Sunday, October 31, 2010

40 Days For Life In Moncton - Closing Speech

Well, it's been 40 days. And here in Moncton we succeeded in keeping the vigil going without interruptions. People had a hard time registering online (the built-in schedule had its security glitches,) so they were just coming in without bothering with registration. The coordinators too, just used an old-fashioned pen and paper. In the end, we had almost 250 participants, whose contribution varied from just one hour (once) to as much as several hours every single day.

We did have some opposition. The pro-aborts made an attempt to match our vigil in early October - that didn't succeed. Since then they were able to gather about a dozen of people on a couple more occasions, but those counter-protests didn't last - especially if the weather was getting worse. Today they came for the last hour wearing masks and trying to disrupt the vigil with loud music. Did any of them expect to see over 30 people at the vigil site? To be honest we too didn't expect so many people to show up for the last hour.

Did we have any success? 541 baby was saved worldwide - and those are just the ones we know of. Obviously, here in Moncton, we never know if an abortion has been cancelled, if there has been at least one baby saved in our city. We walk by faith, not by sight. And we know that our prayers were not in vain.

So, is it over? Not really. After the 40 days, comes day 41.

Halloween Horror: Radical Christians Are Coming!!!

For full effect watch with the lights off. And... better avoid eating or drinking anything in a couple of hours prior to watching. Because those radical Christians are really really really scary!...

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Roxanne's Law — How About A Choice To Keep The Baby?

Rod Bruinooge Explains Roxanne's Law:
Since tabling Roxanne's law in early 2010, I've really been touched by all the stories that I've received from all across from women who have been threatened and coerced into ending their pregnancies.
Rod Bruinooge
(From Roxanne's Law on Vimeo)
Roxanne's Law (bill C-510) does not affect the legal status of abortion. It will merely give women the opportunity to press charges against those who use threats and coercion (let alone - violence) against them, trying to pressure them to abort their babies.

Bill C-510 will have its first hour of debate on Monday, November 1st. So far, the odds don't look good, because those who call unrestricted abortion throughout all 9 months of pregnancy a "choice", fiercely oppose any moves to protect women's choice to carry their babies to term. And there are others, including the Prime Minister himself, who are afraid to touch the abortion issue. They would rather let the sleeping dog lie - even if that means knocking the proverbial dog unconscious.

But things can change if there are enough people willing to demand change. ARPA has a sample letter about bill C-510 to send a note to your MP. Also please consider writing to Stephen Harper; just to let him know that after breaking so many campaign promises, his attempt to stick to his old promise not to allow abortion debate, is at best pathetic.

Friday, October 29, 2010

Who Said That "Progressives" Are Inconsistent?

Here's a nice cartoon. (By the way, the girl depicted there might as well be Pentecostal :) But who said that the "progressives" are inconsistent? They're working towards their goal to "get the Bible out". Many of them either fail to realize (or prefer not to notice) that by banishing Christian thought from the public square (be that under the guise of "multiculturalism" or "separation of Church and State",) they actually make way for cultural jihad.
“The world in general, and the West in particular, is undergoing a tragic process of de-Christianization. Christian principles, values and institutions have been extirpated from our social, economic, political, legal, educational structures. Sometimes publicly, sometimes stealthily, the process has wrought havoc in Europe and the countries that descended from them.”

De Souza is the founder and director of Saint Gabriel Communications, an international Catholic apologetics organization and a popular program host on EWTN. He said that the failure of Christianity in Europe, has led to “the greatest Jihad ever carried out by Islam,” which takes the form not of physical battles, but as a “silent Jihad” through demographic take-over.
“Contraception promised a freedom without responsibility, abortion promises the right to do one’s own thing with one’s own body, homosexual marriage promises respect for different orientations … result: the end of civilization as we knew it.”
Those who believe that they "have no interest in promoting one brand of theism over another", who believe that by wiping out their nation's Christian heritage they gain more freedom for themselves, actually end up ruining their own freedom on the long run.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

"Social Justice": Communist Fraud Masqerading as Charity

Here's a great rebuttal to those who claim that "fighting poverty" is more important than defending fundamental values, such as the right to life and the sanctity of marriage. Somehow their "social justice" is somewhat... one sided:

Not for nothing did Bishop Fulton J. Sheen call Judas Iscariot the patron saint of "social justice", when people are concerned with humanity but ignore the truths of God. Poverty is being used as an excuse to fund groups that promote evil - all in the name of social justice. But social justice doesn't mean focusing so narrowly on the material needs of the society that the spiritual needs are dismissed.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

An Example For Stephen Harper To Follow

Rob Ford won. He won in Toronto - a city which is viewed by everyone as the leftist fortress; a city where no Conservative has been elected since early 90s where even the provincial PCs have had no chance for a decade or so. Moreover - his victory didn't happen in a specific riding or ward, not in an enclave populated mainly by supporters - he won a city-wide vote.

And, believe it or not, he managed to win without trying to look "moderate" and "progressive"; without pandering to the special interest groups, without backpedaling on allegedly "controversial" campaign promises; without muzzling his own team and without making promises to uphold the rivals' social policy in a pathetic attempt to attract the undecided voters from the rivals' camp... What a contrast compared to Stephen Harper's past campaigns!

See for yourself: Rob Ford was firm about ending handouts to unions and other special interest groups. He kept talking about the need to stop the "gravy train", even if his opponents didn't like his message. Compare that to Stephen Harper who, in the face of all the criticism from the left, ended up backpedaling on his decision to cut $60M from the worthless "arts" funding.

Rob Ford was straightforward in his opposition to the so called "fair wage" policy; he didn't care if his opponents were going to portray him as "anti-fairness". Here's a role model for Stephen Harper, whose party had voted unanimously to exclude the provision criminalizing speech from the "human rights" Act and who chose to do nothing about it out of fear of being portrayed as "anti-human rights".

