Thursday, May 29, 2014

Elliot Rodger and What Went Wrong


Rodger's father issued a statement through his lawyer in support of gun control and "staunchly against guns". It might have been a bit more useful if Peter Rodger, instead of opposing a category of manual instruments, had spent more time dealing with his son's problems.  
The more that the smiling people on television talk about gun control, the less likely they are to talk about them.
In a collectivist system, everyone is responsible for everything collectively and not responsible for anything individually. Everyone but the killer is responsible for his shooting spree. And that means no one is responsible. The problem is tackled with public awareness hashtags and legislation that hurts millions of people who didn't do anything wrong.
Guns have become a convenient cliché. The new villain is no longer the killer, but the 5 million members of the NRA who are unwilling to give up their constitutional rights because Elliot Rodger's family failed at their single most important job.
http://sultanknish.blogspot.ca/2014/05/the-you-didnt-do-that-society.html
 
And that is the crunch. I am not an advocate for owning guns, and being a Canadian citizen, I find the American insistence on being able to own guns rather puzzling. Be that as it may, this mass murder is being analyzed by everyone without ever looking at what went wrong in Elliot Rodger's family. And I do have to agree that it was not guns that killed these people, it was Elliot Rodger who killed them.

There is a real hesitation to look at the real societal problems that stem from families gone amuck, because that would mean judging what people are doing wrong in raising their kids. It is all part of the political correctness that follows from relativism; everyone is okay, everyone is doing their best, and no one can be faulted for what goes wrong.

It is truly time to look at this issue with honesty. Only when we analyze what happened to Elliot Rodger in his family life, will we be able to come to some conclusions about what made him mad enough to go on a killing spree. 
 




Ashamed of the Gospel?


 What was once normative is now regarded as heretical — the moral and cultural equivalent of treason.  And so, here we are. You see, for us, as for our faithful Evangelical friends, it is now Good Friday.  The memory of Jesus's triumphal entry into Jerusalem has faded.  Yes, he had been greeted — and not long ago — by throngs of people waving palm branches and shouting "Hosanna to the Son of David."  He rode into the Jerusalem of Europe and the Jerusalem of the Americas and was proclaimed Lord and King.  But all that is now in the past.  Friday has come.  The love affair with Jesus and his Gospel and his Church is over.  Elite sectors of the cultures of Europe and North America no longer welcome his message.  "Away with him," they shout.  "Give us Barabbas!"

 Will we muster the strength, the courage, the faith to be like Mary the Mother of Jesus, and like John, the apostle whom Jesus loved, and stand faithfully at the foot of the cross?  Or will we, like all the other disciples, flee in terror?  Fearing to place in jeopardy the wealth we have piled up, the businesses we have built, the professional and social standing we have earned, the security and tranquility we enjoy, the opportunities for worldly advancement we cherish, the connections we have cultivated, the relationships we treasure, will we silently acquiesce to the destruction of innocent human lives or the demolition of marriage?  Will we seek to "fit in," to be accepted, to live comfortably in the new Babylon?  If so, our silence will speak.  Its words will be the words of Peter, warming himself by the fire: "Jesus the Nazorean?  I tell you, I do not know the man."

Robert George speaking at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast 2014







Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Rebuttal to Emily's Positive Abortion Video





This is Dr. Monica Miller's response to Emily Lett's video that she made to present a "positive abortion story".

Beside the obvious point, i.e. if this is a video of an abortion, where is the aborted baby?, the line I found most poignant was this:

Emily, someone is holding your hand. Right now, someone is making a connection with you while you are disconnecting yourself from your unborn child. While you are making a connection with someone, you are disconnecting yourself from someone. It is the height of irony.








