Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Carbon Tax And Deficit Spending — Back On The Agenda?!

No, this is not an early April fools joke. That's what was actually suggested at the Liberal 150 conference:
The chill came in the afternoon, when panelists, egged on by former Toronto Star columnist David Crane, told the gathering that the most sensible way to green the Canadian economy was to impose a carbon tax.

It was exactly that proposal that many blame for the defeat of the Liberals in the last election. It would be a courageous party, in the Yes Minister sense of the word (i.e., politically suicidal), to propose it again.
If the people here have any say in the matter, the Liberal Party will seek to redefine itself as a party committed to social policy and the environment. There is nary a word about the deficit, about keeping taxes low, about fostering international trade.
Oh, yeah, we've just seen the Liberal commitment to social policy. Thanks God for the three courageous Liberals who stood up for fetal rights and voted against the motion. Thanks God for 10 or so who just didn't show up. But Ignatieff is not willing to give up; he still pledges to keep fighting for subsidized abortion and contraception. See how committed he is to social policy?

And now, Ignatieff and his party have declared their commitment to mother Gaia environment. Nothing new here. Instead of real initiatives to fight air and water pollution, we have yet another carbon tax proposal. Let's drive up the costs of driving to work and keeping the house warm; people who cycle to work year round and wear parkas indoors pollute less, don't they?

And what's that they say about an alternative to balancing the books?
The question for Michael Ignatieff and his team will be to what extent the party sticks to that platform going into the next election. To the extent it does, Canadians will be offered a clear choice: focusing on getting the books back in balance, or focusing instead on new investments to make the population healthier, better educated and more secure.
Shall I remind you that even when the stimulus spending expires, Canada's budgetary balance will still be negative $20B and, since the government is unwilling to reverse most of its previous spending commitments, it will take 3 more years to get rid of the deficit. So where are the Liberals planning to get the money for the "new investments to make the population healthier, better educated and more secure"? Are they going to raise taxes (previously, their carbon tax was marketed as "revenue neutral") or are they going to resort to more deficit spending, being satisfied with merely keeping the debt to GDP ratio below a certain mark?

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

From Inside The Abortion Clinic

It must be a tough job - you get no shows that wouldn't even phone ahead to cancel their appointments, because they don't want any more lies and intimidation from the abortion mill workers. You get patients being dragged inside kicking and screaming and scaring away customers. And you get parents of those patients who find out they've been misled - when it's already too late...

What does it take to work in that kind of environment without falling into a deep depression? What kind of doublethink skills does it take to believe that butchering innocent babies is actually the right thing to do - even when the mother herself clearly shows that she would rather let her baby live? Judge for yourself. Here are a few quotes from the pro-abort blog, that were e-mailed to me by Peter Ryan. The blog is run by one of the escorts at the Morgentaler abortuary in Fredericton:
And then there were three kind of weird patient incidents. The first (in ascending order of strangeness) was that while a patient was in the clinic, her father left and went next door to the "Women's Care Centre". Of course the protesters got super excited and all swarmed in to greet him. He returned some time later with a handful of pamphlets and sat back in the waiting room with the patient's mother. The patient herself had already gone in to have the procedure, so as volunteer AL pointed out, that had the potential to be an awkward ride home. At least he didn't get one of the little plastic fetuses they hand out next door; I don't feel that would have gone over too well in the waiting room.
Oh year, a plastic fetus doll is such a dangerous weapon! Anyone possessing it must be arrested on the spot, before he or she succeeds in smuggling it into the waiting room of an abortion mill. Too bad the pro-life protesters didn't have a plastic unborn baby doll to give that poor fellow. Yes it was already too late to save his own grandchild. But a plastic likeness of a baby in the womb could inspire other women, waiting for their ordeal, to choose life for their babies.
And the worst incident was a young woman whose mother had dragged her here. The patient clearly did not want to have an abortion; while in to have her ultrasound she freaked out about the finger prick test, and then told the nurse, her mother and anyone who would listen that it was a blessing to be pregnant, a beautiful gift from God. Incidents like this are never as amusing as you think they are going to be, at least not at the time. While back in the waiting room, she was talking to her parents, trying to get them to leave. Another patient came up to me in tears and told me that either Gift-from-God patient had to go, or she would. Apparently GfG was blabbing on in the middle of the waiting room about how she wasn't going to "kill [her] baby" and all that. In the end, we had to ask her to either leave or stop upsetting the other patients. She left.

Outside, GfG and her parents were approached by Pink Hat, in her rosary-counting, Jesus-totin' glory. GfG's mother was already SUPER PISSED, and ended up giving Pink Hat a nice little shove (she wasn't hurt). While I don't condone the violence, I feel that the protesters have to assume that their presence is going to provoke that kind of reaction sometimes. Anyway, they are a litigious bunch over there so they must be pretty mad that there's no way for them to find out the woman's name or where she is from.
Yeah, shame on those evil pro-lifers for not letting that woman to have her grandchild killed. I can understand her frustration. Imagine - after all the time and effort she had to put in to force her daughter into an abortion clinic, when it already looked like she had achieved her goal, her daughter dared to throw a tantrum, caused them to lose their appointment and now, those people laud her daughter's decision to keep that little b*****d in her womb?! How dare they!!!

But I can assure Ms. Cooke (and everyone else concerned) that the "Vast Anti-Choice Conspiracy Worldwide" is not going to send an assault squad to track down that woman and shove her back. Believe it or not, we're not nearly as scary and vengeful as our opponents portray us. Life has triumphed - that's good enough for us.