Even when it came to social issues - Rob Ford had the courage to express his views on immigration and didn't burst in apologies when his comments were found to be controversial by the leftist media. What a contrast compared to Stephen Harper, with his repeated pledges to quash the fetal rights debate; a promise which (unlike so many others) he actually intends to keep (even if it means leaving women vulnerable to coercion) -- just to avoid looking "scary" in the eyes of the moderates...

Somehow, Rob Ford didn't really care about being viewed as "scary" by his opponents. He stood up for his principles, for what he believed in - and he won with 47%. Isn't that a little more than what the Conservatives typically get in Toronto?

Rob Ford won - not because the opposition was split and not because of the apathy and absenteeism in the opposition ranks. He won because so many non-voters, those long marginalized by the mainstream politicians, those who had long lost faith in voting, finally saw that there is a real man out there. A man who is a down-to-earth, common sense Conservative and who is not afraid to be a Conservative. So these people went out and cast their ballot. Compare that to how many votes did the Conservative (-trying-to-look-moderate) party gain in the last election.

So here's an example for Stephen Harper to follow. If being a real Conservative works in Toronto - it will work from coast to coast. It's not that hard, Stephen. Just stand up for the values and principles of the party that elected you leader about 7 years ago.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Faith, Education and Politics

John Betts, MLA for Moncton Crescent, shares his experience as a Christian and as a politician. He talks about what it is to be a Christian politician, why should Christians be involved in politics and how one can be a successful politician without compromising his Christian values.

There are several issues which John touches: the right to life and abortion (did you know that the waiting list for adoption in New Brunswick is about 8-10 years, while almost a thousand babies a year perish in abortions?) the education (and the defeatist attitude, which most of the school districts have towards our youth,) and also - about people's involvement; how voters' input could make things better. Because, legislators can't see all and know all; the government is way too large even in such a small province as New Brunswick.

Monday, October 25, 2010

14 People In Uniform vs 5 Pro-Life Students

Michael Coren interviews "several enemies of the state" (the pro-life students that were arrested, handcuffed and fined $130 for trying to set up a pro-life display) on his show. Michael often reiterates that this is not an issue of whether or not you support abortion, but whether or not you support freedom of speech.

And, as Michael looks into the issue, he finds out that some students are less equal than others; that the same universities that defend one kind of controversial views (such as the "Israeli apartheid" expositions) violently deny right to free speech to those holding the pro-life views. It turns out that some universities even have a clause in their charter that allows them to shut down displays that go "against the mainstream values".
Michael Coren does an incredible job of demonstrating the incoherence of the position taken by “pro-choicers”.

José (JoJo) Ruba of the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform also makes an appearance. He is such a smooth operator and a great apologist for the pro-life cause.

The tone of the show is very calm, non-inflammatory and somewhat stoic. It’s mostly factual. No fire and brimstone here.
Too bad the CTS TV website won't allow embedding the show directly in this blog, but you can follow this link to see it. See for yourself - the videos of the arrest and the videos of our educated tolerant "pro-choice" students who are only "pro-choice" when it comes to their own choice. Hear the arguments and judge for yourself who is the true pro-choice here.

P.S. Also check out this article: The price of free speech in Canada on the Oh! Canada! blog, by Pastor David Kalamen. Again, this is not about whether or not you agree with a certain idea. It's about whether or not people even have the right to freedom of speech - including the freedom to express ideas the majority might not agree with.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Anti-Life Culture — Children Are Targeted At School And At Home

First, here's a presentation by George Gilmore. George for many years was president of the New Brunswick Right to Life Association. He has long maintained a keen interest in the education of our youth. He reports on some recent developments in the public schools in the area of “sex education”. Through his presentation, he shows that what happened this past summer in District 16 schools in Miarmichi was certainly not an isolated incident.

Here are the quotes which George's wife didn't find appropriate for his speech. See for yourself, how appropriate those quotes are - especially when it comes to a presentation intended for the grade 9 students.

And, if you think that the children are safe at home - think again. Here's a presentation by Marsha Boyd-Mitchell. Marsha coordinates the Christian Action Federation of NB's ministry to youth and she's a teacher and soon to be a principal of a Christian school in Sussex. Her talk is entitled "Culture Conscious: Right to Life in the Media". But the reality is such that the talk is mainly about the lack of the culture of life in the media.

This presentation exposes fashionable notions on euthanasia, abortion, domestic violence and promiscuity in entertainment. Media often reflects the views of society, but in addition it misinforms youth about these very weighty topics.

That's what our children are being exposed to. Marsha mentions that an average child gets about 30 hours of TV time a week. That doesn't include all the time spent listening to music which, as we've seen, is no better. The solution is - get your children out. There are other schools (like the one where Marsha teaches,) where being pro-life and pro-family is the norm. There are other books, songs and even TV programs that teach children the right values. All we have to do is to support them.

Friday, October 22, 2010

That's How They Want Religion To Be Taught In Schools

It would be funny if such "lessons" haven't been made mandatory, and not just in Quebec... P.S. The book mentioned in the video must be worth reading...

Thursday, October 21, 2010

How Bad Does It Have To Get Before You Stop Being A Silent "Moderate"?

For Fr. Simon Lobo, it was his sister's arrest at Carleton University that prompted him to stop being a moderate and to speak up against the injustices that take place on Canadian soil and against all the silence and inaction that make these injustices possible:
“This is where we've come as a society,” Fr. Lobo told his parishioners at St. Maurice Parish. “As Canadians we pride ourselves on being so tolerant, and yet it seems the tolerance only goes in one direction – and it's not in favour of life, and it's not in favour of Catholicism at all."
“I can’t be a moderate pro-lifer any longer,” he said. “It’s become something that’s drawing the line in the sand for a lot of people.”