Pro-Life Signs Being Refused by Edmonton City Council

 
 
 
 
This sign was put up as a billboard by Pattison Outdoors in Edmonton, Alberta. However the Edmonton Transit System has declined to put the sign into all the buses in that city.  It looks as if they will have a fight on their hands however; one of the people behind this sign campaign is lawyer Andre Schutten who says that, since the transit commission is a government entity, it is not allowed to discriminate against public messages as long as they meet the code of advertising.  And apparently, this sign does meet that code.
ETS wanted the billboards changed by removing or replacing the word “kill.” After consulting with the original designer of the billboard, the ARPA (Association for Reformed Political Action) group concluded that there was no suitable substitute for the word “kill” and that any change to the wording of the poster would neuter its effectiveness. Furthermore, it was clear that the use of the word “kill” was accurate and true.
 Now the law is on the side of ARPA. If ARPA was dealing directly with Pattison and they were denied the ability to place an ad on a private Pattison billboard, ARPA would have stopped their claim immediately. As a private entity, ARPA respects their right to only publish whatever they are comfortable publishing. Incidentally, Pattison has published this exact billboard on their private billboards in other locations across the country.
 But ETS is a government entity. As such, it may not censor the expression of views it doesn’t like. The charter (section 2(b) to be exact) protects every Canadian from unreasonable interference by the government in the expression of their opinions, even – no, especially – controversial opinions.
 In fact, just five years ago, our Supreme Court ruled against the Vancouver Transit Authority, stating that Vancouver bureaucrats had no grounds to refuse to publish political messages on their advertising space. Such a refusal was a violation of the charter.
 But don’t expect the Edmonton municipality to change their tune. The only recourse available for volunteer groups is to apply to a court for a judicial review. City employees know that such a process is long, expensive and not without risk. And even if a group were to win, the city can just appeal. After all, it doesn’t cost the councillors a dime. They will happily use your tax dollars while trampling your freedoms.

I hope they will have the ability to pursue this campaign. After all, if the Charter guarantees such rights, it shouldn't result in a municipality's being able to curtail that freedom.








 


Dr. Day Gardner speaking on abortion in Halifax




Jeff Lutes from CJLU FM radio has put this video on YouTube. It is a talk given last Wednesday evening in Halifax, by Dr. Day Gardner. Dr. Gardner is the president of The National Black Pro-Life Union.  An interesting bit of personal information is that Dr. Gardner was also the first black woman to place amongst the semi-finalists in the Miss America contest, and she was also Miss Atlanta Georgia in 1974. Brains and looks are a winning combination when you want to speak against abortion.

She spoke of the vast extent of abortion in the US amongst black and Hispanic women. Although they form only a percentage of the population, they are having the most abortions per capita. One of  the key reasons for this is that Planned Parenthood targets the minority population, by putting their clinics in minority neighbourhoods. They know that women experiencing financial difficulties, experiencing relationship instability will be much more likely to seek an abortion to solve an unplanned pregnancy.

Kudos to Jeff Lutes who has always been front and center on this issue. He is one of the very few Christian ministers who is willing to speak about the scourge of abortion and he promotes Canadian pro-life efforts every chance he gets.

If you don't know much about the American abortion scene, Dr. Gardner's talk will give you a brief overview of the recent Kermit Gosnell trial and the extent of abortion within the US.













Monday, May 26, 2014

The Gift of Writing

Yesterday a friend told me that she was writing a book. I was skeptical. Everyone seems to be writing a book these days, and I wondered what could someone have to say that would fill a book?

I asked her what the book was to be about. And she gave me a surprising answer. I was expecting to hear "a memoir" or "the story of my life"; instead she simply said "forgiveness".  I was taken aback. And was immediately drawn to encourage her in this.

I know a little of this woman's story. Not nearly enough, but the bare bones of how her husband, a respected minister, cheated on her and brought about the end of their marriage. And a few years ago, she wrote in The Atlantic Catholic, about her experience of how that had led her to return to the Catholic Church, how to forgive her husband, and most crucial of all, how she now felt wed to Christ.
Her story is one of personal redemption from an incredibly painful situation into a place where she feels the presence of God pretty much all the time.

This book will probably take quite a while to write because she is a perfectionist. There will not be one single spelling error or grammar mistake and wrong use of punctuation in it. I look forward to reading it, because it will be well written but mostly because it will be such a personal revelation of how God has healed her and set her free.

She told me that she had been advised to begin blogging and I encouraged her to do that. Blogging, if nothing else, will make her known amongst a circle of potential readers. The networking that blogging provides is quite amazing, given that it requires so little financial outlay (none if you wish). 

