Jim Hnatiuk - Leader of the Christian Heritage Party
Communiqué Vol 16, No 07 Mar 03, 2009
The 'Tug-of-War' of GLB demands
Jim Hnatiuk, leader of the Christian Heritage Party of Canada, points out two recent developments within the gay, lesbian or bisexual (GLB) community that demand further investigation.
The first is a recent GLB complaint against Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada, submitted to the Canadian Human Rights Commission last month.
In the complaint, available here, the complainants say they don't receive equitable levels of programming support from Health Canada, compared with support for the general population or other minorities. The GLB complaint reveals a significant increase in health problems within the GLB communities. To quote only a few from their submission:
· "... gay/bisexual men have a life expectancy 20 years less than the average man in Canada";
· "..lesbians have higher rates of breast cancer"; and
· "within the area of HIV/AIDS that the inequities in Health Canada and Public Health Agency of Canada policies and programs vis-à-vis GLB people are most clearly illustrated... If one uses Statistic Canada's figure of 1.7% for the percentage of the population that is GLB..., the infection rate is 26 times higher than the general population."
Hnatiuk says it's important to place this within the context of a second recent development: a "Social Justice conference" staged by the BC Teachers' Federation at University of the Fraser Valley in Abbotsford Feb. 20-21, 2009.
Although the stated purpose of that conference was to help teachers implement the Social Justice 12 curriculum adopted under BC's Corren Settlement Agreement, a disturbing hidden purpose was revealed by a graphic, (see left) distributed by the BCTF in its information packages: the real goal is to move students' attitude towards LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered and questioning) people beyond "tolerance" to "acceptance"-and then to "support," "admiration," "appreciation" and finally "celebration".
Should Canadian students be taught to celebrate behaviour that the GLB community itself links to shorter life expectancy, higher rates of breast cancer, and an HIV/AIDS infection rate 26 times higher than the general population?
Demands for so-called 'gay rights' continue to have an enormous social impact on our nation. Therefore, CHP Canada believes Parliament must devote adequate time to examining the facts.
Both Liberal and Conservative governments broke their promises to Canadians, as neither ever authorized any real enquiry into the facts surrounding same-sex 'rights' demands. The Liberal government told Parliament "this government will never legalize same-sex marriage." (Justice Minister Anne McLellan, speaking in Parliament in 1999.) But they did exactly what they promised they would never do. The Conservatives promised to re-examine the issue. They didn't.
As in France, CHP Canada would appoint a Royal Commission, with the authority to do a thorough examination of all the issues related to the GLB community. If they suffer from shorter life expectancy and higher disease rates--and they do, as their own CHRC complaint states--no school or other government agency should be allowed to promote "acceptance" of this lifestyle... let alone "celebration" of behaviour that constitutes a serious health threat!
CHP Canada also wants to point out that there are those who have been forgotten: the many who want to leave, and have left, that dangerous lifestyle. Rather than discrediting or demonizing their experiences, wishes, and dreams, there should be professional assistance and resources available for them and their families--at public expense--in every community.
Radical 'gay' activists, who clamour for the banning of reparative therapy, do their own community a grave disservice. The CHP believes the choice to leave homosexuality should be available to whomever wants it, truly satisfying Canada's dream of civil liberty.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Sunday, January 18, 2009
CHP Canada - Affirms Israel's Right to Defend its Civilians!
January 06, 2009
For immediate release
For years the Israelis have exercised restraint against Hamas terrorists who vow Israel's destruction. The Christian Heritage Party of Canada affirms the universal right of all nations, including Israel, to enjoy peace and national security within their borders. Today there is overwhelming evidence that Israel has had no choice but to restore safety for its civilians through the use of strength. When it can be verified that the Hamas missile attacks will cease and that monitoring agreements can be reached, then the CHP agrees with other nations that have called for both sides to move to a ceasefire.
