia in 1917, why does he promote creeping socialism so vigorously here in Canada?

Saturday, March 26, 2011

Say No To "Earth Hour"! Lights On Full Power!

Let's make it an hour without envirofascist nagging. Let's say no to all those who want us to sit in the darkness - be that for an hour or for the rest of our lives:
For those who aren't part of Generation X, Good is a Vancouver pop star, scheduled to come out with a new album later this month. But Monday on his Facebook page, he made a stunning announcement: He is against electricity.
"The world functioned prior to the advent of power," he announced. "In fact, it did so incredibly well for millennia."
Good's website's home page is a gorgeous photo of a concert stage -- bathed in dazzling spotlights. His blog details the dozens of cities he has travelled to for concerts. The man has the carbon footprint of a small village. Yet he condemns electrical power.
Before electricity, mankind's state of affairs was bleak. Life expectancy 200 years ago was just 35. Good is 39 years old and should think about that.

Life wasn't just shorter. It was brutal, and grindingly poor. It's not hard to imagine. Just look at those parts of the world today without power -- over a billion people have to cook their dinners on an open flame. There's not a lot of room for pop music in the world's most excruciatingly poor countries. They're too busy trying to survive.
No wonder those eco crooks are so eager to indoctrinate toddlers with their ideology. Anyone who is capable of thinking for himself will notice the inconsistency and outright falsehood in what these treehuggers preach. So, instead of sitting in the darkness and worshiping gaia, let's turn on all the lights and celebrate freedom.

Friday, March 25, 2011

International Day of the Unborn Child

Please pause for a moment to remember the innocent babies that weren't given a change to take their first breath.
At the Supreme Convention held in August, 2002, a resolution was passed proclaiming The Feast of the Annunciation, March 25, to be the International Day of the Unborn Child, Orderwide. Our Supreme Knight said: “May this day be the occasion for all of us to witness to the sanctity of God’s great gift of life and to further resolve to protect and defend it. These are times of violence and of armies. The Knights of Columbus is the size of a great army, and we must not flee from the great conflict that is around us.”
If you are in Ottawa - there's a prayer vigil going on at the abortuary (65 Bank St. in Ottawa). Similar vigils are being held in a few other locations around the world. But even if there's no vigil in your town - just pause for a minute and say a prayer - for the unborn children that perish and for those who fight for their rights. The pro-abort side is stepping up violence and vandalism against those who dare to tell the truth about what abortion is and what it does to women. Every act of support, even a minuscule one is greatly appreciated.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Call To Action For New Brunswick Christian Business Owner

ChristianGovernance Report – March 18, 2011:
A Christian business owner in New Brunswick needs your support. She has become the latest victim of the homosexualist agenda. From the brief glimpse we have into her testimony due to the incident that has thrust her into the spotlight, she appears to be a God-fearing, hard-working business owner. She is a florist who refused to provide her services to the fake marriage ceremony of two lesbians. Initial reports do not indicate the filing of any human rights complaints against her, though it will be a striking anomaly if this does not happen. Christians in similar situations have been the recipients of hate, malicious attacks, intimidation and loss of business. Click here and here for two such examples. As the article below indicates, homosexualists are planning a protest for Saturday (tomorrow). They won’t let this incident die; it’s too much to expect such tolerance from Canada’s politically enabled homosexualist movement.
The Moncton homosexual community was quick to organize a "peaceful" protest to harass Kim Evans of Petals and Promises Wedding Flowers at her own home. The CBC, as it always does, sided with the anti-family crowd, depicting the perverse couple as victims of a narrow-minded bigoted Christian fanatic and failing to disclose the fact that M. B. Leduc who blew this story out of proportion is a little more than just an event planner. Yet, there were still a few courageous Christians that came to support Kim Evans in this hour of hardship. Please consider joining them.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

New Brunswick Budget - It Could Have Been Worse

The most disappointing part is that the final round of personal income tax cuts has been suspended until further notice. At the same time - the government merely froze the tax rates at their current level; even the upper tax bracket, about which the government was clear, was returned to 14.3% (which is the last year's rate,) and not all the way back to 17.95%. Moreover - large and small businesses could still look forward to save 9-10% on their provincial income tax bill. General business tax rate goes down to 10% in July (but the final cut to 8% is suspended) and there's a new tax cut for small businesses - from 5% to 4.5%, to take place next January.