I told her about Jennifer Fulwiler and her newly published book, and suggested she get in touch with Jennifer to connect with a publisher. And I hope that she will also find the vastly diverse world of Christian female bloggers who share their life journeys with any who wish to read them.

For those of you who are blogging already, please keep it up. You never know whom you may touch with your words. There are stories that need to be told and there are people looking for those stories of personal experience, of discovery, of healing, of spiritual growth. While your blogging entries may seem simple and mundane to you, you don't know how it may touch someone somewhere and give them that hope and encouragement they need to live their Christian calling.

Not all bloggers will end up writing books, but some will. And blogging provides the perfect practise of frequent writing that is required to hone your skill. And if you never publish anything other than your blog, take heart that someone reads it (they rarely tell you) and it will warm their heart. You are doing a great service for others when you blog in sincerity; even if you never hear anything back that is affirming, know that you are lighting candles in a world that is so very dark. 






Friday, May 23, 2014

Father Lloyd O'Neill


Father Lloyd O'Neill, parish priest of the Halifax archdiocese, died on Monday, May 19 and was buried this morning from St. Agnes parish, the last parish in which he served as pastor.

The full obituary can be read here.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/obituaries/1208878-oneill-father-lloyd-Eugene

Father Lloyd was my parish priest for 8 years at St. Theresa's Parish in Halifax. A kinder more attentive man I don't think you could find anywhere. He always had time for everyone, particularly those who were suffering.

What I didn't know was the extent of his work with the police and the forces. From his second year as a priest, Father Lloyd gave himself not just to parish work but to work with the forces, the RCMP, and the Halifax police as chaplain for 48 years in total.

He was the one on call during the Westray mine disaster and he was the priest at the forefront of the Swiss Air disaster, comforting the first responders, and tending to the distraught families of the victims.

The homily was given by Bishop Martin Currie, who shared many years of friendship with Father Lloyd commencing with their years at St. Francis Xavier University in the early 60's. As Bishop Currie said, Father Lloyd became a priest just as the church was undergoing huge changes after Vatican II, yet he kept focused on what he believed was his calling from God  - to be a shepherd to the flock.

One story that brought laughter and tears was the recounting of the first time Father Lloyd had been called in to a hostage-taking. The police had surrounded the house in which a man, armed with a knife, held a young woman hostage. He did not respond to the police, and it was hoped that he might respond to a priest. Father Lloyd stood beside the door, talking to the man, who eventually opened the door. Whereupon Father Lloyd grabbed him even as he held the knife, and tackled him to the ground, rolling him into submission. The police were horrified, this was not the usual tactic for taking a prisoner. But it worked and Father Lloyd still took delight in recounting the story years later.

There were also several occasions on which Father Lloyd talked someone out of jumping off the bridge into the harbour. He accompanied the police as they met with families after car accidents, he was a man unafraid to be right there in the mess of life.

He was a little unconventional; a very kind man but with a focus and he had a temper. He did not care much for bishops, preferring the simple approach of being there one-on-one with all the little people.

It certainly worked, because St. Agnes was not big enough for the funeral and the mass was televised to St. Theresa's Church, which was also packed with those who knew him and loved him. 

As Archbishop Mancini said "not even the pope gets two churches!"

Someone said to me that the only sadness she felt was that Father Lloyd died alone. He had said Mass on Sunday evening, and was to take his sister to Sydney on Monday, but he didn't show up. He was found in his apartment sitting in his chair with his boots on. He had said he always wanted to die with his boots on. 

The last homily I heard Father Lloyd preach was about two weeks ago at a morning mass at St. Theresa's church. His homilies were never long, and he never read them, he simply spoke from his heart. That day, he only had a couple of sentences to share. He told us all to simply take time to gaze upon the crucifix and think of just how much Jesus has done for us. He could often be found in the adoration chapel, doing just that.

I don't find it sad that he died without anyone there. I know that there were angels by his side, leading him into heaven and perhaps even Mother Mary was in attendance. I am convinced that the sound of joyful refrains as he entered into paradise were out of this world.  Thank you Father Lloyd for your life of service to Christ.