It would be easy to blame the university, the police, or “those who promote a radically liberal agenda” for the arrests, he said in the homily, "but you and I are part of the problem, because we have put up with too much for too long.”

Fr. Lobo noted that Canadians' tax dollars have fully funded abortion for decades, as well as academic institutions such as Carleton. He also noted that municipal tax dollars pay for the police, who were called in to arrest the students.

"On an annual basis, I would suggest that as a parish ... – indirectly – we give more money to support abortions and the pro-choice cause then we give to donate to support women in crisis pregnancies and the pro-life movement,” he said. “Does that bother you?”
The latter too is a good point. What do you think is a better option - to pay income tax, knowing that some of the funds will go towards funding abortions and pro-abortion groups in Canada and worldwide or to donate to the local Right to Life chapter and get about half the amount back in tax breaks? By the way, political contributions of up to $400 are eligible to 75% tax credit. What makes more sense - to contribute $400 to Canada's only pro-life, pro-family political party at only $100 out of pocket expense or to keep the $100, let the government pocket the other $300 and doing nothing until it's your own relative that gets arrested for telling the truth?
Fr. Lobo called the graphic images of abortion used in GAP, which are often seen as controversial, “disgusting.”

“But they're also true and accurate. Abortion is disgusting,” he added.
You can listen to Fr. Simon Lobo’s homily here. It reminds me of the Lev Tolstoy's famous article against death penalty, written back in 1908. Well, it's been over 100 years. Murders and villains no longer face death penalty. But it's still rampant in the world, targeting the most innocent people of all - the unborn babies.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Defending Family Values IS Fighting Poverty

Those who think that "social justice" and fighting poverty are more important than defending traditional marriage and family values, better think again: here's another research which confirms the obvious - that breakdown of the traditional family and marriage is in fact the major cause of poverty:
The crux of this problem and its costs is that a lack of marriage causes poverty. The poverty rate for single parents with children is 36.5 percent, while it is only 6.4 percent for married couples with children.
Obama's solution for the poverty problem is more redistribution of money from taxpayers to the poor. But there's no evidence that more money is the remedy because we've been increasing handouts every year and the problem keeps getting worse.

Contrary to a lot of chatter, this isn't a teenage problem (only 7.7 percent of new single moms are minors), and it isn't a failure of birth control, and it isn't the accidents of unplanned pregnancies. These single moms want their babies and confidently expect Big Brother to provide for them.
Marriage drops the probability of child poverty by 82 percent. Marriage has just as dramatic an effect as adding 5 to 6 years to the parents' level of education.

If single moms were to marry the fathers of their children, the children would immediately be lifted out of poverty. Eight out of ten of these fathers were employed at the time of the births of their out-of-wedlock children.

Government should reduce or eliminate the marriage penalties in welfare programs, in tax law, and even in ObamaCare.
Here in Canada, the situation isn't much better. In spite of the minor improvements brought in by the Conservative government, families are still disadvantaged; they still pay more in taxes and receive less in benefits, compared to two individuals that make the same income. The situation is even worse on the provincial level. Unfortunately, not many at the government level are interested in having strong, successful and self-sufficient families. After all - if everyone can get by without government's help - who is going to need the nanny state and it's handouts?

But handouts, as we know, never work. Strong families, on the other hand - that's the building block of our society. Supporting family values, opposing anti-family sex "education" curriculum in schools and eliminating discrimination against families in our tax system is therefore essential.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

40 Days For Life - Do It For The Little Ones

317 babies have been saved since the beginning of the fall vigil. The total number of babies saved from abortion by the 40 Days for Life vigil has surpassed 3000. Here's the story of just one of them:
If you’ve followed these reports, you may remember reading about Erin, the “wrong number” woman from Indianapolis.

To quickly recap, Erin had scheduled an abortion last spring. She called to confirm her appointment — or so she thought. But she didn’t reach Planned Parenthood. The phone that rang belonged to a 40 Days for Life volunteer who was praying outside the abortion center!

To make a long story short, Erin canceled her abortion and her daughter was born just a few days before this campaign started.

But there’s more!

Prayer volunteers recently met Lori, who had driven four hours from Kentucky for a counseling session — the first step in the abortion process. The vigil participants quickly got in touch with Elizabeth, the pro-life counselor who had helped Erin.

Elizabeth learned that Lori had a small child … and was still suffering from a previous abortion. Lori appreciated the offers of help, but still had doubts about keeping her baby. So Elizabeth called Erin!

“Erin helped Lori to have the courage to trust God and choose life for her unborn baby,” said Eileen in Indianapolis. “Erin was pleased to be able to help someone else.”

Please pray for Erin, Lori and all those who are tempted to “choose” abortion.
In Birmingham, Alabama, twins were saved from abortion. Yes, the 40 Days for Life vigil works; no wonder the pro-abort group in Ottawa wants the city to revoke the vigil's permit and to prevent future vigils using tight "bubble zone" by-laws. They try to portray a peaceful vigil as a noisy protest, claiming that women who want to access the abortion facility on Bank street "have to run the gauntlet of anti-choice activists". But the reality is much simpler:
“These people are no-choice unless it’s their choice,” commented Mary Ellen Douglas, national organizer for Campaign Life Coalition. “They don’t believe in freedom of speech for anybody else, unless it’s their opinion. The people out there praying on the street for an end to abortion have every right to be there.”
The pro-aborts know that their myths about "choice" are powerless against the witness of truth and the wholehearted prayers. That's why they keep resorting to lies, harassment and gag laws.