Small miracles do happen. 3 lives saved in Fredericton - two no shows (one likely was the 42 year old lady "N" we've been praying for,) and that girl that found the strength to resist in the very last moment. (Too bad it was too late for that poor grandfather and his unborn grandchild.) 9 lives saved in Toronto. At least 368 babies saved during the recent 40 Days for Life campaign. The total number of lives saved since the inception of "40 Days", has surpassed 2500. Thousands of families have been spared from a terrible tragedy. Many of them are going to share their experience with others, encouraging them too to choose life. So, abortion mill workers can look forward for even more tough days ahead.

Monday, March 29, 2010

Ignatieff — A Laughable Leader?

First here's the recent Hansard. Pierre Poilievre and other freedom loving Conservatives are laughing at Ignatieff and with Ann Coulter:
Mr. David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the darling of the reform-conservative-republican movement really outdid herself last night in Calgary. By addressing Canadian diversity, Ann Coulter said that diversity is not an advantage to a country like Canada. “It's not a strength”, she continued. Then she went on to compare diversity to cancer. From organizing speeches to putting on cocktails, the Conservative Party's dirty little fingerprints are all over her Canadian tour.
Will the Prime Minister immediately and publicly condemn Ann Coulter's outrageous and intolerant views?

Hon. Jay Hill (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, you and the hon. member would know that his question has absolutely nothing to do with the business of government and should be disallowed.

Mr. David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the office of the member for South Shore—St. Margaret's organized a Coulter cocktail. The member of Parliament for Calgary West led the applause last night from his front row seat.
The Prime Minister's mentor, Rainer Knopff, who co-authored the reckless and divisive firewall letter, co-sponsored the speech and sat there while his guest savaged mainstream Canadian values.
Silence is acquiescence. Either the Prime Minister supports it or he does not. Which is it?

The Deputy Speaker:
Order, please. I do not see that that is a business of government administration. I do see the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister rising, so I will give him a chance to answer, but I caution members to keep their questions--
I see the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister rising to answer the question. I will allow him to do so.

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, the member has raised a very important question about an American commentator who has come to this country with some outrageous comments: comments supporting the Iraq war, comments supporting the use of torture, and comments referring to Israel as a war criminal. But enough about the leader of the Liberal Party.
"Does it get any better than this?" Asks Craig Carter, the author of the The Politics of the Cross Resurrected blog. Looks like it does. Here's something I found at Blogging Canadians:
By Trevor James Rodie on 27 March 2010 - 2:33pm

To the Honourable Mr. Dion,

I saw you last week as I sat in on Parliament. You looked dejected, and we didn't get to hear a peep out of you. I found this disappointing, as you are the most recent ELECTED leader of the Liberal Party, which should make you the current leader of the Opposition. But who says the Liberals care about silly things like Democracy, or Integrity or standing up for what's right. Perhaps if they did, they wouldn't have thrown you under the bus after one unsuccessful election. Even John Tory, architect behind Kim Campbell's famous disaster of a campaign (one of the worst in Canadian history, by its results), got far more chances than that. And to be fair, did they even support your Green Shift while they were campaigning? Or did they pretty much act like you shouldn't have been leader the minute you were elected, even if it was their own undemocratic methods of electing leaders that they so stubbornly clung to that led to your victory. Have you ever wondered how things might have been if they actually supported your ideas?
The link to the entry redirects to the Green Party website. It is in the "blogs" sections, so I'm not saying that this is the official point of view of the Green Party of Canada, but it doesn't look like the party objects to such a letter... So it looks like the Greens have found their own way to have a good laugh at Michael Ignatieff. An appeal like that to one of the members of his team, just can't be viewed otherwise.

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Lights On! Full Power!

Down with the phony "earth hour". Let the Lights of Liberty shine! Let's make a stand against the global warming alarmism. Let's make it clear that we refuse to accept their nursery rhymes as scientific facts.

And, while the eco-fools celebrate their hour in the darkness, take your time to watch this speech on environmentalism by Ann McElhinney. It's not evil, it's just wrong, she says - and she provides plenty of examples. Here are part 2 and part 3 of the speech.

And then don't forget to watch this video about the beautiful but dangerous "avatar" movie and about the public school system which contributes to spreading the environmentalist lies.
Enviro-fascism comes in many forms. Global warming alarmism and the overpopulation myth are just a few out of many. We face a powerful industry of lies. The least we can do to stand up to them is to turn our lights on for that specific hour during which they want us to sit in the darkness.

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Abortion Debate — It Just Can't Be Avoided

When Stephen Harper declared that he wouldn't allow abortion debate in the House of Commons; when he pledged to use "whatever influence he has" to keep abortion off the agenda, he probably pictured a handful of pro-life MPs introducing a private member bill to protect unborn babies. And he knew that in this situation, he wouldn't really need to use "whatever influence he has" to stop such a bill from coming to a vote. If anything, he wouldn't even have to direct any of his MPs to vote against the bill. Should the bill actually make it to the Order of Precedence, (a privilege that is usually granted to less than 1 in 10 private member bills and motions,) the opposition members of the standing committee on House Affairs would have enough votes to have the bill designated a "non-votable item" - just as it was done with the earlier version of the Unborn Victims of Crime Act - bill C-291 in the 39th Parliament.

Sure, during the past Parliament, there were still a few occasions when Stephen Harper was compelled to address the thorny issue. For example, when some of his MPs became too outspoken in their protest against awarding the Order of Canada to the chief butcher. Or when it was announced that the government would no longer support the Unborn Victims of Crime Act (just days before the election call, which killed all the outstanding legislation including bill C-484). Or even when Winnipeg MP Rod Bruinooge announced the formation of a new pro-life caucus in the House of Commons. Still, Harper could be sure that the pro-life wing of his party is well under control and he shouldn't worry about them putting the government in a position where it would have to take sides in the abortion debate.