His funeral card simply says "Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did it to me."  Matthew 23:40









Wednesday, May 21, 2014

New Brunswick politicians dare to oppose the pro-choice lobby

A refreshing story out of New Brunswick, where there has been a lobby to provide government funding to the Morgentaler clinic in Fredericton. The clinic is slated to close this summer due to lack of sufficient funds. And the cry went up that the clinic should be supported by tax dollars to continue to provide abortions to women who use its services.

At the recent March for Life in Fredericton, 800 people showed up - twice the number of last year's March. And 24 of those were MLAs who came out to oppose federal funding for abortion at the clinic. That is almost half the legislature (55 MLAs in total).

What a great surprise to see politicians actually step up on this issue and dare to voice their position which is in opposition to the pro-abortion lobby.

I was in Fredericton a few years ago for their March for Life and was pleased to see about 300 people turn out for the rally and then walk to the pregnancy crisis centre to hold a prayer vigil. The centre is immediately adjacent to the Morgentaler clinic. There was a real sense of solidarity amongst those present and the protesters were few and rather quiet.

I would hope that this spirit extends beyond the province's borders, especially in to Nova Scotia which is apathetic on this issue. We can barely get 100 people out to our rally, and this year there was not one single clergy present at the March for Life.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-brunswick-abortion-industry-alarmed-by-almost-half-of-legislature-atten









Monday, May 19, 2014

Justin Trudeau should read this

Message from the Archbishop: “Being in Communion with the Catholic Church on Moral Issues”

The position of the Catholic Church in favour of life at all stages is clear and unchanging. A person who takes a position in contradiction to the teaching of the Catholic Church on the value and dignity of human life from the moment of conception to the moment of a natural death, and persists in this belief, is not in communion with the Church’s values and teaching, which we believe faithfully transmit for today the teachings of Christ.
 
In his Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel, no 213), Pope Francis explains the link between protection of the unborn and every other human right:
“Among the vulnerable for whom the Church wishes to care with particular love and concern are unborn children, the most defenceless and innocent among us. Nowadays efforts are made to deny them their human dignity and to do with them whatever one pleases, taking their lives and passing laws preventing anyone from standing in the way of this. Frequently, as a way of ridiculing the Church’s effort to defend their lives, attempts are made to present her position as ideological, obscurantist and conservative. Yet this defence of unborn life is closely linked to the defense of each and every other human right. It involves the conviction that a human being is always sacred and inviolable, in any situation and at every stage of development. Human beings are ends in themselves and never a means of resolving other problems. Once this conviction disappears, so do solid and lasting foundations for the defense of human rights, which would always be subject to the passing whims of the powers that be. Reason alone is sufficient to recognize the inviolable value of each single human life, but if we also look at the issue from the standpoint of faith, “every violation of the personal dignity of the human being cries out in vengeance to God and is an offence against the creator of the individual ‘’(John Paul II, Christifideles laici, no 461).


              One may not dissent from these core teachings on life issues and be considered a Catholic in good standing. This is a very serious matter requiring of each Catholic, prayer, reflection to inform one’s conscience, and openness to embrace the Gospel of Jesus Christ in its fullness.
                                                                        
                                                     - Terrence Prendergast, S.J.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Friday, May 16, 2014

Will Catholics Listen?

Archbishop Terence Prendergast of the Ottawa diocese has issued a statement to Justin Trudeau's recent policy of allowing only pro-choice candidates to run for the federal Liberal party.

The archbishop has asked that all priests of the diocese make his letter available to their congregations this Sunday in an effort to clarify the issue for Catholics.

There are many many Catholics who vote Liberal. And many of them vote that way because their parents voted Liberal, their grandparents before them. Immigrants in particular have been supporters of the Liberal party since this was the party that helped new immigrants in their entry into Canadian culture and society. But that has changed over the years. And those who vote Liberal, because it is in their history, need to assess their position.

“The position of the Catholic Church in favour of life at all stages is clear and unchanging,” writes the archbishop. “A person who takes a position in contradiction to the teaching of the Catholic Church on the value and dignity of human life from the moment of conception to the moment of a natural death, and persists in this belief, is not in communion with the Church’s values and teaching, which we believe faithfully transmit for today the teachings of Christ.”
This is pretty clear, sufficiently so that Justin Trudeau should be able to understand it. However, his response is that his father was authentically Catholic and raised his children as Catholics, and Justin therefore infers that his father's actions were in keeping with the Catholic faith. He even cites his father's support for divorce. But he omits his father's part in legalizing abortion.