As with all conflict, the CHP regrets the loss of innocent lives and would ask those opposing the Israeli invasion to focus their anger and frustration not against the Israeli army but against the illegal actions of Hamas. Hamas is in fact committing double war crimes, but no national leader will say this. The Hamas offensive has been launched against innocent Israeli civilians; Hamas then imperils their own civilian population by both launching an offensive from within a civilian enclave and seeking protection from retribution by hiding within that same civilian enclave. The CHP strongly condemns these Hamas war crimes.
The CHP agrees with the statement made by Canadian Foreign Affairs minister Mr. Cannon in that: "Israel has a clear right to defend itself against the continued rocket attacks by Palestinian militant groups which have deliberately targeted civilians. First and foremost, those rocket attacks must stop."
The CHP hopes that the military action will be short term, and suggests that Canada offer to assist in the establishment and the post diplomatic monitoring of agreements.
The CHP does not believe in dealing with organisations which engage in terrorist activities aimed deliberately against innocent civilians, therefore agreements must only be made with a legitimate government body in Gaza.
For immediate release
For years the Israelis have exercised restraint against Hamas terrorists who vow Israel's destruction. The Christian Heritage Party of Canada affirms the universal right of all nations, including Israel, to enjoy peace and national security within their borders. Today there is overwhelming evidence that Israel has had no choice but to restore safety for its civilians through the use of strength. When it can be verified that the Hamas missile attacks will cease and that monitoring agreements can be reached, then the CHP agrees with other nations that have called for both sides to move to a ceasefire.
As with all conflict, the CHP regrets the loss of innocent lives and would ask those opposing the Israeli invasion to focus their anger and frustration not against the Israeli army but against the illegal actions of Hamas. Hamas is in fact committing double war crimes, but no national leader will say this. The Hamas offensive has been launched against innocent Israeli civilians; Hamas then imperils their own civilian population by both launching an offensive from within a civilian enclave and seeking protection from retribution by hiding within that same civilian enclave. The CHP strongly condemns these Hamas war crimes.
The CHP agrees with the statement made by Canadian Foreign Affairs minister Mr. Cannon in that: "Israel has a clear right to defend itself against the continued rocket attacks by Palestinian militant groups which have deliberately targeted civilians. First and foremost, those rocket attacks must stop."
The CHP hopes that the military action will be short term, and suggests that Canada offer to assist in the establishment and the post diplomatic monitoring of agreements.
The CHP does not believe in dealing with organisations which engage in terrorist activities aimed deliberately against innocent civilians, therefore agreements must only be made with a legitimate government body in Gaza.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Re:MP aims to reopen abortion debat
The abortion issue is a hot topic of late and has been in the news almost constantly since the spring of 2007. This causes one to wonder why some pro-choicers seem to think this is a dead issue.
One in particular is Joyce Arthur, who constantly uses rhetoric from the '60s and cannot accept the findings of science and technology. These have proven that life begins at conception, and Canadians are smart enough to recognize this. Arthur's use of antiquated words such as "anti-choice" shows her reluctance to move into the 21st century as well.
The statement that Conservative MPs are "out of touch" with the average Canadian and don't want to go back to an abortion debate shows she is afraid of the educated Canadian because we do want a debate on abortion.
The abortion issue is not over and will never go away. It took the anti-slavery movement many decades to rid society of that terrible injustice; pro-life advocates will certainly fight on for many more years.
Cliff Pyle, Saskatoon, Sask.
source
One in particular is Joyce Arthur, who constantly uses rhetoric from the '60s and cannot accept the findings of science and technology. These have proven that life begins at conception, and Canadians are smart enough to recognize this. Arthur's use of antiquated words such as "anti-choice" shows her reluctance to move into the 21st century as well.
The statement that Conservative MPs are "out of touch" with the average Canadian and don't want to go back to an abortion debate shows she is afraid of the educated Canadian because we do want a debate on abortion.
The abortion issue is not over and will never go away. It took the anti-slavery movement many decades to rid society of that terrible injustice; pro-life advocates will certainly fight on for many more years.