And yet the abortion debate came back - in a way Harper could never imagine. It was brought back by the pro-aborts themselves. When the government chose to cut funding to an affiliate of the Planned Parenthood International, the opposition parties demanded an explanation. They refused to regard this as a mere cost cutting measure. Neither were they satisfied with a promise "not to shut the door" on contraception, which they managed to get from the Prime Minister after all. They wanted the government to publicly affirm its commitment to the cherished secular sacraments of contraception and abortion.

Yes, this was in the end a motion about abortion. It just wouldn't be possible to separate abortion from contraception if we were to fund an organization that supports both. Try to picture a government official coming to the Planned Parenthood International with a multimillion dollar cheque. Try to imagine his instructions: "Remember, this only goes to contraception, not to abortion. So I want to see all that money being spent on pills, not on potassium chloride injections. And when I say pills, I mean, those that prevent pregnancy, not those that induce miscarriage..." Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? You either support both or you support none.

And our opponents know that. While the motion itself was worded so that it wouldn't have the word "abortion" in it, the Bloc MP Johanne Deschamps and the NDP MP Libby Davies were both talking not just about "family planning" but also about "access to safe abortions for women globally", sometimes - using both in one sentence. They knew exactly what they were going to vote for.

Luckily, the motion has been defeated. A rare canadian pro-life win. Three courageous Liberals — John McKay, Dan McTeague and Paul Szabo, deserve our special thanks for choosing to stand up for what's right even if it meant voting against the party line. Thanks to their efforts and thanks to the votes of 141 Conservative MPs, the government wasn't forced to choose between defying the opinion of the Parliament and backing down on their rare pro-life action.

But the debate itself isn't going to go away. In fact, the constant debate on whether or not we should "reopen" the debate on abortion is just that - a debate, even if some of our opponents refuse to accept it as such. Declaring a pro-life bill "non-votable" or blocking a pro-life presentation on campus won't help. The debate will be back in full force every time the pro-abortion ideology clashes with common sense. And if Ignatieff pledges to continue fighting for subsidized abortion and contraception as part of maternal health initiative, then we're likely to have yet another round of abortion debate - right in the House of Commons.

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Ann Coulter's Speech Shut Down By Fascist University Mob

The very same internazi-sozi thugs that promote an anti-Israeli campaign week on campus, have successfully shut down Ann Coulter's speech for allegedly "hateful" content. No surprises here. Just like it's not surprising that the young girl who complains that Ann Coulter's remarks have left her heartbroken, turns out to be the very same girl who advocates the destruction of Israel (with obvious consequences for its Jewish population). Fascism Triumphant.

The university management was by no means willing to defend freedom of speech. If anything, one François Houle, the Vice-President Academic and Provost of the University of Ottawa, chose to warn Ann Coulter that here in Canada we don't have the same freedom of speech as in the US; that while the freedom of expression is recognized by the Charter as a fundamental freedom, the Charter doesn't guarantee freedom after the expression. Thus, unless Ann Coulter submits to the leftie-imposed political correctness, she may face criminal charges. No wonder that in the end, Houle & Co were quick to use the threat of violence as an excuse to cancel the speech.

Well, if Ann Coulter can't speak inside the left-wing violent ghetto, otherwise known as the University of Ottawa campus, that doesn't mean she can't speak on Canadian soil. Here's an extract from her speech. (H/t SoCon or Bust.) If you have some other clips - post them, embed them, distribute them. There won't be enough internazi-sozi thugs to silence each and every one of us!

Update: Ann Coulter was interviewed on the Michael Coren show. Follow the link for the 47-minute interview.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Open Letter To MPs On The Abortion Language Vote

By the Deputy Leader of the Christian Heritage Party, Rod Taylor:
News reports suggest that there will be a vote on Tuesday regarding the government's proposal to provide resources for women and children through the G8. The attempt to politicize the proposed Canadian initiative designed to improve health outcomes for women and children around the globe is disgusting. Canada is a giving nation, a compassionate nation and a free nation. Our ability and desire to reduce deaths, disease and discomfort for millions of women and children is a breath of fresh air and a cup of cool water for those suffering in conditions of poverty, abuse and unpleasant social conditions.

The blatant attempt to turn a humanitarian gesture into a platform for partisan wrangling is another signal that some people get into politics for the wrong reason.

To attempt to link compassionate aid to the stale and stagnant spectre of even more abortions, even more killings of innocent human beings is a ruse so despicable and morally bankrupt that it is hard to imagine. There is a promise of blessing to those who offer a cup of cold water to one who is thirsty but to those who promote death for the innocent and vulnerable there can be no confidence and no quietness of conscience.
As for the claim that opponents of contraception adhere to a "failed right-wing ideology" - here's a great rebuttal by MPs Brad Trost and Maurice Vellacott:
For example, on its website IPPF says that “where abortion is legally restricted in most instances, harmful, clandestine practices have damaging health effects and claim the lives of thousands of women, particularly poor women, each year…. We seek to increase access to safe abortion services by advocating for changes in restrictive laws and public policies.” This is their real agenda which may be unknown to most people.

Yet where is the evidence that permissive abortion laws improve women's health?

As Ian Gentles, research director at the deVeber Institute for Bioethics and Social Research has pointed out in a recent article in the National Post, Poland virtually prohibited abortion 20 years ago and since that time, maternal mortality has decreased by 75%, infant mortality decreased by almost 66%, and the rate of premature births decreased by over 50%.

According to the World Economic Forum's “Global Gender Gap Report 2009,” Ireland, the only other European country besides Poland where abortion is illegal, has the lowest maternal mortality ratio of any country, with one death per 100,000 live births.