What Justin doesn't seem to know is that his father was not authentically Catholic. Well known as a womanizer and a man who had numerous affairs, he divorced his wife, had another affair later in life with a love-child from that union, there is rumour of a private letter to Morgentaler concerning someone's abortion (his child?).

Pierre Trudeau was not Catholic; and his son Justin comes from the same tree. He claims that his cultural Catholic identity and his espousing some of the Catholic beliefs makes him truly Catholic.

Unfortunately, he is not alone. So many people in the church think the same way. And that is why so many of them have voted for Pierre Trudeau and will vote for his son Justin.

Unless the Church specifically calls out Trudeau and tells him directly that he is not a Catholic in good standing, the rest of the Catholic Church will not take heed of this latest letter. Unfortunately, the Catholic hierarchy has been too close to the Liberal Party in the past to sever the ties cleanly now. There would be some muck-raking for sure. Perhaps some clergy would be exposed; there is almost an air of collusion between the bishops and Catholic Liberal politicians.

I commend Archbishop Prendergast for his letter, but I doubt that it will have much effect. There needs to be a letter from the Canadian Conference of Bishops, and someone in charge needs to have a face-to-face talk with Trudeau to spell out exactly where he is wrong in his thinking. And then they need to follow through and excommunicate him from the church if he persists in this way.

Words are not sufficient; actions are necessary; without them, Catholics won't listen to what a couple of bishops have said, they won't even hear that they have said anything.

One thing has become very clear however:  the debate is on, Prime Minister Harper.













Thursday, May 15, 2014

Abortion opinions, but not facts

When you hear someone claim that abortion is a woman's right, challenge them with the facts. There is no "right to abortion" in Canada.

As Jackson Doughart says "One is entitled to one’s opinions, the saying goes, but not to one’s own facts."
The Morgentaler ruling only struck down the established and specific abortion law which required women to apply to a therapeutic abortion committee for any termination, including ones that would alleviate an immediate threat to the mother’s health such as ectopic pregnancy. As well, some regions of the country were not equipped with such committees, meaning that women who needed a therapeutic abortion but could not access a committee-equipped hospital had to choose between breaking the law and preserving their own health. It was this measure, and this measure alone, that the Court struck down when it ruled in the Morgentaler case. It did not decree that any law restricting abortion amounted to a violation of the Charter right to security of the person, which is the thrust of the pro-abortionists’ present argument.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/05/02/jackson-doughart-there-is-no-constitutional-right-to-abortion-on-demand/







Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Thank You Cardinal Collins

Cardinal Tom Collins of Toronto has written a letter to Justin Trudeau.  Thank you, Cardinal.

“It is worth noting that if Pope Francis, as a young man, instead of seeking to serve in the priesthood in Argentina, had moved to Canada and sought to serve in the noble vocation of politics, he would have been ineligible to be a candidate for your party, if your policy were in effect,” Collins wrote.
 “Political leaders surely have the right to insist on party unity and discipline in political matters which are within the legitimate scope of their authority. But that political authority is not limitless: it does not extend to matters of conscience and religious faith. It does not govern all aspects of life,” Collins wrote.

This is pretty basic stuff that anyone should be able to understand. Let's hope that Justin Trudeau will comprehend this letter, but I am willing to bet that he will choose wilful blindness when it comes to the Cardinal's statements. 






Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Waiting for a Statement from the Bishops

Will the Canadian Conference of bishops make a statement in response to Justin Trudeau?  It would seem that they should because Trudeau claims to be a practising Catholic. Last week, Trudeau stated that anyone considering a run as a Liberal nominee for Parliament must be in accord with the pro-choice position of the party. This is the first time that anyone has said the Liberals are unilaterally pro-choice.

Trudeau has said that sitting members of the legislature who are pro-life will be considered exempt, but does that mean they can stand for re-election?  Or do they have to adopt the pro-choice mandate that Trudeau has declared to be the Liberal position.