Monday, October 18, 2010

Day Of Silence For The Unborn

Schools typically don't welcome pro-life message. Well, how about a day of silence?
October 18, 2010 ( – On Tuesday morning, students from thousands of schools around the world will keep silence and refuse to speak as a protest against the silencing of countless innocent children by abortion.

Leaders of the Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity, a project of Stand True – Christ Centered Pro-Life, say hundreds of thousands of students will lose their voice in solidarity with their brothers and sisters who will never have a voice. Last year Stand True heard from participants that over 80 girls canceled their abortions on the day of the event due to the silent campaign.

"By refusing to speak the students create a huge buzz and abortion will be the most talked about subject on campus," said Bryan Kemper, President of Stand True Ministries. "This generation is fed up with the senseless violence of abortion and is determined to bring an end the abortion holocaust."

Participants will also signal their solidarity with the unborn by wearing red armbands and/or red duct tape on their mouths, and distribute educational flyers to anyone who asks why they are silent. Students are instructed to be respectful to teachers and other officials, and to speak with them when required.

Many home-schooled students will also participate in the event by visiting local malls and other public areas to distribute flyers.
Meanwhile, pro-life students at Carleton University, the courageous group that was arrested recently for setting up a pro-life display, are trying to host the "Echoes of the Holocaust" presentation on campus. These presentations by the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform are considered to be controversial, and in the past, some of them were either banned outright by the "student unions" or shouted down by pro-abort protesters. Hopefully, Carleton students have a little more success than the pro-life groups at McGill and St.Mary's.

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Universities Are Not Charter-Free Zones

Court of Queen's Bench Justice Jo'Anne Strekaf confirmed in her ruling that university students too have the right to free speech. University by-laws can't override the Charter.
As Justice Strekaf said,
“I am satisfied that the University is not a Charter free zone. The Charter does apply in respect of the disciplinary proceedings taken by the University against the Applicants [Keith and Steven Pridgen]….While the University is free to construct policies dealing with student behaviour which may ultimately impact access to the post-secondary system, the manner in which those policies are interpreted and applied must not offend the rights provided under the Charter.”
The ruling is good news for the Pridgens. It’s great news, as well, for pro-life students across Canada who have faced, or will face, discrimination from university administrations and student unions because of their pro-life message.

University administrations and student unions should take note of this ruling – especially the University of Calgary and Carleton University, which seem to have a particularly hard time respecting free speech rights of students, at least when it comes to pro-life students. Justice Strekaf’s ruling sets a clear precedent. Students do have free speech rights on campus and they have the law on their side.
Considering that students must also pay a hefty amount of money for the privilege to attend classes, there's definitely no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to criticize their professors. And, considering how political the universities have become, considering that there are so many other groups which engage in political activism on campus (including display of graphic pictures) - there's absolutely no reason why the university should single out pro-life students.

Friday, October 15, 2010

No Culture Is Wrong?

That's what's being promoted now under the guise of "equity policy" and "multiculturalism":
Recently, I attended an equity forum at a local school board which was in the midst of establishing their Equity Policy. One of the PowerPoint slides made an astonishing claim which is really the cornerstone of new age equity. The claim was, “No Culture is Wrong.” I thought to myself, well, that certainly is not true, because if it was then honor killings would be honorable and cannibalism would be just another way to eat.

Diversity and multiculturalism 40 years ago were simply about appreciating various folk cultures. Today however, diversity, multiculturalism, inclusiveness and equity now mean that all viewpoints, all lifestyles and all behaviors are equally moral and valid. Hence, no culture is wrong. Equity is an ideology seeking to create an ideal society, yet it has nothing to do with reality. It is really just a new term for an old delusional philosophy of utopianism which seeks to break free of traditional loyalties, old thought patterns and moral convictions. Equity seeks to liberate mankind from ‘oppressive constraints’ like purity, fidelity and responsibility.

Today, some believe that not supporting someone in immoral behavior is judgmental and may hurt the individual’s feelings. Better to let a person destroy their life and others with their immoral conduct and feel good about it than to warn them of the harm they are doing and encourage them to do the moral thing. True, their feelings may be hurt for the moment but the hurt incurred is not even in the same league as the damage they and others will experience should they continue in their immorality.
The "progressives" however believe that not hurting perverts' feelings justifies subjecting children to homosexualist propaganda at schools. Jim Enos happens to live in Hamilton, a city where the district school board has been extremely active in forcing this form of abuse on children, in spite of the parents' objections.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Fetal Rights Debate — Who Is Insane Here?

"Rally to restore sanity" - that's how the US pro-aborts named the rally which they plan to hold on October 30. The name obviously comes from the famous Restoring Honor Rally, that drew over 500,000 participants. Looks like the pro-aborts want to cash in on its popularity (copycats!) and apparently their major buzzword - "choice" has become way too worn out. So they decided to use the word sanity instead, with a bunch of slogans which explain how poor choice to destroy the baby at the earliest stages of development is also the "sane" choice. Protecting those babies, trying to save them from death, is apparently insane.

One of their slogans recommends supporting pro-aborts because "politicians make crappy doctors". Sure, nobody says that it should be a must for a politician to have a med school diploma. But how about a basic knowledge of simple scientific facts on fetal development, that are known to everyone who bothered to take biology classes in middle school? Politicians that keep denying or ignoring those facts for the sake of their ideology, can't be trusted even to put band-aid on a cut. (They may accidentally criss-cross it over your mouth.) And by the way, the fact that politicians make lousy doctors doesn't mean that "planned parenthood" knows best.