In return the government is boosting taxes on tobacco and gasoline, practically undoing the gas tax cut, implemented by Shawn Graham's government in 2006. Looks like this has become a tradition - once a new government comes to power, it cancels some of the tax cuts brought in by its predecessors. After all, the provincial Liberals too, started by undoing some of the Bernard Lord's tax cuts. The difference is that, unlike the Liberals 4 years ago, the PCs chose to address the budget crunch by raising consumption taxes and abating income taxes and not the other way around. And, since David Alward's government doesn't have to appease the opposition to get the budget passed, we can still look forward for the suspended tax cuts to be implemented sooner or later; maybe - in time for the 2014 election.

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Budget 2011 - A Compromise That Didn't Work

This was a typical Conservative minority budget - no significant spending cuts, no across the board tax reductions, except for the small targeted tax breaks here and there. A slightly better performance of the Canadian economy allowed the governing party to look forward for returning to balanced budgets a year earlier than originally predicted, but that's as far as it went. The government didn't rush with deficit reduction and didn't try to attach any allegedly controversial items, such as axing subsidies to political parties. In spite of the favorable public opinion polls, the Conservatives clearly weren't going to orchestrate their own defeat. The opposition, however, is planning to do that for them:
Mr. Flaherty’s failure was not due to lack of effort on his part. He took out a line of credit to buy Mr. Layton the most shiny engagement band in the shop. He seemed to think that by including a raft of new spending measures in the budget specifically geared to winning NDP support, he might persuade Mr. Layton to prop up the Conservative government. After all, the thinking went, the NDP leader is still recovering from hip surgery and public opinion polls suggest his party will lose MPs if an election were held now.

But such rational thinking discounted the NDP’s irrational hatred for the Conservative Party. In the event, no amount of cajolery or political seduction could persuade Mr. Layton that it was worth lining up alongside Mr. Flaherty and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
The Finance Minister attempted a fine balancing act, between new spending to win the support of the opposition on one hand, and his desire to return to budgetary surplus in four years. He appears to have pulled it off — if you buy the idea that this government is capable of finding savings of $17—billion by 2015/16. The Conservatives announced that they will implement an operating review across the whole of government over the next 12 months, aimed at cutting $4—billion a year from its $80—billion direct program spending budget.
In spite of all these efforts to appease the left, it looks like the days of the 40th Parliament are numbered. Oh well... Maybe that's for the better. Maybe, after the game of big tic tac toe in May, we'll finally have a government that is more concerned about serving the nation, than about preventing the opposition from voting it down at first occasion. (Those missing 11 seats have already cost us around $10 billion each.)

Meanwhile we get to keep the upcoming final round of the business tax cuts (legislated in 2007 or '08, not without help of the very same opposition that wants it cancelled now) and, so far it looks like the Feds are not planning to match the QPP premium hike, that was recently proposed in Quebec. Yes, Quebec government is planning to gradually increase the QPP premiums - to 5.4% (10.8% for the self-employed) in 2016. (That's exactly three times the original premium rate!) Up until now, QPP had the same premium rates as the CPP, so I was worried that the budget might include the announcement of a similar CPP premium hike. This apparently won't happen. And, to make sure it won't, we better make the right choice at the polls 6 or 7 weeks from now.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Working Longer Only Way To Keep Pensions Afloat

If you think that expanding the CPP is the panacea - think again:
Making people work longer is the only way governments can keep pension systems going without cutting benefits to the point of driving the elderly into poverty, the OECD think tank said on Thursday.

As aging populations strain retirement coffers, countries around the world will have to raise retirement ages despite deep-rooted public opposition, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said in a report.

"Working longer, even if it is very hard for people who don't want to, is the least painful option," the OECD's head of social policy, Monika Queisser, told journalists, noting efforts so far to prune back benefits had not been enough.
By the way, that already happens here in Canada. The new rules that are to be phased in between 2011 and 2016, offer more incentives to postpone retirement to the age of 70, (the maximum bonus for late retirement increases from 30% to 42%,) while further reducing the benefits of those choosing to start drawing at the first opportunity (they'll only get 64% of the benefit, instead of 70%). Also, should a CPP recipient choose to return to the job market - he'll once again have to contribute to the plan - in exchange for slightly higher benefits.