Included in his statement is the declaration that Liberals must also support same-sex marriage. Trudeau's logic is that both abortion and same-sex marriage are legal in the land; therefore any member of Parliament must support what has been ruled by the Supreme Court.

So bury your conscience if you vote Liberal. You have no other choice. And you can't vote NDP either if you hold Christian values.

There isn't much left, since the Conservative party, while allowing their members to hold traditional Christian values, has stated that they will not re-open the debate on abortion. And same sex marriage, well they don't go there either.

What choice do you have left in Canada if you believe that both of these laws are wrong?  The Christian Heritage Party is a viable alternative, but in my riding there isn't a candidate running for that party.

I don't believe in not voting, because if you don't vote, you forfeit your voice in who governs you to someone else who does vote. And don't complain about things if you don't even vote to express your will.

As for the debate being quashed, perhaps that will change as Nikki Ashton of the New Democratic Party has put forward a motion to declare that women in Canada have a right to abortion. For her to have done this, they must be feeling a threat from the pro-life movement. Otherwise, why would she feel the need to protect what is already legal?  There must be some inkling of a challenge on the horizon.

This is a perfect time for the Catholic bishops to proclaim clearly that abortion is not a right, that the Church upholds the sanctity of life from conception to natural death. And then they should be prepared for the fallout, from all the liberal Catholics who think it is perfectly fine to separate your personal beliefs from politics.







Monday, May 12, 2014

It's Their Loss

First Ayaan Hirsi Ali is disinvited from speaking at Brandeis University and the honorary degree that was to be conferred on her is revoked; then Condoleezza Rice voluntarily disinvites herself from giving the commencement speech at Rutger's University; and now Dr. Ben Carson has also said he will not address the graduating class at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.

Students at Brandeis protested that Ali was anti-Islamic and therefore offensive to a certain segment of the student population; Rice was called a war criminal by a small group of student protestors; and Carson has met with objections because he supports the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman.

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/05/were-ayaan-hirsi-ali-and-condoleezza-rice-silenced/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/dr.-ben-carson-steps-down-as-college-speaker-after-furor-over-his-defense-o#at_pco=cod-1.0&at_si=53711cfb4f84f128&at_ab=per-4&at_pos=4&at_tot=auto


So who will these colleges invite to be their honoured guests at graduation?  Those will be hard shoes to fill in all those cases; and it is to their loss that they have made this decision. The student bodies in all these schools of higher learning have been deprived of hearing people who have something remarkable to say, even if they don't agree with them.

As a personal aside, I recall going to an evening of poetry at York University in Toronto in the early 70's. The guest for the evening was Allen Ginsburg; he had just been appointed the poet laureate for the year. I was revulsed as I listened to him recite in detail his experience of homosexual anal sex. So tell me why was it considered okay that I should have to listen to this crap? Yet people like Ali, Rice and Carson are not allowed to speak. I doubt they would say anything as gross as Ginsburg did; yet their speech is censored, while the gross details of someone's deviant sex life are fully permitted. People consider themselves to be progressive, but their actions of silencing speech they don't agree with prove otherwise.




















Friday, May 9, 2014

Avoid the truth about abortion at all costs

I heard an interesting story today. The woman talking with me told me about her daughter who is a grade 12 student at a local high school. The students were asked to begin a discussion in class, one that would elicit a lot of responses. The more discussion, the more active that discussion, the more points that student would get for initiating the discussion.

Yes, you guessed it. This woman's daughter decided her topic was going to be abortion. Her mother cautioned her that it might get rather animated, was she sure she wanted to start this in school?  Her daughter was unafraid.

And yes, she began the discussion. It reached the point that some students were so involved in the topic that they stood on their chairs to speak to the class, using the added height to make sure their remarks were noticed. And what were they saying?

Almost all of the students claimed that there is no life in the womb. That is not a human being in there. In fact, one student said that the "baby" or "fetus" or "organism" was not a human being until it had a voice to speak.

At that point, the teacher could not restrain herself. She asked the class:

Are you saying that a baby of six months old, who is being sexually assaulted, has no rights?

An incredible discussion. What becomes clear is that these students, many of whom have had abortions or have been complicit in an abortion, have to defend their position by claiming that this being that is destroyed in an abortion is simply not human.