In a letter in the Canadian Medical Association Journal in 2009, Dr. Rene Leiva cites a 2006 Salvadorian Ministry of Health study. Up until 1998, abortion was legal in El Salvador and the maternal mortality ratio was calculated to be 150. After 1998 abortions were no longer legally permitted and by 2006 the maternal mortality ratio had dropped to 71.2, a reduction of more than 50%.
So, whose ideology has failed? And what concept better be promoted at the G8 summit, if we're serious about improving reproductive health and reducing maternal and infant mortality? I think the answer is obvious. The greatest thing about family values is that they are self-evident.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Parliamentary Motion To Demand Support For Abortion Set For Tuesday

The opposition parties already succeeded in pressuring the Prime Minister into promising "not to close the door" on contraception in the G8 maternal health plan. But that's not enough for them. They want nothing less than clear commitment to keep sponsoring abortion and contraception worldwide - at taxpayers' expense, of course:
According to a Friday afternoon report from the Globe and Mail, “Liberals are hoping to pin down Prime Minister Stephen Harper over where he stands on abortion in his G8 maternal-health initiative for the Third World.”

There are plans underway for the Opposition parties to introduce a motion in the House of Commons on Tuesday that would demand that Canada’s maternal-health plan support all “family-planning” options, including abortion.

This matter has been a political hot potato since Stephen Harper first announced the maternal-health initiative. Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon explained the motivating factor for this plan. “Each year, nearly 9 million children die before they turn five, and half a million women die in pregnancy and child birth. Many of these deaths can be prevented with improved access to health care, better nutrition, and scaling up proven interventions such as immunization. So this is a key Muskoka priority.”

Unfortunately, pro-abortion politicians, media, and activists are using this as a wedge to promote abortion overseas and to politicize the abortion debate here in Canada. They have been relentlessly demanding that the maternal-health initiative include abortion.
Apparently, the motion itself is non-binding (otherwise, it would be an appropriation vote and therefore - a matter of confidence). But the government is still likely to end up in a "lose-lose" situation: If they ignore the motion, the opposition will have yet another opportunity to accuse them of showing contempt to the Parliament. If the government caves in - they'll be wasting our tax dollars promoting wholesale slaughter of unborn babies along with failed methods of avoiding pregnancy - under the guise of "maternal health".

Take action. The No Apologies news release has all the instructions provided and you can check the ARPA Canada website as well. Sure, if it's a whipped vote, then our letters to MPs won't change its outcome; still - it's worth letting them know what we think about their intent to use our tax dollars to fund abortion and contraception.

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Personhood For The Unborn — The Human Rights Issue Of Our Time

Canadian personhood website launched:
March 19, 2010 ( - Alliance for Life Ontario has launched a new Canadian Pre-born Personhood initiative with the creation of a Personhood website. The site provides information about abortion in Canada and encourages visitors to sign a petition asking the Canadian government to extend full legal protection to every Canadian, from their biological beginnings to their natural death.

Organizers of the initiative state that the signed petitions will be presented in Parliament on Person's Day - October 18, 2010.

"Much of the debate about abortion centres on whether the child before birth is a human person," the website states. "Today, science and technological advances, such as ultra-sound and intrauterine photography prove the humanity of the child in the womb."
Echoing the 1929 Privy Council decision to include women in the definition of "person," Jeffs reiterated, "Denying personhood to the preborn child places us in a made-in-Canada time warp of barbarism and injustice. The number of Canadians killed by induced abortion since 1969 is over 3 million. To those who ask why personhood should be granted to the preborn, we ask, why not?"
Please take your time to sign the sign the online petition to extend full legal protection to every human being from their biological beginnings to natural death. And don't forget to join the facebook group.

Friday, March 19, 2010

Parliament Resumes Euthanasia Debate

Prorogation doesn't kill private member bills, so bill C-384 was merely scaled back to the first hour of debate.
OTTAWA, Ontario, March 17, 2010 ( - The House of Commons held a debate Tuesday on Bill C-384, a bill proposed by member of parliament Francine Lalonde (La Pointe-de-l'Île, BQ) to legalize euthanasia and assisted suicide.
The bill received an hour of debate in October, but it moved back to first reading again after Parliament was prorogued for January and February.

The legislation was originally scheduled to have already come up for a vote, but Lalonde has traded back the second hour of debate three times, apparently in an effort to buy time to drum up support in a largely unsympathetic parliament. The second hour of debate and vote are currently expected sometime in May. However, Lalonde may attempt to push it back again.

Three MPs spoke in favour of the bill, with Lalonde being supported by Diane Bourgeois (Terrebonne-Blainville, BQ) and Bill Siksay (Burnaby-Douglas, NDP). Five MPs opposed the bill: James Lunney (Nanaimo-Alberni, CPC), Paul Szabo (Mississauga South, Lib.), David Sweet (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale, CPC), Joe Comartin (Windsor-Tecumseh, NDP), and Mark Warawa (Langley, CPC).
I'm glad to see multi-party opposition to legalized euthanasia. We won't have the major political parties uniting to support one's right to life from conception, but at least we have multi-party consensus that once born, one has the right to live his life until its natural end; that direct and intentional actions that cause another person's death should remain illegal. Hopefully, with their joint efforts, we'll finally see bill C-384 defeated.

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Stephen Harper's Interview On YouTube — There's Still One Question Missing

And that question is about Canada's legal vacuum on fetal rights. Not because they were running out of time - if they had enough time for a question on whether Stephen Harper is going to organize another referendum on Quebec's sovereignty (a question which is completely irrelevant for a Federal, not to mention, a federalist Prime Minister,) and if they took the trouble to dig that particular question out of some 1800 questions submitted, (in spite of all the marijuana and climate change questions that kept repeating themselves,) they could have allocated a minute or two to answer a question on the unborn babies' rights.