One way or another - they need you to work longer, so that you keep contributing to the plan, rather than start drawing from it. What else could they do, considering that they've already boosted the premiums a whooping 175%? Raise the benefits even further? Let's not forget - the low- and middle-income earners will be the hardest hit. Make them pay 6, 7, 8 or even 10% (double that rate for the self-employed) on top of the lowest income tax bracket (20-26% depending on the province,) and what will they have left for basic living expenses? Being able to retire at 65 at government expense is great, but when even those below the poverty line have to pay 30-35 cents on every extra dollar they make, many may not even make it to that age.

So, there's no choice - work longer and don't forget to build-up some independent retirement savings. And if you don't like that idea - how about having a few more children? Let's not forget - the CPP was implemented during the last years of the "baby boom". Only then the society could reasonably hope that there would always be enough young men in the workforce to sustain a pay-as-you-go defined benefit public retirement plan.

Saturday, March 19, 2011

Freedom From Discrimination Doesn't Mean You Can't Say No To A Customer

The decision of a Moncton area flower shop owner not to accommodate a perverse couple has reignated the debate:
A peaceful protest is planned for this afternoon outside a Riverview flower shop that recently refused service to a same-sex couple due to the shop owner's religious beliefs.

A debate has raged on social networking sites and throughout Metro Moncton in the last few days, with one side saying the now-married couple was clearly discriminated against while the other says the shop owner should be allowed to practise her religious beliefs and run her business how she wishes.

Attempts to reach the owner of Petals & Promises Wedding Flowers, Kimberly Evans, were unsuccessful yesterday, and the couple in question has declined to speak to media since the news became public. Attempts to reach the couple's wedding planner, who spoke about the issue earlier in the week, were also unsuccessful.
She says she respects everyone's right to religious freedom so long as it doesn't impede the rights of others, and she feels that anyone getting into business should realize they can't close their doors to a certain segment of the population.

The New Brunswick Human Rights Act prohibits anyone doing business in the province from refusing service to customers based on their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability and a number of other criteria.
That's the problem with the "human rights" legislation (in New Brunswick as well as in any other jurisdiction, including the Federal Human Rights Act) that it makes no difference between freedom from discrimination and the implied freedom to rub one's lifestyle in the others' faces. It sees no difference between outright discrimination (such as "no homosexuals allowed" sign at the door) and the person's fundamental right to say "no" to something he doesn't agree with - be that "no, I'm not printing this" or "no, I'm not putting this label on a bouquet". Just like a baker has the right to refuse to put a swastika flag on a cake, a florist has the right to refuse to put a homosexualist banner on a wreath. Saying no to a customer is not discrimination.

Friday, March 18, 2011

Pro-Abort Violence - All The Way To Bombs

As if sporadic assaults on vigil keepers wasn't enough:
March 18, 2011 ( - A homemade “bomb” akin to a Molotov cocktail was thrown at an elderly pro-life activist during a 40 Days for Life prayer vigil yesterday, March 17. The attack took place at around 6:15 p.m., near the All Family Health Care abortion center in Kalispell, Montana, according to the Thomas More Society (TMS)

According to Karen Trierweiler, coordinator of the 40 Days prayer vigils in Kalispell, the device was thrown at one of the vigil participants, an elderly retired woman, by an unidentified assailant as she walked on the public sidewalk near the abortion facility.

The victim did not see the thrower, nor did she see the device before it exploded on the sidewalk behind her, making a loud popping noise as it burst into flame. The victim was unhurt.
I could imagine the uproar if a similar stuff was thrown at the abortion facility. But don't expect the pro-abort violence to make headlines in the mainstream media. If anything, the media will happily portray the pro-aborts as "fighters" for "women's choice". Even if for many, this "choice" means coercion, trauma, despair:
March 15, 2011 ( - A former winner on Britain’s version of the reality show Big Brother has opened up about her abortion experience six years ago, revealing how she was shattered after her boyfriend pressured her to abort her baby at 3 months gestation. She warned others to “not have an abortion for any man.”
“He waited until I was three months gone to let me know he didn’t want it,” said Gibson. “I even had baby names picked and he turned around and told me that he didn’t want our child and that I should get rid of it.”