This is the safe position. If they can convince themselves that no being is destroyed in an abortion, they are off the hook. If they admit that a human being is destroyed in an abortion, then they will have to face the horrific truth that they have killed a human being or have assisted someone else to do that.

No wonder they shout and scream and can't listen to the biological facts. The truth is too terrible to face.

But the truth has a way of asserting itself. Time is running out for the pro-choice side.












Thursday, May 8, 2014

Our morals are on display

  

What are we to make of a society where kicking a cat is the worst imaginable crime (except possibly expressing negative sentiments toward black people in a private conversation) while killing a baby is a form of empowerment? A century ago they would have thought us monsters. Today we think that they were the monsters. At least that's what our guardians of public morality insist on telling us.

Today we burn dead babies for heat and send out SWAT teams after cat kickers. In 1914, they would have ignored the cat and they had no SWAT teams, but they would have made every effort to save an endangered child.

Perhaps they were monsters. Or perhaps we are. 

Public morals reflect the shape of a society. Today more households have pets than children. So it's only natural that many value pets more than children. Morality follows emotional attachments. Love has become the ultimate arbiter of public morality today. And that has its consequences in more ways than one. Our morality is love, not family.

In 1940, 43 percent of all households had children. By 1960, that number was up to 44 percent. Today it's around 20 percent.Meanwhile 63 percent of all households have a pet. 40 percent own cats. Or as some like to put it, the cats own them. There are more cats in America than children.
What are we to make of a society where kicking a cat is the worst imaginable crime (except possibly expressing negative sentiments toward black people in a private conversation) while killing a baby is a form of empowerment? A century ago they would have thought us monsters. Today we think that they were the monsters. At least that's what our guardians of public morality insist on telling us.

Today we burn dead babies for heat and send out SWAT teams after cat kickers. In 1914, they would have ignored the cat and they had no SWAT teams, but they would have made every effort to save an endangered child.

Perhaps they were monsters. Or perhaps we are. 

Public morals reflect the shape of a society. Today more households have pets than children. So it's only natural that many value pets more than children. Morality follows emotional attachments. Love has become the ultimate arbiter of public morality today. And that has its consequences in more ways than one. Our morality is love, not family.

In 1940, 43 percent of all households had children. By 1960, that number was up to 44 percent. Today it's around 20 percent.Meanwhile 63 percent of all households have a pet. 40 percent own cats. Or as some like to put it, the cats own them. There are more cats in America than children.



Societies that place a low value on human life can survive as long as they have high birth rates. If they have low birth rates and use household pets and pornography as substitutes for the biological reproductive instinct... they have no future. They will not survive. They will die alone and the civilization that succeeds them will have many children, few pets and will kick their surviving cats.

That isn't a matter of debate.

A society that cannot survive is not moral or amoral. It is irrelevant. To its own people however it is inherently immoral. No virtue of a society can be worth its destruction because that will also destroy the virtue in question. A society that chooses extinction can never be moral, because the thing that it chooses to die for will not carry on its morals. That's a simple matter of everyday evolution.

  






Wednesday, May 7, 2014

Democracy in Canada - it's questionable

Today Justin Trudeau stated that all new Liberal MPs must toe the party line on abortion and same-sex marriage. In other words, you can't be Liberal and pro-life, nor can you be Liberal and hold the traditional view that marriage is between one man and one woman.

This really seems to me to be the antithesis of democracy. Where is the freedom of conscience that should rightly belong to everyone who holds public office?  If the party can demand allegiance on these two issues, they can demand it on any issue.

What exactly is the point then of electing representatives to the federal government?  They have to align themselves with the head of the party.

Canada is impoverished by its lack of a First Amendment like the US has. Surely the right to free speech and free thought and conscience rights are absolutely necessary for a thriving democracy. We Canadians seem to have settled for some kind of benevolent dictatorship here. I guess that is what you get when you opt for a nanny state, that looks after you from cradle to grave.