There were quite a few of them asked and some of them received quite high degree of support from the voters. But in the end, that question was omitted. Here's the transcript of the interview, you won't find the word "abortion" or "unborn" there. To commend the Prime Minister, he did a great job explaining why we shouldn't legalize drugs and that there are better alternatives for childcare than mammoth Federally-managed McDaycare monopoly. He even took his time to respond to a man concerned about baby seals, but he didn't say a word about saving the baby humans.

Is this the most pro-family Prime Minister we can get? Looks like that; all other major parties are much further to the left. Can the situation improve? Maybe. We've seen some opinion polls, according to which, majority of Canadians consider abortion morally wrong. But how likely is that to translate into votes come next election? After all that's not the only issue on which the silent majority doesn't agree with all four major political parties. Yet in the end, most of them still support the major parties or don't vote at all; even if there is a far better option on the ballot and vote splitting is not a concern. We've seen that in Cumberland — Colchester — Musquodoboit Valley, didn't we?

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Top Ten Liberal Media Smears Against Conservative Women

Remember the uproar over Peter McKay's remarks about Belinda Stronach? Could you imagine a similar media uproar over a left-wing politician's dirty joke about Sarah Palin or any other Conservative woman for that matter? Of course not! If anything, the mainstream media will happily jump on the bandwagon and come up with even more smears against the outspoken woman - just because she doesn't agree with their ultra-left views. Check out this report by the Culture and Media Institute:
But for a select group of women – conservative women – their accomplishments and contributions are rarely celebrated but often demeaned and mocked in sexist – and crassly sexual – ways.

The Culture & Media Institute looked back at what the media had to say over the past year about some of today’s most prominent conservative women, including Michelle Malkin, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Sarah Palin and Liz Cheney, and compiled a list of the 10 worst attacks on these women who dare to speak out in favor of conservative values.
And then they call pro-family Conservatives "misogynists".

Monday, March 15, 2010

Pro-Aborts Censor Pro-Life Presentation On Campus

As it has been the custom:
VANCOUVER, B.C., March 15, 2010 ( – Dozens of pro-abortion protesters at the University of British Columbia (UBC) disrupted a pro-life demonstration last Tuesday, which was being sponsored by the University's pro-life club, Lifeline.

The club was running the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP), which compares abortion to past genocidal atrocities - displaying, for example, an image of a Holocaust victim beside an image of an aborted baby.

Lifeline has run a GAP campaign nearly every semester since the fall of 1999. The campus pro-abortion group, Students for Reproductive Choice (SRC), usually lines up with their own protest opposite the GAP displays. This year the two groups had signed an agreement with the Student Union stating that they would stay 30 feet away from each other and remain civil and peaceful during the demonstration.

“Unfortunately, certain students from the SRC club did not follow protocol,” said Ania Kasprzak, co-president of Lifeline. SRC members, along with other protesters from the University of Victoria and the Vancouver community, moved in front of the GAP display, where they held large yellow banners with pro-abortion slogans such as, “Unwanted Pregnancy is NOT a choice” and “Full Access to Free Abortion.”
Same old, same old. Slogans versus arguments, myths versus facts, emotions versus reason. "Full access to free abortion" - without explaining why should taxpayers be forced to pay for an elective procedure. "Unwanted pregnancy is not a choice" - without mentioning that pregnancy is a direct consequence of some other action, which is usually nothing but choice. And, as always, they talk about freedom to control own bodies, without uttering a word about the babies' bodies which end up being destroyed by abortion. And when they're out of arguments - they block pro-life displays and shout down pro-life speakers. Because they know that if they let the truth be told - they'll lose.

Sunday, March 14, 2010

EUSSR Cracks Down On Homeschooling

First Germany, now Sweden:
How can you tell that a country is desperate to maintain 'think' control over the populace?

They outlaw home schooling.

LifeSite News:

The government of Sweden is taking a hard line against homeschoolers, proposing a bill that will only allow home education under “extraordinary circumstances,” reports the Home School Legal Defense Association. The bill is expected to pass in the Swedish parliament, following a review by the Supreme Administrative Court, and will allow for homeschooling families to face criminal charges.

The court has asked only for the government to specify the definition of “extraordinary circumstances.”
Simply put - they don't have that many children of their own (if any) - so they need to indoctrinate ours to stay in power. Since their coercive utopia sees the family as the largest impediment to total government control, no wonder they're making yet another move to take away what's left of parental rights. And it seems like Quebec is not far behind.

Meanwhile, a new social networking site has been launched to help homeschoolers:
OVERLAND PARK, Kans. – has launched the first social network that meets the unique desires of Christian parents while providing a fun and safe environment for Christian kids. This new online social network is available at Individual accounts are free on By upgrading to a family account, members are able to use all of the available tools and parents are able to control their kids’ access to the site. uniquely addresses parents’ concerns with safety and content. allows parents to direct what their children can use on the site. Parents can manage the content their kids can access and create. Parents can also choose to approve friend requests, or can give their children that freedom, and can control which friends can see which of their kids’ content. There are no graphical or pop up ads on the site. Simple and relevant text ads appear only on the parent pages.
Hopefully, the new social networking site, helps homeschoolers not just to exchange information, but also - to unite to defend their rights.

Friday, March 12, 2010

March For Life Facebook Page

Don't forget to become a fan! And invite all your friends.
March 10, 2010 ( – The annual Canadian March for Life is only two months away, and in an effort to help spread the word about the event Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), the organizer of the march, has launched a March for Life Facebook fan page and event page.