Gibson, now 26, admitted, “I’ve regretted my abortion ever since.” “I wept for hours. I knew straight away that it was a mistake,” she recalled.
But don't tell that to all the "planned parenthood" lackeys out there. They're ready to burn you alive for merely telling the truth.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Pro-Aborts Assault Vigil Keeper, Try To Steal Banner

When the pro-aborts run out of arguments... well, you know the rest:
MONTREAL, Thu Mar 17, 2011 ( - Earlier this week, one of the organizers of Montreal’s 40 Days for Life campaign in front of the Morgentaler abortion clinic was physically attacked by a young woman who the pro-lifer described as being “obviously upset at our presence.”
“A young lady in her late teens accompanied by a neatly bearded young twenty-something was obviously upset at our presence. She was the more articulate of the two, demanding that we close down our site,” he related.
As the young woman attempted to walk away with the rolled up banner, Jenkins said he tried to prevent her from taking it, at which point she punched him with such force that he ended up on the ground.

“I grabbed one end without letting go,” he said. “She tried to wrestle it from me, threatened to punch me, and did so. Somehow I ended up with the banner beneath me on the ground. At this point she and the young man left.”
Yes, the pro-aborts are obviously upset with the 40 Days for Life vigil. They don't like being reminded, that abortion is not just "between the woman and her doctor", that there's the baby's life at stake. But we're not going give in just because the pro-aborts are upset:
If anyone thinks that physical violence will discourage us, they are sorely mistaken. In fact, I suggest to all pro-lifers that if anyone tries to discourage you from any kind of pro-life activism, just promise the person making the threat that you will only do more activism if they persist in their attempts to dissuade you.

We will not be silenced.

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Canada's Multicultural Trap

A country under siege - that's how Christine Williams titled his article. And it's somewhat hard to argue with that:
The Multicultural Act, enshrined under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, has empowered courts with sweeping interpretive powers at the highest levels of decision making. The court's mandate becomes balancing individual rights with that of multicultural rights -- a task which has increasing lead to socio-political upheavals. For example, what constitutes hate speech and so-called propaganda is left to Judges to decide. These Judges are heavily under the influence of political correctness to appease special interest groups that not only drive their own agendas, but which are often quick to levy accusations of racism and intolerance -- the curse words of this era. The absolute right to free speech—a prized tenet of democracy—is in effect dissolved; this erosion bears direct significance in the face of growing Islamism.
The Canadian high profile cases of human rights lawyer Ezra Levant and political commentator Mark Steyn highlight this. Levant—who was then publisher of the Western Standard-- republished the controversial Danish cartoons depicting Mohammed in 2006. Syed Soharwardy of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada and the Edmonton Council of Muslim Communities subsequently lodged a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission. Similarly, political writer Mark Steyn and Maclean's magazine were dragged to the B.C. Human Rights Commission for a so-called islamophobic article in that publication entitled: "The Future Belongs to Islam". This too stemmed from a complaint filed by a Muslim group: the Canadian Islamic Congress.
The recent scandal is just yet another example. Justin Trudeau blasted the Conservatives for using the term "barbaric" to describe such practices as honor killings and female circumcision. Michael Ignatieff sided with him claiming there's no such thing as "honor killing". The latter is the leader of the opposition, who is ready to campaign for the nation's top job. The former is viewed as his eventual successor. We can only hope that these guys are kept on the opposition benches for a little longer - until it becomes clear that multiculturalists do newcomers no favors when they soft-pedal their denunciation of customs that cannot be tolerated in civilized nations.

P.S. If Ignatieff believes that "there's no such thing as an honor killing, there's only killing and it's a crime everywhere", will he ever agree that there's no such thing as "hate crime" that there's only crime which should be prosecuted for what it is and not for what some believe it's supposed to mean? Somehow I doubt it.

Monday, March 14, 2011

Baby Joseph Transferred To U.S. Hospital

He may not have much time to live, but at least he won't be pulled off life support by hospital officials who believed that their diagnosis should have been the final one; who not only refused to help the baby, but fiercely opposed any attempts to have the baby transferred to a hospital where help could be offered:
Since October, Joseph has been battling a severe neurological condition. Doctors at the Ontario hospital said the baby’s disease is fatal and decided to remove his breathing tube.