Cliff Pyle, Saskatoon, Sask.
source
Sunday, November 16, 2008
BC’s new homosexual curriculum blasted by Civil Rights League
By Jonquil Frankham
VANCOUVER, November 11, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com)—BC’s new aggressively pro-homosexual, heavily left-leaning curriculum hasn’t got its facts straight, says Catholic Civil Rights League director Sean Murphy in an in-depth analysis of the curriculum.
And this, indicates Murphy, is only the beginning of the problems with the curriculum.
In his article Murphy points out that Making Space, Giving Voice, the new curriculum guide for B.C. schools, mistakenly teaches that Canada, not America, deported Maher Arar—a Canadian citizen who was suspected of terrorism by US authorities—to Syria, where he was tortured. Murphy, however, counters that while Canadian officials “bear considerable responsibility for what happened to Mr. Arar” the fact is that “the United States—not Canada—sent him to Syria.
“The first step in making progress towards social justice is getting the facts right, particularly when the facts are in dispute,” continues Murphy. “Thus, it is disturbing to find that Making Space, Giving Voice gets facts wrong, not only when they are not in dispute, but when they are publicly available and familiar to well-informed citizens.”
The new curriculum was formed under the guidance of Murray and Peter Corren, a “married” homosexual couple who were given an unprecedented level of control over the development of the curriculum by the BC Ministry of Education. Murray Corren, who is a teacher in the Surrey school board, aired complaints of “systemic sexual discrimination” in BC schools before the Ministry in 1999. His complaints led to a complete overhaul of the province’s curriculum, from Kindergarten to Grade 12, to include homosexual propaganda in every subject.
From a human rights perspective, the greatest problem with the curriculum is the “no opt-out” policy the Correns insisted on when planning their new guidelines, says Murphy. Under the curriculum guidelines, parents are not permitted to remove their children from objectionable classes.
As of this past June, however, only two BC school boards had said they would enforce the “no opt-out” policy.
A leftist, homosexualist ideological dogmatism is evidenced throughout the overhauled curriculum, charges Murphy. “Tolerance” is no longer considered sufficient by the homosexual ideologues, he says. In Making Space, Giving Voice it is instead “expected that students will ‘accept’ (i.e., affirm the moral and social acceptability of) any and all sexual lifestyles presented to them, excepting only those that are illegal. ‘Acceptance’ is to be presented to students as a moral, social and legal obligation imposed by the requirements of social justice.”
Meanwhile, suggests the director of the CCRL, there is to be no “acceptance” of any viewpoint on sexuality other than the Correns’.
“The approach taken by Making Space, Giving Voice is openly authoritarian… On the grounds that students must be kept ‘safe’, it advocates the suppression of contrary views by controlling student expression, and the silencing of critics with accusations of bigotry. Parents are to be denied the opportunity to prevent morally objectionable materials or ideological instruction from being forced upon their children, or to prevent them from being coerced by oppressive instructional or classroom management practices.
“Making Space, Giving Voice is really not meant to make space for all, nor to give voice to all,” writes Murphy. “For all the cant about welcoming ‘diversity,’ and the importance of ‘inclusiveness,’ some voices are not welcome, and some views are to be excluded…The mask of neutrality is coming off.”
Murphy points out the irony that while Making Space, Giving Voice suggests that students should critique “unflinching observance of tradition” and asks them to consider “what old ways of thinking or behaving are still slavishly adhered to,” this skeptical attitude seems to apply only to the values held by their parents—not those of the Correns.
“Certainly,” he says, “it is nowhere suggested that students should critique the unflinching observance of the current establishment’s norms, or consider what new ways of thinking or behaving are slavishly adhered to.”