“We know that social networking sites can be extremely powerful tools to raise awareness,” said CLC National coordinator Mary-Ellen Douglas. “However, they are also only as effective as we make them.
If you can't attend the March in Ottawa, check with your local Right To Life organizations, for a local March for Life in your province. New Brunswick is going to have a March for Life in Fredericton on the same day as the March for Life in Ottawa. And, judging from the comments on the Facebook page, there will be local Marches in Regina, Edmonton and Victoria. All we need is to show up and make our voices heard.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Charity — Work Of Individuals, Not The State

Here's a great rebuttal to all the 'social justice' fans out there:
ROME, March 8, 2010 ( – Care for the poor and vulnerable is the concern of individuals, motivated by genuine charity, rather than the exclusive concern of the state, Pope Benedict XVI has said in a pair of addresses this weekend. In an address to a group of bishops from Uganda, the pope praised their efforts to defend the sacredness of human life and of the family, and urged them to help their flocks resist the “seductions” of materialism.

Speaking to a gathering of Italian Civil Protection Service (ICPS) on Saturday, March 6, the pope commended their voluntary service and said that Christians are called to help their neighbours “concretely,” and called on ICPS volunteers personally to become “living icons” of the Good Samaritan.

“There is no just order in the state,” he said, “that eliminates the service of charity.”
When the state tries to do charitable work, it ends up creating a bureaucratic machine that, in the name of charity, does everything in its power to perpetuate the problem. Because, just as everyone else, they want their jobs to be permanent. And, just as every other establishment, they're interested in expanding their customer base, not reducing it. So, if the poor are their clients - why would any of them be interested in ending poverty? Their ideal is - an all-pervasive bureaucratic structure that will impose austerity on all - in the name of "social justice".
Socialism is not about charity, but rather about what is called "justice." Socialists actually tend to despise charity as an impediment to justice. Now, justice in a socialist worldview is not what it has traditionally been in past centuries. Justice for socialists means the rightness of the state taking from the rich(er) and giving to the poor(er). In other words, justice does not mean respecting private property and forbidding stealing (as the Bible does), but rather no respect for private property and the institutionalization of stealing as government policy.
No wonder we see the ultra-left government in the UK formulating its "social justice" policies in a way that actually drives Christian charities out of charitable work. The bureaucracy, that was given the monopoly on charitable work in the name of "social justice", doesn't like competition.

P.S. Meanwhile UK loses £41Billion a year because of family breakdown. Fix that - and you won't need the mammoth bureaucracy to "fight poverty".

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Abortion Lobby — Scared Of Science

They claim to defend women's right to choose, but they fight tooth and nail against giving women the means to make an informed choice:
Big Abortion is scared. They’re scared to death that America is slowly trending towards life. They’re scared of the hundreds of thousands of people who march on Washington every year. They’re scared of the wonderful, prayerful and effective 40 Days for Life vigils outside abortion clinics across the country. But mostly they’re scared of science.

So they’ve sought to silence pro-lifers. Heck, they’ve trained the media as their attack dogs so well that we’re not even called pro-lifers. We’re anti-abortionists. Big Abortion has sought to legally institute bubble zones and “no speech” zones around clinics. They try to mocking the effectiveness of abstinence to diminish it. They desperately seek to hinder the ability of pro-lifers to speak with abortion minded women.

But mostly they seek to prevent women from seeing their babies in ultrasounds because they know that a woman who looks at an ultrasound will recognize the humanity of the unborn child within her womb.
So who are the real fanatics here? Who are the ones guided by nothing but beliefs and ideology? They refer to abortion facilities as "reproductive health centers". Reproductive? Health? They must be kidding! Many of them won't even have a separate sterile operating room, not to mention those that have lost their licenses for failing to meet basic health standards, yet continue to operate...

All their industry is based on a big lie. The ultrasound shows the truth - that the unborn baby is just that - a baby; that he is neither "a blob of tissue" nor a "part of woman's body". Unlike what The Portland Mercury claims, the baby's face is fully formed during around 10th week of pregnancy. And, if the law allows killing those babies at will, it's only fair to demand that the baby is given a chance to look his mother in the eyes.

Let the mother see her baby. And let the baby look at her mother - at least from an ultrasound photo - before she makes the tragic mistake.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

40 Days For Life @ Halfway Point. Over 200 Babies Saved.

Our opponents tend to mock the vigil keepers' efforts. One of them even went as far as calling the pro-life vigil "silly", claiming that "standing across the street and praying to end abortion -- that doesn't work". Well, it turns out that pro-life prayers do work after all. At least 209 babies have been saved from being slaughtered before birth:
I still think it's a miracle any time 40 Days for Life prayer vigil participants are blessed with the knowledge that a mother has changed her mind about aborting a child. And today, as we reach the halfway point of this campaign -- it's already happened ... 209 times that we know of! That's 102 more lives spared -- over the last week.

Here are just a few of those miracles:

JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA: A woman and her daughter spent about an hour in the parking lot at the abortion center, entering and leaving the business several times. Finally, they drove out of the lot. The young woman rolled down her window and said, "I am not going to have an abortion."

"We were there at the critical time," said Trudy in Jacksonville. "We were there at the entrance of the driveway, offering her hope in her desperate situation.

"She saw strangers praying for her; she saw signs that gave her options; she experienced the ultimate, unconditional love from people whom she may never see again in this world. And her miraculous decision gave us peace and joy this world can not give!"
And here's a story of another 40 Days For Life miracle - a woman dialed a wrong number (or so she thought) and she reached one of the vigil keepers instead of the "planned parenthood" office. As result - her baby is likely to live to see daylight.

Yes, miracles don't happen 100% of the time. But they'll happen more often if there are more of us willing to sacrifice an hour of our free time to stand outside of the abortion facilities and pray for those who are in danger of losing their lives before they even get a chance to have their first breath.

