Sunday, May 31, 2015

When a gay atheist gets it better than .......


So, wearily and with a reluctance born of not even supporting the argument’s conclusion, let me restate the conservative Catholic’s only proper response to news such as that from Dublin last weekend. It is that 62 per cent in a referendum does not cause a sin in the eyes of God to cease to be a sin.
 
It must surely be implicit in the claim of any of the world’s great religions that on questions of morality, a majority may be wrong; but this should be vividly evident to Christians in particular: they need only consider the fate of their Messiah, and the persecution of adherents to the Early Church. ‘Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you,’ says Paul. What does the Archbishop of Dublin now have to say to the 743,300 people who voted to uphold what their priests taught them was God’s will? These, and not the gays, are now the reviled ones. Popular revulsion cannot make them wrong.
 
Have some of us, in short, made the mistake of taking the church at its word? Was it always, anyway, about going with the flow? Was it always secretly about imposing the morals of the majority on the minority — so all that is necessary is to discover which way the preponderance falls?
 
Abortion next, I suppose. Here, too, shall I live to hear the divine ahem? Silly me. And there I was thinking they meant it. As so often in my life, I have missed the big celestial wink.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/05/as-a-gay-atheist-i-want-to-see-the-church-oppose-same-sex-marriage/








Wednesday, May 27, 2015

Birth Control reflected in girls' names



Note, Mary is the #1 name until 1962 when it falls to second place. Then it begins to drop rapidly down the list, until it is completely gone by 1972.

And what was going on during that decade?  Legalized sale of the birth control pill in North America, plus almost complete rejection of Humanae Vitae in 1968, the long-awaited encyclical by Pope Paul VI on contraception.

Reject the life issue and reject the faith. It's all downhill from there on.

Parallel to the abandonment of the name Mary is the decline in the number of children per family.

The facts speak for themselves.












Saturday, May 23, 2015

Incremental and Gestational Legislation


A few months ago, I posted a video of the day when pro-life supporters planted 100,000 pink and blue flags on Parliament Hill. This was October 2, 2014 and this group, www.weneedalaw.ca, has repeated the full display again on the grounds of Queens Park in Toronto.

As well, there have been smaller displays of 10,000 flags in various locations across the country, about 30 so I am told; one that I heard of was in Charlottetown PEI.

Of course, we hear nothing of this from main stream media. But that is not surprising.

I was speaking with a member of the weneedalaw group this week and she told me the impact this display had in Ottawa. Many people came up, thinking that this was an event for breast cancer since October is Breast Cancer month. They were told, no not breast cancer, but these flags represent the abortions done in Canada each year. They were met with shock and disbelief at the enormity of the problem. As one person said, "surely you mean 100,000 world wide?"  No, was the reply, "each year in Canada".

Members of Parliament entering the House of Commons saw the display and apparently a number came out through the day to look. They too were taking in the vast number of flags. The display achieved its goal - to raise awareness of the extent of abortion in our country. Citing statistics just doesn't do it, but a visual display drives the reality home.

So, weneedalaw is planning on doing this in a number of cities across the country prior to the federal election next fall. When I found out, I was super excited and my adrenaline was pumping with excitement that, at last, we could do something dramatic here to show people the reality of the abortion holocaust.

Thinking that others would share my excitement, I began to talk with those whom I thought would be on board. How disappointing to find out that the very people who do the most publicly on the abortion issue are not on board with this. Why? they disagree with the philosophy of weneedalaw and therefore won't cooperate in any project with them.

The issue is gestational legislation. WeNeedaLaw supports any effort to dialogue with those in power in order to bring about some move to curtail abortion legally in this country. As it stands now, Canada is one of only three countries in the world that has absolutely no legal protection for babies in utero. In that, we stand together with North Korea and China, both countries known for their human rights violations.

Emails were flying back and forth between myself and a spokesperson for the group that refuses to cooperate, with links to various articles supporting both positions. Their position is that any legislation that is gestational is unjust because it divides babies in the womb into those who can be aborted and those who cannot be aborted. They will not support any legislation that does not outlaw abortion from conception.

The other side believes that holding out for legislation that bans all abortions from conception to birth is unreasonable and therefore efforts must be made to curtail abortion, to reduce the evil that is being perpetrated. If you can't eliminate the evil, you can reduce it.

While I respect the belief that all abortions are wrong and should be illegal, I am taking sides with weneedalaw, because I have decided that compromise is necessary in order to achieve any results. Usually compromise is a dirty word and I am usually in that camp, but my practical self says holding out on principle in this case is costing lives. If the abortion mindset is like the Berlin wall, it won't come down all at one blow; but removing brick after brick will weaken that wall and it will collapse eventually.