To read Sean Murphy’s article from the CCRL, go to:
http://www.ccrl.ca/index.php?id=4932
For more coverage on the Corren case, see:
New Vancouver School Policy: Parents Refused Right to Pull Kids from Pro-Homosexual Lessons
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08062512.html
B.C. Gay Couple Seeks Mandatory Homosexual School Curriculum Without Parental Opt-Out
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/jul/05071106.html
Homosexual Activists Consider Targeting Private Christian Schools for “Homophobia” Want provincial ministry of education to exert “more control” over curriculum and staff hiring
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/feb/07022706.html
VANCOUVER, November 11, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com)—BC’s new aggressively pro-homosexual, heavily left-leaning curriculum hasn’t got its facts straight, says Catholic Civil Rights League director Sean Murphy in an in-depth analysis of the curriculum.
And this, indicates Murphy, is only the beginning of the problems with the curriculum.
In his article Murphy points out that Making Space, Giving Voice, the new curriculum guide for B.C. schools, mistakenly teaches that Canada, not America, deported Maher Arar—a Canadian citizen who was suspected of terrorism by US authorities—to Syria, where he was tortured. Murphy, however, counters that while Canadian officials “bear considerable responsibility for what happened to Mr. Arar” the fact is that “the United States—not Canada—sent him to Syria.
“The first step in making progress towards social justice is getting the facts right, particularly when the facts are in dispute,” continues Murphy. “Thus, it is disturbing to find that Making Space, Giving Voice gets facts wrong, not only when they are not in dispute, but when they are publicly available and familiar to well-informed citizens.”
The new curriculum was formed under the guidance of Murray and Peter Corren, a “married” homosexual couple who were given an unprecedented level of control over the development of the curriculum by the BC Ministry of Education. Murray Corren, who is a teacher in the Surrey school board, aired complaints of “systemic sexual discrimination” in BC schools before the Ministry in 1999. His complaints led to a complete overhaul of the province’s curriculum, from Kindergarten to Grade 12, to include homosexual propaganda in every subject.
From a human rights perspective, the greatest problem with the curriculum is the “no opt-out” policy the Correns insisted on when planning their new guidelines, says Murphy. Under the curriculum guidelines, parents are not permitted to remove their children from objectionable classes.
As of this past June, however, only two BC school boards had said they would enforce the “no opt-out” policy.
A leftist, homosexualist ideological dogmatism is evidenced throughout the overhauled curriculum, charges Murphy. “Tolerance” is no longer considered sufficient by the homosexual ideologues, he says. In Making Space, Giving Voice it is instead “expected that students will ‘accept’ (i.e., affirm the moral and social acceptability of) any and all sexual lifestyles presented to them, excepting only those that are illegal. ‘Acceptance’ is to be presented to students as a moral, social and legal obligation imposed by the requirements of social justice.”
Meanwhile, suggests the director of the CCRL, there is to be no “acceptance” of any viewpoint on sexuality other than the Correns’.
“The approach taken by Making Space, Giving Voice is openly authoritarian… On the grounds that students must be kept ‘safe’, it advocates the suppression of contrary views by controlling student expression, and the silencing of critics with accusations of bigotry. Parents are to be denied the opportunity to prevent morally objectionable materials or ideological instruction from being forced upon their children, or to prevent them from being coerced by oppressive instructional or classroom management practices.
“Making Space, Giving Voice is really not meant to make space for all, nor to give voice to all,” writes Murphy. “For all the cant about welcoming ‘diversity,’ and the importance of ‘inclusiveness,’ some voices are not welcome, and some views are to be excluded…The mask of neutrality is coming off.”
Murphy points out the irony that while Making Space, Giving Voice suggests that students should critique “unflinching observance of tradition” and asks them to consider “what old ways of thinking or behaving are still slavishly adhered to,” this skeptical attitude seems to apply only to the values held by their parents—not those of the Correns.
“Certainly,” he says, “it is nowhere suggested that students should critique the unflinching observance of the current establishment’s norms, or consider what new ways of thinking or behaving are slavishly adhered to.”