Rather the opposite. Here are a few facts that the pro-aborts pretend not to be aware of:

Every day we learn more about fetal development. We know about the tiny heart that starts beating 18-21 days after conception; we know about the tiny feet and arms and fingers - with unique fingerprints already engraved. We know that an unborn baby can feel pain and recognize voices... Now we also know that babies want to be social before they are born:
The impulse to be social is so deep-seated in human consciousness that it’s even evident in the womb, suggests a new study on the interaction of twins just a few months after conception.
The researchers used ultrasound recorders to make three-dimensional videos of five pairs of twins, once at 14 weeks and again at 18 weeks. By the 14th week, they were already reaching for each other. This was even more pronounced by the 18th week, when fetuses touched each other more often than themselves.
So who is insane here? Those who speak up in defense of innocent babies or those who believe that killing them before birth is a "choice"? Those who base their views on scientific facts or those who deny the obvious and cling to a long-discredited ideology? If the pro-aborts want to restore sanity - they should start with themselves.

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

US Physics Professor: Global Warming — Greatest & Most Successful Pseudoscientific Fraud

Another professor speaks up against the global warming fraud... on his way out.
...How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
But now, once Professor Harold Lewis has resigned, the science is settled, right? Senator Mitchell believes that "climate change is so obvious that most people now acknowledge that it is happening and are not about to stand up and say, "No, it is not happening"; and, of course, one has to be pressed to imagine that it is actually not happening". So Senator Mitchell is pressing the government to make tithing to the Church of Mother Gaia (otherwise known as "carbon offsets") eligible for the Federal income tax credit.
My wife and I have three children; there are five of us. Each Canadian is responsible for about six tonnes of carbon emissions a year. In our case, that is 30 tonnes. We could go to the European market today and probably buy a tonne for about $20. For $600 a year, our family could be carbon neutral.
Climate change is happening. The science is overwhelming; it is being caused by human activity. We have to encourage the human activity that will fix it, which is what this bill is designed to do.

The other argument that has been used is that carbon credits have all kinds of structural problems: They represent hot air in Russia; they will not really do the trick, et cetera. I say to Conservatives who say that to me still, "You should talk to your Prime Minister because he is already committed to cap and trade, and carbon markets and carbon credits are the trade part of the cap and trade." It is a moot point for even Conservative policy now. We are into it; we just have not even started to develop the market for carbon credits.

Look elsewhere in the world. In Europe, there is a $100-billion-a-year carbon market.
Yes, unfortunately, Stephen Harper was pressured by the opposition parities and by the warmist heads of states to get Canada involved in this cap-and-trade scam. But that doesn't necessarily mean that "global warming", "global climate change", "global disruption" or whatever it's called nowadays is actually taking place. That only means that even Canada's right-of-center party is unable (and sometimes - unwilling) to stand up to climate fraudsters, that have such a strong backing in our Parliament, in the media and in the scientific community.

Senator Mitchell wants families to "voluntary" tax themselves; he believes that a family of five should be spending $600 a year on those phony "carbon offsets" to be "carbon neutral". That's over $4B a year out people's pockets - just on the individual level; we should not forget that businesses too will be compelled to buy those phony "offsets" and the costs will factored in the prices of goods and services. Plus, those jurisdictions that tax carbon, apply much higher rates than $20 per tonne, so Senator Mitchell's projections are way too optimistic. In reality, becoming "carbon neutral" will costs each family thousands, not hundreds of dollars a year. The 15% credit, if passed, will cost the government billions of dollars, that not including tens of billions of dollars in extra expenses, resulting from reduced economic output, higher unemployment and lower standards of living.

But why should we waste all that money on a pseudoscientific fraud?

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

40 Days Milestone: 3000 Babies Saved

Those are just the ones we know of. Now, isn't this something to be proud to be a part of?
October 12, 2010 ( – Yesterday the 40 Days for Life campaign announced a significant milestone for the burgeoning pro-life initiative – its 3,000th baby saved from abortion since the first 40 Days campaign in the fall of 2007.

“To God be the glory for reaching this major milestone!” wrote Shawn Carney of 40 Days in yesterday’s update. “That's a LOT of children and mothers spared from abortion. And that's a lot of GREAT stories.”

Carney shared one such story from an abortion facility in Reno Nevada, where the abortionist has actually installed a sprinkler system aimed directly at the sidewalk where 40 Days participants stand and pray.

Carney relates that at the Reno site recently, “A woman driving out of the abortion center's parking lot stopped to ask one of the local volunteer for her phone number. Shortly after, the volunteer received a text message.”

The woman wrote in the text message that the previous week she had gone to the abortion facility to drop off the payment for an upcoming abortion, at which point she saw the pro-life protesters out front.

“As I was driving away I couldn’t help but think that maybe there was another way. All this week I thought and prayed about it and I realized in my heart what the right thing to do was,” she wrote.

“I can’t help but think, that had you guys not been there that day to remind me that I had another choice, that maybe one more baby would have died today.”

She concluded, “Don’t stop what you’re doing. It matters. It did to me. From the blonde lady in the white SUV who picked up her money instead of aborting her baby today.
Jill Stanek reports that the pro-aborts have started a Halloween campaign "don't get tricked, get treated". Obviously, there's always a question about the kind of "treatment" they promote - what it means for the babies - and for the women. But also, the more stories like that we hear, the more it becomes obvious, who is the one that tricks women into making a choice they wouldn't make if they knew the whole truth; whether its the pro-life movement or the pro-aborts.

Monday, October 11, 2010

"We've Changed Our Mind, Could You Please Abort The Baby"

It sounds crazy, but that's what actually happened in BC:
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, October 6, 2010 ( - More light has been shed on the web of legal and moral dilemmas surrounding artificial reproduction this week after a B.C. fertility doctor revealed a dispute between a couple and their surrogate over the couple’s desire to abort their baby. The National Post reports that the parents had discovered through a first trimester ultrasound that the child likely had Down syndrome.