Just this week, Bryan Kemper wrote a post on why he was supporting the Pain-Capable law in the US. This law would ban abortions after 20 weeks, the point at which medical science says babies in utero can definitely feel pain. The law also includes exceptions for pregnancies caused by rape and incest. Kemper is usually a no-compromise sort of guy.
This has got to be one of the most divisive aspects in the pro-life movement, to the point of causing serious infighting amongst friends. I have been called evil, faithless, a compromiser, and even the enemy of God. All of this because I am willing to support legislation that I believe is a positive step toward my end goal: the total abolition of all abortion. 
 I have heard people say that every time a law is passed with an exception, that we are throwing those babies ‘under the bus’. However, we can’t throw a baby under the bus that is already under the bus. Abortion is legal throughout all nine months of pregnancy, and so those babies are already sentenced to die. What we can do is pull as many babies out from under the bus as we can, until the bus is no longer there. 

http://www.standtrue.com/hr36/

From the website of www.weneedalaw.ca
Even if there is no abortion law, abortion remains legal. Adding restrictions doesn't make it legal, nor does it make abortion more legal. Some of what was legal is now made illegal (e.g., abortion after 12 or 18 weeks' gestation), thereby saving some lives and limiting evil. That is exactly what the Bible calls the State to do – to limit evil.
Some might object, "Wouldn't a law prohibiting abortions after a certain number of weeks arbitrarily divide humans into 'protected' and 'unprotected' classes?" The continuum of human life begins at fertilization and ends at natural death. Currently under Canadian law only "born" humans have protection, so our law today already divides humans into "protected" and "unprotected" classes. If the law was changed to reflect increased protection by extending it to "pre-born" humans from 20 weeks to birth, then fewer babies would fall under the unprotected class, thus limiting the injustice of abortion. We certainly do and would support any initiative that would move more humans into the "protected" class.
http://www.weneedalaw.ca/about/direction-matters-why-we-support-gestational-limits


Even Pope John Paul II made the statement that in countries that have no legal protection for the unborn, it is right and just to do whatever can be done to restrict that evil. WeNeedaLaw has the support of Priests for Life in Canada as well as the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform along with a number of pro-life voices including Bishop Henry of Edmonton AB.

Chris Rostenberg, writing in Human Life Review, writes that it is a waste of time to argue for the right to life of tiny embryos at conception. People simply do not relate to that. However, the majority of people do understand that killing a baby at six months gestation is horrific and would support banning late-term abortions.
For individuals and for societies, the debate begins with killings of older children, not with embryos or euthanasia. Late in the pregnancy, there is no real question of whether the unborn is a human person, while at the beginning of pregnancy there are such understandable questions. If you support late prenatal homicide, then you support early abortion too, but the opposite is not necessarily true, so it makes sense to discuss late abortion first. With euthanasia, the subject wants to die, but the unborn child in the sixth month does not. Late abortion is simpler than many other facets of the life issue, and more outrageous. There is an urgent need that many people feel to stop late abortion . If or when it becomes possible to pass anti-abortion laws, most states will probably go through a pro-compromise phase, The only way prolifers, pro-compromisers, and pro-hybrids can get the law they want is to expose and overturn or circumvent the supreme Court rulings, That is our first battle.

So, I support this effort even if it means a willingness to compromise on ideology. That ideology isn't getting any babies saved, and getting Canadians to support a law limiting abortions will save some babies. I can no longer stand on the sideline and be an idealist. I am willing to get down and dirty and do something that will really bring about an effect.

WeNeedaLaw is planning on putting up the 100,000 flag display here in Halifax. Date and time will  not be disclosed as we don't want those pesky pro-choice people coming and destroying it. It is done like a flash mob, come in quickly, set up, shock, and then take it down. Move to the next city.

If you want to help, email me at julieculshaw5@gmail.com

We are going to need 80-100 energetic individuals to do this. All I can disclose at this point is that it will be sometime next fall. Let's get those 80-100 folks signed up now!

In case you didn't see the display in Ottawa, here is a video of it. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. In this case, flags are worth 100,000 lives.


 
 
 
 
 
 








Wednesday, May 20, 2015

Blind acceptance of "the pill"

 
 
 
Published in April in the journal “Human Brain Mapping,” the study measured cortical thickness in the brains of 90 women – 44 of whom were using oral contraceptives, and 46 of whom were naturally cycling.
 
Only women using the combination form of oral contraceptives were used in the study – it did not measure women using progesterone-only or other forms of oral contraceptives. The research found that oral contraceptive use was significantly associated with a thinning in two areas of the brain: the lateral orbitofrontal cortex and the posterior cingulate cortex.
 
The lateral orbitofrontal cortex is involved in emotion regulation and response to rewards, while the posterior cigulate cortex regulates inward-directed thought, such as recalling personal memories or planning for the future.
 
 
“You might think after 50 years and hundreds of millions of women taking various incarnations of the pill, there would be a large and cohesive and impressive body of evidence on it, but there’s next to nothing,” Cahill told CNA. “I honestly find that amazing.”





 
 

Tuesday, May 19, 2015

March for Life Halifax pushes back


Last Thursday, about 100 pro-life supporters showed up at Province House for an hour of rallying in support of life and to hear speeches by local pro-life leaders.