Monday, March 8, 2010

Ultrasound Coupon Saves Baby's Life

When an unborn baby can be seen - the fact of his humanity becomes self-evident:
March 5, 2010 (40DaysforLife) - Last week, we reported on a young mother in Louisville, Kentucky who chose life for her baby after redeeming a coupon for a free ultrasound. That story struck a chord with the 40 Days for Life team in Southfield, Michigan.

The Southfield team tried the same idea ... and it worked!

Howard, one of the prayer volunteers, showed his "free ultrasound" coupon to women who were approaching the abortion facility. One woman took the coupon - she seemed quite excited to get it - but then walked into the building.

She came out ten minutes later - and told the volunteers that while she was inside the abortion center, she had called the pro-life pregnancy resource center to ask about the free ultrasound.

They left the abortion facility immediately. "We did the ultrasound and had everyone crying tears of joy," said Mike, the 40 Days for Life coordinator in Southfield. "The baby' mother was so overjoyed to see her baby. Praise God!"
Hopefully, it doesn't stop there. I'd love to see a few ultrasound clinics next to or across the street from the abortion facilities. So that every poor women who considers, for one reason or another, that her unborn baby's live is not worthy of living, could step in, see the baby - and reconsider.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

Down With "Earth Hour"! Join Lights For Liberty!

Let's stand up to Gaia worshipers!
While Environmentalist moonbats who still haven't heard that anthropogenic Global Warming was a Global Hoax turn off their lights to appease the Climate Godess, the Most Holy Pious and venerated Mother Gaia, and her High priest Al Gore and false prophet David Suzuki, we who believe that liberty, and the achievement and innovation that has resulted directly from men and women being able and motivated to offer the fruit of their minds for sale on the free market will turn on our lights and electric gadgets to full power to hnour the ideas that have given man the best quality of life and health he has ever had since the dawn of time.

Junk Science did not invent the light bulb! Liberty did!

So turn 'em on, loud & proud on March 27th 2010 between 8:30 and 9:30 PM local time!

Spread the word! there are 900 000+ Kool Aid drinkers on the Earth Hour site... let's beat them!
Global warming is a hoax. Even the mainstream scientists started distancing themselves from global warming alarmists. Earth doesn't need our sacrifice. Liberty does. So, instead of sitting in the darkness for an hour - turn on every single light bulb. And encourage all your friends and neighbors to do the same!

Friday, March 5, 2010

Militant Atheists Find Creationism Offensive

They talk about science, reason and freedom of inquiry, but they don't like when others question their beliefs. The very same organization that promoted the "There is probably no God" bus advertising campaign is now accusing creationists of... blasphemy:
“I’ve been doing science for 30 years; don’t you think it offends me when you say you don’t believe in evolution?”

I nearly fell out of my chair! I had been asked by an atheist group (the Center for Inquiry) to come down and speak at a meeting they were holding to discuss their recent promotion of a bus advertising campaign on the Toronto Transit line declaring “There is probably no God, so relax and enjoy your life.” They apparently wanted a “religious” view represented so had invited me.

After the initial pre-determined questions to the panel members were asked, the audience (all atheists except for one to my knowledge) were invited to ask questions. The (biologist) gentlemen’s question (above) was issued to me after I had declared I was a creationist.

Free thought (but not for all)!

The group’s mission statement reads: The mission of the Center for Inquiry is to foster a secular society based on science, reason, freedom of inquiry, and humanist values. There were “free thought” posters displayed all around the facility so I was flabbergasted to hear the man state he was offended by the fact that I didn’t agree with him!

I said “Sir, you don’t believe the same things I do, and I’m not offended by that. If you choose to be offended by what I don’t believe I have no control over that. And to be honest sir, considering the intellectual environment we are in here today (the fact that I was invited specifically to provide opposing views!) I think it’s rather pathetic that you would even make that comment.” His fellow atheists actually agreed and the crowd seemed embarrassed for/because of him and he sat down.
Let's follow the advice that Calvin Smith gives us in this article. Let us not be tricked into inaction if someone decides to be offended by what we stand for.

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Budget 2010/11 — Planting Seeds For Future Growth

Of course we knew that we couldn't look forward for any significant tax cuts or new spending initiatives. That was quite obvious. And it was obvious that the primary objective of the budget would be - restoring the fiscal balance. The only question was - how? Today, we've got the answer - apart from the small details, the government chose to stay on course.

There will be no draconian cuts, in fact, program expenses are projected to hit $257.7B in 2014/15. But, the economy is expected to grow even faster. Once the program expenses, as a percentage of the GDP go down from the current 15.6% to the typical 13% - the deficit will disappear. And, since the government pledged to exercise financial restraint (that is - to roll back some of the long term commitments for extra spending,) we can look forward for this to occur in the summer of 2014 - about a year earlier than predicted in the September fiscal update.

But there's more to that. Just like the previous budget, this budget too undertakes some steps towards setting up conditions for faster economic growth. Not with increased spending, but with the right fiscal policies. We saw some of that last year when Ontario and BC agreed to replace their sales taxes with a harmonized value added tax, (which has no cascading effect,) - thus slightly easing the tax burden on local businesses and making production cheaper.

Sure, the measure turned out to be extremely unpopular, because both provinces have failed to provide adequate compensation for extending the sales tax base, choosing to keep all the extra revenues to themselves. (At least they could have reduced their healthcare premiums.) But on the long run, this will add a few billions each year to the GDP growth - and that's why the Feds were willing to go as far as providing an extra $5.6B outlay to Ontario and BC to ease the transition costs.