The baby’s parents, however, have said removing the tube would cause him to choke and die violently. They’ve said they want Joseph to receive a tracheotomy, which would open his airway and allow him to die at home.

On Sunday, after a compromise was seemingly reached, the baby was flown to the U.S. hospital.

“Our physicians are examining Joseph to determine the best course of action,” Bob Davidson, a spokesman with the U.S. facility, said in an emailed statement.

However, with news that the child was in hospital south of the border came a continuing wave of commentary from outspoken anti-euthanasia advocates —an especially strong political force in the U.S. — including a foundation named after Terri Schiavo, which lauded the baby’s “rescue” from Canada.
“Baby Joseph was hours from being pulled off life support at (the Ontario hospital) before his situation made national headlines, forcing the hospital to cease its efforts to end the baby’s life.”
It's a shame that the baby actually had to be rescued (literally - rescued) from the Ontario hospital so that he gets a chance to live whatever little time he has left. Whoever made the decision that baby Joseph's life is not worthy of living, brought shame not just upon his hospital, but upon all of Canada.

Sunday, March 13, 2011

Climate Science - Settled Or Suppressed?

Tim Ball offers a great overview of how climate science has lost 30 years and a generation of scientists:
Traditionally, older scientists held to the prevailing wisdom, and new, skeptical students looking for wider answers challenged them. In climatology, the opposite has happened. The so-called skeptics challenging the prevailing wisdom are the professors who have researched and taught the subject for 30 years or longer. Their knowledge is much wider than that of the new, young scientists because climate science has stagnated for 30 years. All the funding was directed to only one side of climate science, the side promoted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which governments accepted as ‘official science.’

It is frightening how little climate science is known by either side of the debate on human causation of global warming. A paper from Michigan State University found “most college students in the United States do not grasp the scientific basis of the carbon cycle – an essential skill in understanding the causes and consequences of climate change. See

Disclosing his ignorance about the science of the carbon cycle and the role of CO2 in climate, the professor said students need to know the cycle because they must deal with the buildup of CO2 causing climate change. Three major factors are at the root of this ignorance: the emotional, irrational, religious approach to environmentalism; the takeover of climate science for a political agenda; and funding directed to pursue a political rather than the scientific agenda. The dogmatism of politics and religion has combined to suppress openness of ideas and the advance of knowledge critical to science.
With that kind of approach, no wonder climate scientists have to rewrite the past, altering the climate data that contradicts their warm-mongering theories. After all, it's all about money.

Friday, March 11, 2011

Pro Abort "Professor": A Baby Is Not A Person Until 18 Months

Up until then, he claims, there's nothing wrong with killing a child - unborn or even a newborn. If anything, he believes that killing a pig is worse than killing a baby. No, we're not making this up; that's his own words, spoken in front of an audience of ~150 students and members of the public:
In her remarks, Gray pointed out that the scientific community is unanimous that life begins at fertilization. At fertilization, she explained, the child “has everything she needs within herself to direct her growth and to move to the next more mature stage of her development.”

Mercer agreed that the unborn are human beings, and that abortion is the deliberate killing of a human being, but argued that the notion of “human being” is not a “morally relevant concept.” Individuals are not special by virtue of their “species membership,” he said, but become “persons” and worthy of protection because they possess certain “ethically salient properties” such as the ability to experience pain or pleasure, self-consciousness, and rationality.
According to Mercer, a child likely only gains personhood at around 18 months to two years of age, and he also suggested at one point that adult pigs might be persons. Though he said he couldn’t imagine a reason to justify killing a born child given the availability of adoption, he said upon further questioning that “if the child isn’t a person, it’s not an offense against the child to kill it.”

A principled vegetarian, he agreed that it could be wrong to kill a pig even though he believes it’s acceptable to kill a child in the womb.
Even if such views are not (yet) mainstream, they portray the pro-abort crowd quite accurately. After all, the very same arguments that are used to justify abortion, could be used to justify killing of the newborn babies. And, of course, the idea that human life, at certain circumstances isn't worth much, the belief that animals are equally (if not more) worthy of protection, the desire to cling to these views even if they directly contradict known scientific facts - we see that all the time, everywhere - from university campuses all the way to the House of Commons.