I would hope that some gutsy MP has the courage to take Mr. Trudeau to court over this. If anything should be fought over in court, it is the right to follow one's conscience regardless of your profession, and especially when you serve in government.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/justin-trudeau-candidates-who-oppose-abortion-are-not-welcome-in-liberal-op
















Tuesday, May 6, 2014

The missing girls of Nigeria

A lot of people have gone missing lately. On March 8, Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 disappeared with 239 people. The navies of several countries are still scouring the seabed of the Indian Ocean for the wreckage. And on April 14, 276 high school girls (the number is uncertain) in a remote Nigerian village were kidnapped by an al-Qaeda affiliate, Boko Haram (Western education is forbidden), the night before a physics exam. They have probably been taken over the border into neighbouring Chad or Cameroon.
 Unhappily, Western media ignored the latter atrocity. Until the past week -- when the leader of Boko Haram, Abubakar Shekau, appeared on a video and announced that he would be selling the girls, presumably as sex slaves. The going rate is 12 American dollars. Although he looked quite deranged, even drugged, it was a brilliant public relations move and the story moved immediately to the front page.
This story hasn't had much media coverage. The girls were attending a Christian school, and have most likely been captured by Islamists to be sold into slavery.
 Newspapers are still full of stories about the disappearance of British toddler Madeleine McCann in 2007, but the disappearance of more than 200 Nigerian girls was regarded as just another dark episode in the Dark Continent.

www.mercatornet.com

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/05/06/nigeria-girls-kidnapped/8756325/












Banning Trinity Western law graduates

Two Canadian law societies – secretive committees of lawyers in each province – have decided to blacklist all students from a Christian law school in B.C. called Trinity Western University (TWU), because of that school’s Christian student code of conduct.
 None of those students – no matter how smart, no matter how hard-working, no matter how honest – will be allowed to practice law.
 It’s anti-Christian bigotry that would be unthinkable if it targeted Black, Jewish, Muslim or gay students.

The reason that BC and NS have banned students from Trinity Western Law School from practising in their provinces is because the Trinity students sign a covenant that says they commit to the Christian teaching of sexual abstinence until in a marriage, between one man and one woman.

So therefore, this action is an action against those who support traditional marriage. It is not as if these new lawyers are out to overturn the law of Canada, which legalized same-sex marriage in 2005, but they are perceived as bigots by those who are same-sex marriage supporters.

Who will be banned next? Christians are being marginalized in our society. They are being punished through rejection in the work force, through parenting their children according to their Christian values, through declining to accept any business contract that would endorse same-sex marriage.

There are plenty of other lawyers to whom one can go, in fact we are overrun with lawyers in Canada. Try finding a new GP, on the other hand, but lawyers are numerous.

Sign the petition at this website and show your support for those law students who wish to practise their Christian beliefs while practising their profession as well.

http://www.therealbigots.ca/






Thursday, May 1, 2014

Abortion and Breast Cancer - another link

Another study undertaken in India reveals that women who have an abortion increase their risk of breast cancer by 280%.  A figure like that is enough to scare anyone, and percentages can be confusing. What this means is that abortion increases the risk by 2.8 times, or perhaps round that up to 3.  Therefore a woman who has an abortion is three times more at risk for breast cancer. Given that the current numbers show that one in eight women will develop breast cancer at some time in her life, anything that increases that risk should be taken very seriously.

From the book Breast Cancer, Its Link to Abortion and the Birth Control Pill, Dr. Chris Kahlenborn has a number of charts with statistics from studies that deal with the relation between breast cancer and having had an abortion.

Haven't you ever wondered why there are so many women at the Run for the Cure?  It is a no-brainer to see that the incidence of breast cancer is increasing, not simply being diagnosed earlier.

So why don't pro-choicers read any of these articles or comment on these statements?

Despite the evidence, U.S. leaders say abortion advocates ignore the risk to women's well-being posed by expanding the “right to choose.”
In case anyone still thinks that ignoring the connection is okay, consider these numbers.
There are over a billion women in India and China alone. If half of them have an abortion and the lifetime risk of breast cancer goes up a modest 2 percent, that comes out to 10 million women.  - Dr. Joel Brind, professor of endocrinology at Baruch College at the City University of New York
As these studies come out of countries like India and China, the west is going to have to pay attention. If not, then they are really the ones waging a war on women.


http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/women-who-have-had-abortions-280-more-likely-to-develop-breast-cancer-new-s