The surrogate, a mother of two, initially disagreed with the parents and decided to give birth to the child; however, she eventually decided to abort, according to the Post. The parties had signed an agreement saying that the parents would not be responsible for their child should the woman carry the pregnancy to term against the parents’ wishes.
The first question (and the obvious one) is - what about adoption? After all, if the woman agreed to carry the baby for his biological parents - why can't she continue carrying the very same baby to term for some other couple that could adopt him later?

But then - how can we expect common sense when it comes to practices that go against the basic moral laws?
However, Juliet Guichon, a bioethicist with the University of Calgary, said that children cannot be treated the same as any other product that might be created on an assembly line. “Should the rules of commerce apply to the creation of children? No, because children get hurt,” Guichon told the Post. “It’s kind of like stopping the production line: ‘Oh, oh, there’s a flaw.’ It makes sense in a production scenario, but in reproduction it’s a lot more problematic.”

According to Dr. John Shea, a leading Canadian bioethicist and expert on reproductive technologies, the situation highlights the dangers of Canada’s liberal laws concerning the beginning of life. “When you break the moral law, you end up with a thousand different problems, foreseen or unforeseen,” he said.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

"Choice"? Whose Choice Exactly?

The woman mentioned in the story obviously didn't want to choose abortion. But her "boyfriend" apparently made the "choice" for her:
Columbus, OH ( — An Ohio man was arrested this morning after police say he allegedly tried to force his pregnant girlfriend at gunpoint to have an abortion.
They said the couple were in a vehicle dropping their child off at school when Holt-Reid became angry after the girlfriend refused to keep the abortion appointment slated for this morning. Holt-Reid reportedly obtained a gun from the glove compartment and pointed it at his pregnant girlfriend — forcing her to drive to the abortion center. The Dispatch indicates she passed a note to center staff, who called the police after receiving it.
But maybe this was just an isolated incident? Not really:
A report released earlier this year finds women who have abortions frequently report they feel pressured or coerced into having one — and they say they don’t get the counseling they need from abortion centers for abortions they may not otherwise want. The report from the Elliot Institute, Forced Abortion in America, calls the problem a “widespread epidemic.”

The report notes how research suggests most abortions are likely unwanted or coerced, with one survey of women who had abortions finding that 64 percent said they felt pressured by others to abort.
Babies don't choose abortion. And as we've seen, in 2 out of 3 cases - neither do women. Someone else makes the "choice" to destroy the "unwanted" baby for them - irresponsible partners or family members who see abortion as "lesser evil" compared to having an "unplanned" or out of wedlock baby... And yet, those who call themselves feminists, those who pretend to campaign for "women's rights" still fiercely oppose the bill that would make it a crime to coerce women into aborting their babies...

And here's another story - also about "choice". Not the baby's choice of course and again, not the woman's choice...
Albuquerque, NM, October 8, 2010 ( – The seventeen-year-old teen sat nervously in the waiting room of the Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on Thursday, October 7, 2010. She was six weeks pregnant and did not want to have an abortion, but her mother had insisted.

Suddenly, her phone alerted her to an incoming text message.

“Jane, [not her real name] you are a mom! Please choose life for your baby, we want to help you! Tara”

That began a texting conversation that ultimately led to the young mother leaving the abortion clinic with the firm decision to keep her baby.
“Can i see an ultrasound an still tell them i dont want it done?” texted Jane.

“Yes you dont have to do anything you dont want … you can leave now and go next door they will help you just leave now,” replied Tara.

“my parents wont let me,” responded Jane.

Tara assured Jane that she did not have to do anything she did not want to do. She encouraged her by telling her that her grandparents and boyfriend did not want her to have the abortion and that they would be supportive of her and the new baby. Jane asked her if Tara could help with an adoption, and Tara assured her that she could. Tara encouraged Jane to come outside and talk to her.

“I am coming over there to meet u! Lets talk before u make your final decision, theres no hurry,” texted Tara.
So who is really "pro choice" here? Those who usher women into abortion "clinics" - often against their will or those who are there to help women in crisis, those ready to provide women with psychological help and information, to help them make an informed choice - and choose life.

Friday, October 8, 2010

Confirmed: Arrests At Carleton U — An Act Of Censorship

The university no longer tries to pretend, that the arrest of five pro-life students had anything to do with trespassing. Now, it's all about content:
OTTAWA, Ontario, October 7, 2010 ( – While Carleton University said earlier this week that it had five pro-life students arrested mainly because they had set up a display in an area on campus that the university claimed was “not normally permitted” for displays, a university representative today told that the real issue was “the nature of the content.”
Carleton’s director of communications Jason MacDonald told media Monday, in comments published by major media such as the National Post, that the group was denied the space because “student groups are not normally permitted use of the Quad for displays.” He stated that, “in addition,” there were concerns about the content of the group’s display.

Today, however, the student group issued a press release saying that Carleton was “misleading the public” by suggesting that the pro-life students were asking for special treatment in the use of the public area.

In the release, club president Ruth Lobo said she found it appalling the university would "mislead the public by making the arrest look like we violated university policy instead of what it really was: that Carleton censors opinions on campus thereby violating their own policy of academic freedom."
So, when the university doesn't like the content of the display, they don't even attempt to argue their point of view using academic means, they just bring in hired goons. Universities of today don't care about truth and academic debate. It's the ideology that matters for them:
Are the pictures true?

That’s the question. And if they are true, then just why the hell is Carleton University and its hired thugs trying suppress it? That’s another important question to ask about the motives and the mentality of Censorship U. Authorities.

But our government and academic organs don’t make judicial decisions based on the truth anymore.
Too bad so many people still come to these places in search of knowledge.