To read Sean Murphy’s article from the CCRL, go to:
http://www.ccrl.ca/index.php?id=4932
For more coverage on the Corren case, see:
New Vancouver School Policy: Parents Refused Right to Pull Kids from Pro-Homosexual Lessons
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08062512.html
B.C. Gay Couple Seeks Mandatory Homosexual School Curriculum Without Parental Opt-Out
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/jul/05071106.html
Homosexual Activists Consider Targeting Private Christian Schools for “Homophobia” Want provincial ministry of education to exert “more control” over curriculum and staff hiring
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/feb/07022706.html
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Jim Hnatiuk new Christian Heritage Party leader
From ChristianGovernment.ca received by email...
A key aspect of this year's Christian Heritage Party convention was its leadership vote. Ron Gray, the Party Leader for the past 13 years is passing the torch to Jim Hnatiuk, a zealous candidate and party recruiter in Nova Scotia. CHP delegates gave their resounding support with the first ballot win for Mr. Hnatiuk, who held the party's Deputy Leader position since 2005. Mr. Hnatiuk was one of three candidates to run for the leadership of the party. The party wants to thank Harold Ludwig and Rod Taylor for their candidacies.
Jim Hnatiuk has been a dynamic member of the CHP ever since he first joined in 2002. He became the Interim Nova Scotia President prior to being named the Deputy Leader. The party's only candidate in Atlantic Canada in the 2004 election (against incumbent Scott Brison) and 2006 election (against incumbent Gerald Keddy), he has worked tirelessly to expand the CHP's presence in Eastern Canada. As a result, the party ran five candidates in Nova Scotia in the recent election.
"I am absolutely encouraged by the overwhelming support I received," Jim Hnatiuk said. "It gives me the confidence to move forward with the goals and focus that I brought forward in my campaign."
Hnatiuk, who has spent a great deal of time thinking about improving the quality of the CHP's image, experimenting with various strategies in his own campaigns, is looking forward to strengthening the party's recruiting methods and building the membership across Canada, from coast to coast to coast. Hnatiuk also wants to fill what he sees as a gap in the CHP's platform by developing policy to deal with the various concerns of the poor and low-income Canadians.
Hnatiuk was thrilled to see the increased number of delegates at this convention. "Many of the delegates here are young people," he said, "and they are the ones at the microphones, debating the resolutions."
Hnatiuk has been married to Ellen for 35 years They have two children and two grandchildren. He operates the largest hunting, fishing and taxidermy business in Nova Scotia. He retired from the Canadian Forces in 1995 after 25 years of service having attained the rank of Chief Petty Officer 1st Class.
- 30 -
A key aspect of this year's Christian Heritage Party convention was its leadership vote. Ron Gray, the Party Leader for the past 13 years is passing the torch to Jim Hnatiuk, a zealous candidate and party recruiter in Nova Scotia. CHP delegates gave their resounding support with the first ballot win for Mr. Hnatiuk, who held the party's Deputy Leader position since 2005. Mr. Hnatiuk was one of three candidates to run for the leadership of the party. The party wants to thank Harold Ludwig and Rod Taylor for their candidacies.
Jim Hnatiuk has been a dynamic member of the CHP ever since he first joined in 2002. He became the Interim Nova Scotia President prior to being named the Deputy Leader. The party's only candidate in Atlantic Canada in the 2004 election (against incumbent Scott Brison) and 2006 election (against incumbent Gerald Keddy), he has worked tirelessly to expand the CHP's presence in Eastern Canada. As a result, the party ran five candidates in Nova Scotia in the recent election.
"I am absolutely encouraged by the overwhelming support I received," Jim Hnatiuk said. "It gives me the confidence to move forward with the goals and focus that I brought forward in my campaign."
Hnatiuk, who has spent a great deal of time thinking about improving the quality of the CHP's image, experimenting with various strategies in his own campaigns, is looking forward to strengthening the party's recruiting methods and building the membership across Canada, from coast to coast to coast. Hnatiuk also wants to fill what he sees as a gap in the CHP's platform by developing policy to deal with the various concerns of the poor and low-income Canadians.
Hnatiuk was thrilled to see the increased number of delegates at this convention. "Many of the delegates here are young people," he said, "and they are the ones at the microphones, debating the resolutions."