P.S. Talking about "possessing certain 'ethically salient properties' such as the ability to experience pain or pleasure, self-consciousness, and rationality" which make one a person - study shows that newborn babies remember music they heard in the womb. So maybe it's "doctor" Mercer who lacks the ability to "express self-consciousness and rationality"?...

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Christian Citizenship Guide: Christianity and Canadian Political Life

New ARPA book, researched and written by Michael Wagner (Phd in Political Science, University of Alberta)
This Christian Citizenship Guide is intended to help us better understand Canadian political life and the valuable role that we each can have in applying our faith to it. Topics tackled include the Christian contribution to Canada’s history, understanding our Parliament, courts, and Charter of Rights and Freedoms and measuring up the modern understanding of human rights to our faith. This is all capped off with a look at what we can do to make a positive impact in the community and country where God has put us.
There are plenty of people out there who don't like the words "Christian" and "citizenship" to be used in the same sentence. That still doesn't mean that socially Conservative Christians should exclude themselves from the political life and let those whose religion is marxism, feminism, environmentalism reshape the nation as they see fit.

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

40 Days For Life - Lenten Vigil Starts Tomorrow

Ending abortion starts where YOU live!

We already know of NINE abortion centers where 40 Days for Life vigils have been conducted that are now CLOSED …

… and MORE facilities may be added to that list.

Just last week, Golden Gate Community Health, a collection of abortion facilities in the San Francisco Bay area, announced it was shutting down — at least temporarily, and possibly forever.
In spite of the harsh winter weather, there are 10 (ten) Canadian cities on board - that's more than ever before.

Monday, March 7, 2011

No Charges For Shooting At Home Invaders

Finally, the prosecutors have realized that self-defense is not a crime:
In a move that acknowledges the difficulty of prosecuting people who feel forced to act in self-defence, Crown attorneys have dropped two gun charges against an Ontario man who shot at masked intruders firebombing his home, saying they had no "reasonable prospect of conviction."

The rules around self-defence in Canada are "complex," prosecutors said, and courts have "repeatedly" established that victims can't be expected to thoughtfully examine all consequences of using deadly force while under attack.
Prosecutors say Mr. Thomson, 53, grabbed a .38 handgun and ran out his front door, firing three shots toward the arsonists, who ran off uninjured. Four men face arson charges in the firebombing.

Police charged Mr. Thomson with four gun offences, but on Wednesday, Crown prosecutors withdrew the most serious charges of pointing and using a firearm.

Mr. Thomson hailed the Crown's decision to drop the charges as a victory, but said he is still determined to fight two remaining charges of careless storage of a firearm, which carry a maximum penalty of jail time.
This is not the first time when a man who had to use force to defend himself and his property ends up being treated like a criminal while the real criminal either walks out free or gets away with a slap on the wrist. A similar incident (when a Toronto store owner was charged with with assault and unlawful confinement for merely trying to stop a known shoplifter,) prompted the government to introduce bill C-60, that would simplify the Criminal Code provisions relating to the defense of property and persons. Hopefully, the bill gets a chance to pass before the leftie politicians (those that regards criminals as victims and successful law-abiding citizens as oppressors) bring us a snap election.

Sunday, March 6, 2011

Two Unborn Babies Testify In Legislature

They can't speak - but thanks to the ultrasound, they can be seen. They voices can't be heard - but it is actually possible to hear the sound of their beating hearts:
The lobbying effort to end abortion in the United States moved into strange new territory Wednesday as two fetuses were presented via ultrasound to a packed committee room of the Ohio state legislature.

Two women were laid out six metres away from state legislators while a technician used a probe to show images of each woman’s fetus on a portable screen.

A heart monitor was used to project the sound of the beating heart of each fetus, nine and 15 weeks respectively.
And yet the pro-aborts keep insisting that "this is not the kind of information that women need to decide whether they are going to get an abortion". So what kind of information they believe a woman needs to make a decision? Must be something similar to what was presented to Miramichi teens under the guise of "sex education" - that abortion is available in the major city and that "it takes five minutes and then you go home fine". That it stops a beating heart, that it kills a baby - who cares?...

Saturday, March 5, 2011

A Conservative Student Newspaper?

It's about time:
Conservative students and groups often complain about being treated inequitably on campus, or feeling like they are all alone in their convictions. The Prince Arthur Herald, Canada's only center-right national student newspaper, aims to change that by giving conservative students a voice and community that will respect their opinions and stand up for their rights, along with the rights of all Canadians.