This budget too plants seeds for future growth. Encouraging research and development, accelerating private sector investments, keeping federal tax-to-GDP ratio at its lowest level since 1961, along with the recently announced measures to curb the credit bubble - all that will add to the economic growth on the long run. In the end, we may actually see the deficit disappearing by the spring of 2013 - just as it was predicted in the last year's budget. And I hope however that, unlike 12-15 years ago, we won't see a certain party, that has pledged to vote against the fiscal restraint and economic growth measures today, taking all the credit for stronger growth and resulting increase in tax revenues several years from now.

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Help Pro-Life Movement On Campuses

From the New Brunswick Right to Life e-mail release:
Dear Pro-Life Supporters,

Did you know that the majority of women making the “choice” to have an abortion are university aged?
Did you know that the majority of students on campus consider themselves to be “pro-choice”?
Did you know that the National Campus Life Network has established a Maritime Director to educate, network and support the post-secondary pro-life students right here in your community?

My name is Sara Hall and I have the great opportunity of building a Culture of Life here in the Maritimes with your help. I am working to maximize the promotion and effectiveness of the pro-life message on campuses in the Maritimes, while minimizing the excess work for busy students.

Nowhere is there a greater urgency for the pro-life message than on the university campus. The university is the place where the ideas and values of our society take root. An active pro-life presence is needed to promote ideas and values that embrace the objective truth that all human life is worthy of protection.

It is important that we develop and maintain a pro-life presence on campuses in the Maritimes specifically at UNB Fredericton, St. Thomas University, Atlantic Baptist University in Moncton, and Dalhousie University. Are you currently a student on campus? Contact me and I would love to meet with you. Are you off campus but interested in helping? Send me any campus contacts you may have. As well, please consider joining my support team to provide financial assistance for my work.

For Life,

Sara Hall
Maritime Director
National Campus Life Network
Phone: 506-693-7760
Sara's biggest need is for students contacts at the various campuses. So, if you know someone who attends university or college in the Maritimes; someone who might be interested in supporting the pro-life movement - please pass it on.

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

What If Someone Else Decides That YOUR Life Is No Longer Worth Living?

13 year-old Lia Mills, the same teenage girl who wrote a bold and well-argumented speech against abortion about a year ago, speaks up against euthanasia.

Mere "well said" is not enough to describe this great speech. It's just amazing how many arguments Lia manages to squeeze in a less than 5-minute presentation.

Lia's last year's speech actually led to a baby's life being saved. (And that baby is just the one we know of.) Hopefully, her speech on euthanasia too makes a difference and helps all of us to make sure that euthanasia, assisted suicide and other types of intentional actions aimed at killing the patient instead of helping him, never become legal in Canada.

Monday, March 1, 2010

A Small Victory For Freedom Of Speech — At What Price?

Yet another verdict of a freedom-snatching committee has been overturned by the court of law:
REGINA, March 1, 2010 ( - Saskatchewan's Court of Appeal has ruled that an anti-homosexaulity activist did not violate the province's human rights code by publicly criticizing homosexuality through a series of flyers he distributed in Saskatoon and Regina in 2001 and 2002.
In her decision in Whatcott v. Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal et al., released February 25, Justice Darla Hunter ruled that Whatcott did not violate section 14(1)(b) of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code by distributing flyers to oppose the teaching of homosexuality in Saskatoon’s public schools.

The court overturned the 2006 Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal ruling that ordered Mr. Whatcott to pay $17,500 to the complainants, to compensate for "loss of their dignity, self-respect and hurt feelings," and imposed a "lifetime" ban on his freedom to publicly criticize homosexuality.
So, common sense has finally triumphed. Distributing flyers that expose ads like "man looking for boys, age not so relevant" is not a "hate crime"; it's a matter of Bill Whatcott's freedom of speech and the society's right to information. Finally, we have the court upholding these rights and freedoms. But at what price?

Again we see that the real punishment for breaking the HRC-imposed rules of political correctness is not the fine and not even the lifetime ban on expressing your opinion, (which the freedom-snatching committees are somehow authorized to impose,) but the process itself. How long did it take for Bill Whatcott to get his conviction overturned? Seven years? Eight? Maybe more? How much did he have to spend for his own defense?

Let's not forget - when it comes to a "human rights" complaint, it's only the complainer who gets all his legal expenses paid for by the taxpayers. The defender must pay for his own defense. That alone is enough to make a successful professional broke. But then, for more than three years Bill was barred from working in his profession. How is one supposed to pay for his defense if his professional association won't allow him to get a job that suits his skills?

Bill has finally won the case, but who is going to reimburse him all that money he was forced to spend on lawyers? Who is going to compensate Bill for being kicked out of his job, for not being able to make a living doing what he's good at, for having to struggle to pay for basic living expenses when the endless legal process kept demanding cash, cash and more cash?

Now, try to picture another successful professional, spotting a similar ad in his local newspaper. The ad outrages him, just as the actual ad outraged Bill about a decade ago. But will he dare to openly protest against such an ad, knowing what happened to Bill? Will he have the courage to distribute flyers, featuring the scan of the ad or even posting it online, knowing that this may cost him his lifetime savings and his job? Will he dare to speak up, knowing that if he is loud enough to be heard, his career prospects will be reduced to flipping burgers or sorting garbage? Will he be ready to spend years seeking justice, just as Bill Whatcott had to? Most likely, he'll back down. And that's exactly what those Orwellian tribunals with "human rights" in their names want to achieve.

I congratulate Bill Whatcott for having the $17,500 fine and a lifetime ban on expressing his views overturned. And I'm glad that the judges didn't miss the opportunity to slam those "human rights" jackboots and their legal bullying. But more needs to be done to bring back our freedom of speech. Let's not forget - the real victory can only be achieved once every single "human rights" commission is disbanded.