Hnatiuk has been married to Ellen for 35 years They have two children and two grandchildren. He operates the largest hunting, fishing and taxidermy business in Nova Scotia. He retired from the Canadian Forces in 1995 after 25 years of service having attained the rank of Chief Petty Officer 1st Class.
- 30 -
Monday, November 10, 2008
Netherlands Bill Would Force "Unfit" Mothers to Use Birth Control Two Years
The Hague, Netherlands (LifeNews.com) -- Women in the Netherlands who are deemed by the state to be unfit mothers should be sentenced to take contraception for a prescribed period of two years, according to a draft bill before the Dutch parliament. The proposed legislation would further punish parents who defied it by taking away their newborn infant. "It targets people who have been the subject of judicial intervention because of their bad parenting," explained the author of the bill Marjo Van Dijken of the socialist PvDA. "If someone refuses the contraception and becomes pregnant, the child must be taken away directly after birth." London Guardian columnist Khaled Diab responded to the bill this way: When I see how some parents treat their children and come across adults who wish they'd never been born because of the abuse they endured as kids, I get some idea of where Van Dijken is coming from, but her proposed solution strikes me as far too draconian. Have we got the right to exercise pre-emptive "justice" – and could this be the first step towards a "minority report" approach to parental "precrime"? And, perhaps, given the Dutch penchant for social engineering, this could prove to be the prelude for the professionalisation of parenting, where in the distant future only certified and trained "fathers" and "mothers" would be allowed to raise children in special facilities.
(Received by email)
(Received by email)
Netherlands Bill Would Force "Unfit" Mothers to Use Birth Control Two Years
The Hague, Netherlands (LifeNews.com) -- Women in the Netherlands who are deemed by the state to be unfit mothers should be sentenced to take contraception for a prescribed period of two years, according to a draft bill before the Dutch parliament. The proposed legislation would further punish parents who defied it by taking away their newborn infant. "It targets people who have been the subject of judicial intervention because of their bad parenting," explained the author of the bill Marjo Van Dijken of the socialist PvDA. "If someone refuses the contraception and becomes pregnant, the child must be taken away directly after birth." London Guardian columnist Khaled Diab responded to the bill this way: When I see how some parents treat their children and come across adults who wish they'd never been born because of the abuse they endured as kids, I get some idea of where Van Dijken is coming from, but her proposed solution strikes me as far too draconian. Have we got the right to exercise pre-emptive "justice" – and could this be the first step towards a "minority report" approach to parental "precrime"? And, perhaps, given the Dutch penchant for social engineering, this could prove to be the prelude for the professionalisation of parenting, where in the distant future only certified and trained "fathers" and "mothers" would be allowed to raise children in special facilities.
(Received by email)
(Received by email)
COALITION ASKS BISHOPS TO TAKE POLITICIANS TO TASK IN BALTIMORE
ADDRESS 'CATHOLIC' PRO-ABORT LAWMAKERS; ENFORCE CANON LAW 915
Baltimore, MD (6 November 2008)
WHEN: Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2008, 7 p.m.
WHERE: Promenade outside the Baltimore Marriott Waterfront Hotel, 700 Aliceanna St., Baltimore, MD, 21202
WHO: American Life League, Maryland Right to Life, Defend Life and the Catholic Media Coalition will gather in prayer for the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops (USCCB).
WHAT: Prayer vigil and press conference to address the USCCB's Fall Assembly and the Nov. 11 full-page ad in USA Today entreating the bishop's to enforce Canon 915. The bishops will discuss the practical and pastoral implications of political support for abortion at the meeting.
WHY: Over 123 U.S. bishops spoke out against abortion in the 2008 presidential election, yet pro-abortion Catholic politicians continue to shape abortion policy while receiving Holy Communion in dioceses across the country. Are Catholics heeding the words of their bishops? How will the Catholic bishop's enforce the Church's teaching on abortion?