This is the 8th year for the March in Halifax. In all 7 previous years, Campaign Life Coalition has brought a sound system and Province House has allowed us to plug it in to a plug within the building. This year, the speaker of the house sent down a message that we could not use their power source, nor were we allowed to stand on the steps. No notice was given; if they had told CLC beforehand, other arrangements could have been made for a sound system.

The speaker's message stated that no group protesting government policy would be given any help to stage a protest. Hmm, the previous government was the pro-choice NDP; even they allowed free speech. Robert McNeil's Liberal government, not so much. Isn't democracy the kind of government where you can protest? 

Ellen Chesal of CLC is pushing back. She has written a letter to the Chronicle Herald about this and tomorrow she will be a guest of Rick Howe on 95.7 FM.

Here is the link to listen in. Ellen should be on around 9:45 am.

http://www.news957.com/2015/05/20/the-rick-howe-show-9-am-374/











Tuesday, May 12, 2015

March for Life in Halifax


This Thursday marks the 8th March for Life in Ottawa. For those who cannot attend the national March, check out your own location to see what might be going on.

Here in Halifax, there is a candlelight vigil on Wednesday at 8 pm. Location is South Park Street outside the VG Hospital, where we held the 40 Days for Life vigil. The vigil is an hour of silent prayer, 8-9 pm, to commemorate those children lost to abortion and to pray for an end to abortion.

On Thursday at noon, there is a gathering outside Province House on Granville Street.  Speakers include Father Doug MacDonald from Cape Breton and Stephanie Potter from Signs for Life.

Please attend one or both of these events if you can. Your presence is greatly appreciated.





Thursday, May 7, 2015

PreBorn Lives Matter

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Is Pam Geller wrong or right?


 
Activist Pamela Geller organized a free-speech conference in Garland Texas (to follow a conference hosted by Muslims a few months previous) and sponsored a contest for cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed.
 
Of course, a couple of radical Islamists showed up, armed with assault rifles, and thankfully were taken out by an off-duty policeman working as security for the conference. He was only armed with a revolver, but he was a good marksman. Only one person was hurt, another security person was shot in the foot.
 
Now the backlash has begun. Rather than focus on the violence of Muslim extremists, everyone is blaming Geller for provoking the incident.
 
Having listened to the reasonable Laura Ingraham who argued that such an action doesn't produce any good will between people and that the cartoon contest has probably put more distance between moderate Muslims and the rest of us, I was inclined to think that she is right. In a better world, she is.
 
However, there are now death threats on Pam Geller, just as there are death threats on Geert Wilders who spoke up in the Netherlands against Muslim extremism. Wilders was a speaker at the conference. And Ayaan Hirsi Ali also lives with constant security because she has denounced the violence of Islam.
 
What we must remember is that Pam Geller never did anything violent to anyone. Yes, she provoked the attack because she believes that free speech must be protected and you can only do that by exposing the threats to free speech.
 
While I myself would not imitate her actions, she is absolutely right in bringing on these consequences. Perhaps because of what she did, we now know about more possible threats to our society from extremists who have spoken up after the event. And that may prevent further violence; we won't know that, but it is certainly good that these fellows have been uncovered by her actions.
 
Don't shoot the messenger. Pam Geller's message is not something we like to hear about, but she is certainly correct in showing that Islam denies free speech and will not stop at anything if it is offended. And that is why she is right. That belief is simply not compatible with western democracy and, in particular, with the right to free speech.
 
It is Pam Geller who should be protected now, not Muslim sensitivities. The policy of appeasement never works with evil. Evil simply grows and overwhelms the appeasers.
 
The hatred that exists in Muslim extremism is the evil here, not Pam Geller's Islamophobia. If we only understood the extent of Islamic violence, we would be as Islamophobic as Ms Geller.
 
 
 
 
 


Sunday, May 3, 2015

LGBT agenda pushed on Africans


According to a recently leaked report entitled: Sexual Abuse on Children by International Armed Forces, in order to receive food, young refugee boys in Central African Republic (CAR) were forced to let the French troops, who were working as UN peacekeepers in CAR, rape and sodomize them in the capital city Bangui. 
 This report was made to the UN since July 2014 but nothing was heard of it. And when it was leaked, what did the UN do in quick retaliation? They suspended the person who leaked it! 
...... 
Many of us have come to realize, the totalitarianism of the LGBT culture leaves no room for objectors and its tyranny does not tolerate dissenters. Those who do not bow are bent and those who refuse to bend are broken against their will. 

http://www.cultureoflifeafrica.com/





 

Friday, May 1, 2015

Too young for sex or sex ed

Overheard yesterday:

Three girls walking to school, they were probably 12 years old.

I didn't know how to blow my nose, said one girl. Her companion replied "I only learned how to blow my nose last year!"  All three laughed heartily.

And Kathleen Wynne thinks these kids are more than ready for sex ed of the kind she wants to impose on them?