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Population Control Freaks Get More And More Bloodthirsty

Some of them are still trying to play moderate; they just want to put everyone on birth control. Or they suggest that we trim the population growth by aborting disabled babies. Others don't really bother to hide their views any more. They make it clear what exactly is the best way to reduce emissions and how those who don't agree with them should be dealt with. Can they be more clear about their agenda? No pressure, right, but only as long as you comply. Not sure what kind of "creative challenge" these guys were facing, but so far all their creativity has been focused on exterminating humans for planet's sake.
Once again, are these “eco-fascists” trying to advocate the “removal” of those who don’t support their radical agenda? It isn’t like this is the first time one of these environmentalists have advocated the “thinning of the herd”, so let’s pretend this something new. Once again, this is the reason Patrick Moore left Greenpeace, the organization he co-founded, because it had become an “anti-human” group.
By the way, this is not the first time the explosion theme appears in their works. They started with an online game featuring an exploding "overconsuming" pig. Now, a couple years later, the envirofascists came up with a movie featuring exploding humans. The online game suggested that the player should have died at early age (typically - between 8 and 24,) when he had "used up his share of the planet". This movie wants the "overconsuming" individuals dead right away.

And, if all they can say in their defense is "sorry, we thought you have some sense of humor" - that clearly shows that those who came up with the script for the scandalous movie weren't just lonely radicals. It's mainstream. Which is not surprising, if you look at it:
We have all heard the chief argument in support of the dehumanization of the unborn - that they're just a clump of non-sentient cells. Attempting to draw a convenient legal line between personhood and parasite cannot stem the cancer that dehumanization inflicts on society. As soon as the arbitrary line is drawn at birth (or race, or sentience), the question becomes legitimate: why not further? Why should infants be classified as human and deserve the right to life? Why should the mentally disabled go on living while we know in our omnipotence that they'd rather be dead?
It starts with the disregard for human life. And it evolves into an ideology, which promises a better world, if only we let them eliminate millions upon millions of undesirables. The radical environmentalism isn't any different. They can claim that they "love the planet" and that they're working to build a better, environment-friendly world. But sometimes they slip - and let everybody see what exactly is their vision for a better "green" world: Whoever drew this, didn't bother to dream about some magic buttons that would destroy anyone who doesn't agree with the envirofascist beliefs. He prefers far more practical approach.

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Abortion vs "Choice"

"We are not pro-abort, we are pro-choice", claims a commenter on the Moncton Right to Life blog. Pro- what kind of "choice"? Babies don't choose abortion. And often - it's not even their mothers who make the decision:
It had never occurred to me to really think about the possibility of unplanned pregnancy. I had always used condoms! The 15% failure rate with ‘perfect use’ was just a random number in my head. Condoms = safe sex = no pregnancy or disease. End of story. I was a good girl, a smart girl, my mother worked for Planned Parenthood and a private abortion clinic, so there was NO WAY it could happen to me.
My mother called around noon. I told her about my discussion with the counselor and she blew up at me (predictably). She screamed that she was going to sue the college for advising any option other than abortion, and she threatened to cut off my tuition and any other support money. I gave in. Immediately she fell back into cheerful mode, bubbling on about how great it was going to be to get her friends together to celebrate my rite of passage. She said she would buy the tickets right away after we got off the phone, and that she would call back once she knew my flight time and which airport.
Her voice turned icy. “Well, if that’s how Daddy feels then he WILL have to support you. If he wants you to ruin your life by having a baby, then HE can pay for EVERYTHING for you and IT, and I will never put another cent toward your education. I’ve devoted my life to helping women who need abortions, and now you’re the one who needs help, and I’m going to help you, so that’s that, okay???”
I told her what my mother had said, and that she was already buying the plane tickets and I had no choice. I remember that, so clearly, more clearly than anything else about my abortion. I said: “I HAVE NO CHOICE.” In a last-ditch effort, the counselor told me that if I aborted I would go to hell. I was an atheist at that point, so the threat was empty to me. I said: “I’m more afraid of my mother.” and hung up.
So that's the kind of "choice" they stand for. Coerced "choice", never - an informed choice, in fact - an unchoice... And Abigail is not the only woman who fell victim to the industry of the "unchoice".

Remember all the outcry from the pro-abort side when the anti-coercion bill was introduced? Why do you think they are so opposed to the law that would make it illegal to threaten a woman with eviction, loss of job or financial support if she refuses to abort her baby? Because then it would be clear that abortion has nothing to do with "choice". The only real choice is to choose life. And if the woman really doesn't want the baby - there's always adoption, the loving option.

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

5 Carleton University Students Arrested For Setting Up Pro-Life Display

Just like in Calgary, they were accused of trespassing on their own campus:
The students were arrested around 9:00 a.m. as they were preparing to set up signs in the university’s Tory Quad, a central outdoor location, for the Genocide Awareness Project, which compares abortion to past atrocities through graphic imagery.

“This will set the standard for how far pro-lifers are willing to go for their right to freedom of speech, and their right to talk about abortion,” said Ruth Lobo, a fourth-year student and president of Carleton Lifeline, after she and the others were released this morning.
Lobo noted, further, that the quad is listed as bookable space, and that it has been used by student groups in the past. MacDonald did not respond by press time when asked about the university’s criteria to determine whether students can use the quad.

Lobo said that when they were told this morning by campus security – who awaited their arrival along with the Ottawa police – to move to Porter Hall, security said they would escort them by a private route so that no one would see the signs. “So they really were very adamant that no one see this thing, and very adamant that no one wants to see this,” she said.