Started by a group of predominately McGill students, The PAH in less than two months of operation has received tens of thousands of hits from across Canada. As a result, the editors have decided that a nationally-read newspaper deserves to be written by students from across the nation.
Hopefully, eventually we'll have a printed version of The Prince Arthur Herald. As for those of us that are not students - Ezra Levant is going to have a daily show on the Sun News Network.

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Unions - United Against Whom?

First - here's a great video (H/t Big Blue Wave)
There's practically nothing I could disagree with, except for the very last phrase:
Public sector unions unlike the private sector are actually unionized against... well against you.
It almost sounds as if the private sector unions were different; as if they unionized against someone else. Well, let's think what exactly (if anything) makes private sector unions different.

It's definitely not their stance on social issues. When it comes to throwing their support behind yet another initiative against traditional family values, upholding unrestricted abortions through 9 months of pregnancy or supporting yet another special interest group's quest for extra privileges at society's expense, the CAW is not any different than CUPE. Fiscal issues? I doubt it. When it comes to pension reform, both public and private sector unions are bashing the proposed Pooled Retirement Pension Plans, demanding an expansion of a forced government-run pension plan instead:
Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's proposal for a pooled retirement pension plan is a step backward from real pension reform. Instead of improving the Canada Pension Plan (CPP), Flaherty's proposal is a sign Canada's banks and financial institutions have hijacked this important issue, says Canada's largest union.
"It's outrageous that Canada's banks and financial institutions have managed to pull the Conservative government's strings to put this option on the table," says Moist. "This proposal will only leave Canadians exposed to gouging by Canada's mutual fund industry, who charge the highest administration fees in the world."

The best, most effective, and most cost-efficient route to addressing retirement income insecurity, says Moist, is expanding the CPP, the option overwhelmingly supported by Canadians.
OFL President Sid Ryan told media and activists that he did not want anything interfering with the profoundly important message being delivered to Flaherty: REAL retirement security can only be achieved through an expanded CPP. Any plan that enables banks and insurance companies to cash in on the backs of working people is a huge betrayal.
So where do they think the CPP invests its surplus revenues? No, that doesn't go towards buying back Canada's public debt. CPP surplus funds are invested in highly volatile stock markets of the "developing" countries. If the PRPP proposal serves the interests of "banks and insurance companies" then what about expanding CPP? Whose interests (and whose countries) does that serve?

As for the CPP being the "most effective, and most cost-efficient route to addressing retirement income insecurity" - could it be that union leaders have already forgot how the CPP premiums went up a whooping 175% in 1986-2003? I doubt it. Don't they realize that if a private plan had the same performance record as the CPP, people would be rushing away from it at first opportunity? So how come they keep insisting on making the worst solution mandatory for all?

Unions, public and private sector alike are not interested in success and prosperity. They are interested in perpetuating poverty so they can be in the anti-poverty vanguard. They are interested in more broken families, more single parents struggling to make ends meet, more seniors who have saved nothing for retirement, more special interest groups who couldn't (or who believe they couldn't) survive without government handouts, token jobs and ethnic quotas... They want all of us, the silent majority, to foot the bill for their vision of "social justice". Public or private sector unions - it makes no difference; they're all unionized against us.

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

March for Life - It Makes Them Worry

So we better redouble our efforts and bring even more concerned pro-lifers to the gates of the Legislature:
Guest speaker, NDP MP Olivia Chow, recounted to the group of about 65 participants her thoughts on stumbling on last year’s March for Life on Parliament Hill. “I walked out of my office and the entire Parliament Hill was filled with people, anti-choice people,” she emphasized.
“For many of us, we thought we had sort of won this battle many years ago and clearly it’s not ever something we can let our guard down about,” the organizer concluded.
Neither shall we. Abortion is still unrestricted through all 9 months of pregnancy and, as if that wasn't enough, the anti-life crowd is stepping up efforts to sneak euthanasia through the back door. The tragedy of baby Joseph, whom the hospital wants dead and of Barbara Jollimore-Bolton, who was put to death "out of mercy" by her husband" - these are dangerous symptoms. We need more people to come out with a clear message: life of an innocent human being is sacred.

Join the March for Life.