The students were taken handcuffed to campus security services, where the Ottawa police charged each with 2 counts of trespassing – failure to leave property when asked, and trying to go ahead with a prohibited event. They were each fined $130.
Suzanne from the Big Blue Wave has the video of the arrest.
Those who believe that this has anything to do with law and order should ask themselves whether the police and campus security would treat the protesters the same way if they were campaigning for the other side. Somehow, when it comes to the left-wing group protesters, one has to be extremely loud, aggressive and violent to get even reprimanded, let alone - arrested handcuffed and fined. Peaceful pro-lifers on the other hand, that's different. If anything, those students should thank their lucky stars that they weren't thrown in jail for a year or two, the way Linda Gibbons was:
TORONTO, Ontario, October 4, 2010 ( – Linda Gibbons will continue to languish in prison until at least Oct. 29 after a brief appearance in the Ontario Court of Justice in downtown Toronto on Sept. 30.
The defense argues that the government’s failure to act on the issue of the temporary injunction renders it incapable of using that order to criminally prosecute anyone accused of violating it. However, Madam Justice Mara Beth Greene has already ruled that the defence is not entitled to disclosure of Crown documents related to why it has failed to proceed with the matter. She has also rejected constitutional arguments against it.
But if Linda was throwing paint at those wearing fur coats or if those 5 that got arrested at Carleton U were staging an anti-capitalism protest - that would be a different story, wouldn't it?

Monday, October 4, 2010

Life Chain - Moncton

About 50 people joined the Life Chain in Moncton yesterday. The 40 Days for Life vigil too went uninterrupted, with 7 people praying at the George Dumont Hospital during the Life Chain hours.

This time we also had a few protesters; a group of some 5 or 6 pro-aborts (apparently the same folks that countered the 40 Days on Saturday,) stood at the entrance to the Champlain Mall parking lot. Ironically, I found it quite encouraging to see them there, because with all the honks and thumbs up that we were getting, it almost felt like we were preaching to the choir.

But, of course, it wasn't the case; even those who agree with us, often don't know the whole truth. Some of those to stopped to talk to us at the 40 Days or at the Life Chain were surprised to find out that there's no legal restriction on abortions in Canada; somehow there's a common belief that abortions are only allowed until 13-17 weeks.

Some didn't even know that the George Dumnot Hospital (a Catholic hospital, by the way,) performs abortions; that it's been responsible for at least 1 in 4 slaughtered New Brunswick babies for over 4 years now. So we're getting the message out, whether the pro-aborts like it or not. They can heckle our prayer vigil, they can ask their friends to drive around yelling "choice" (as if we can't see that it's the same people over and over,) but they can't silence the truth about the unchoice they promote.

Saturday, October 2, 2010

What's Next? An Arrest Warrant For The Pope?

A US judge wants to subpoena the Pope:
The request is an incremental — and long shot — step in a lawsuit that accuses the officials of conspiring to keep the allegations against a Milwaukee priest quiet. The Vatican is not obliged to comply with the request.

Under similar circumstances, the Vatican has made service difficult, time consuming and expensive by insisting, for example, that documentation be translated into Latin, one of the Vatican's official languages.
I guess their next step would be to sending a police van to Vatican, to arrest the Holy Father. And, obviously, there are many people out there who are eager to see that happening. But here's something to think about: would they be that vigorous if this was a high-profile Muslim cleric being accused in covering up sexual abuse? Would they dare to demand the Saudian embassy to serve him with the court papers? Would they even dare to talk about the abuse if there was a Muslim cleric involved? Of course those are rhetorical questions. Those who badmouth the Pope, who want him to be held responsible for the acts of abuse, committed by a handful of priests, those who want him arrested and persecuted, know that they risk nothing.

Friday, October 1, 2010

Legalizing Prostitution — Opening The Door To Modern Slavery

Michael Coren calls it for what it is - the whoring of common sense:
One judge. Not an elected assembly but one socially privileged and detached woman who rejects evidence and objections because she has a more “progressive” view of society. And thus the laws on prostitution could change in this country forever. It’s interesting that the police supported the status quo but their opinions were rejected. When, however, they supported the long-gun registry we were told over and over again that their views had to be respected. How odd.
Fortunately, this government (unlike Liberal predecessors,) doesn't need to consult Svend Robinson on whether or not they should appeal this decision. They just do what's right and they are going to appeal this ridiculous ruling. Hopefully, the ruling ends up being quashed - either by higher court or by the government using of the non-withstanding clause.

As for those who claim that legalizing prostitution will somehow improve the personal security of the women involved in it, those who want Canada to follow the European example, should look closer at the situation in those European countries and see if they've actually had any success:
In 2005, the mayor of Amsterdam admitted that the Dutch experiment to curb abuse by legalizing prostitution in 2000 had failed miserably.

"Almost five years after the lifting of the brothel ban, we have to acknowledge that the aims of the law have not been reached", said Mayor Job Cohen in an NCR report. "Lately we've received more and more signals that abuse still continues."

Police in Amsterdam's infamous red light district were quoted by Dutch media as saying, "We are in the midst of modern slavery." Police said they were hampered in confronting the horrors that are characteristic of the sex trade because prostitution was legal.

In 2005 it was reported that Germany was reconsidering its position on legalized prostitution, made legal there in 2003, after reports that legalization had not really had any benefit for prostitutes, nor had it improved the situation for Germany at large.
“Opponents say Europeans need only look to Sweden to see the future of legalization,” wrote Isabelle de Pommereau in a 2005 Christian Science Monitor article. “The country - which legalized prostitution 30 years ago - recriminalized it in 1998, after complaints that legalization had solved few of the problems it set out to address.”

Sweden's ban on prostitution has focused on legislation that criminalized the buying of sex rather than the selling of sex and has resulted in prostitution being nearly eradicated.
That's how it works in Europe. Countries that gave in to the prostitution industry lobby, have only made things worse. But fighting prostitution (and using the right strategy, such as targeting the demand, rather than the supply,) - that actually works. Sweden is a great example.

And another thing:
They’re not sex-trade workers any more than a drug-dealer is a recreation-trade worker. Language is important; let’s not abuse it.
Right on!