On Nov. 11, American Life League will run a full-page advertisement in USA Today imploring the bishops to stop allowing pro-abortion politicians like Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Joe Biden to politicize Catholicism's most sacred Eucharist and to enforce Canon 915, which states:
"Those… obstinately persevering in grave and manifest sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.
Later that evening, a prayer vigil and press conference outside the USCCB's conference at the Baltimore Marriot Waterfront Hotel will herald an emerging and powerful lay outcry within the U.S. Catholic Church that demands accountability and leadership from the Catholic hierarchy with the belief that Catholics can end abortion in this country.
American Life League was co-founded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death. For more information or press inquiries, please contact Katie Walker at 540.659.4942.
# # #
_______________________________
Katie Walker
Director of Communication
American Life League
1179 Courthouse Road
Stafford, Virginia 22554
540.659.4942
kwalker@all.org
http://www.all.org/
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Baltimore, MD (6 November 2008)
WHEN: Tuesday, Nov. 11, 2008, 7 p.m.
WHERE: Promenade outside the Baltimore Marriott Waterfront Hotel, 700 Aliceanna St., Baltimore, MD, 21202
WHO: American Life League, Maryland Right to Life, Defend Life and the Catholic Media Coalition will gather in prayer for the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops (USCCB).
WHAT: Prayer vigil and press conference to address the USCCB's Fall Assembly and the Nov. 11 full-page ad in USA Today entreating the bishop's to enforce Canon 915. The bishops will discuss the practical and pastoral implications of political support for abortion at the meeting.
WHY: Over 123 U.S. bishops spoke out against abortion in the 2008 presidential election, yet pro-abortion Catholic politicians continue to shape abortion policy while receiving Holy Communion in dioceses across the country. Are Catholics heeding the words of their bishops? How will the Catholic bishop's enforce the Church's teaching on abortion?
On Nov. 11, American Life League will run a full-page advertisement in USA Today imploring the bishops to stop allowing pro-abortion politicians like Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Joe Biden to politicize Catholicism's most sacred Eucharist and to enforce Canon 915, which states:
"Those… obstinately persevering in grave and manifest sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.
Later that evening, a prayer vigil and press conference outside the USCCB's conference at the Baltimore Marriot Waterfront Hotel will herald an emerging and powerful lay outcry within the U.S. Catholic Church that demands accountability and leadership from the Catholic hierarchy with the belief that Catholics can end abortion in this country.
American Life League was co-founded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death. For more information or press inquiries, please contact Katie Walker at 540.659.4942.
# # #
_______________________________
Katie Walker
Director of Communication
American Life League
1179 Courthouse Road
Stafford, Virginia 22554
540.659.4942
kwalker@all.org
http://www.all.org/
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Saturday, October 25, 2008
The Dawkins Delusion
Dawkins ... Oxford University biologist ... and he does not understand statistics as applied to biology? When I was at Oxford, there was a much higher and more rigorous level of intelligence.
Even assuming molecules exist of themselves and with no questioning where they come from - of how they, in their complexity, were created and excluding the complexity which exists in the atom, the statistical odds, of molecules being in the right place at the right time to form the amoeba DNA with its 6 BILLION discrete bits of information, are supra astronomical. [I cannot even choose a measly 6 numbers from 49 to win the 649 Lottery!!]
There are many problems with this assumption. While, in theory, anything that can happen will happen in an infinite system ... we clearly have not approached "infinite time" yet, so an infinite system does not yet exist.
"Anything that can happen will happen" needs to be examined for its objective truth: namely that if the amoeba DNA did occur, then as well there would also be trillions and trillions of other DNA formed through the same random process. This is really 101 Statistics: amoeba DNA being randomly formed would only be one occurrence in a extremely large population of statistical occurrences.
Dawkins not only has his statistical blinkers on, he has his tunnel vision on: focussing on one DNA and - conveniently - ignoring the immense number of other DNA which would have precisely equal statistical opportunities of occurrence.
Dawkins is a very unscientific scientist. Likely needs to go back to school?
Science (unadulterated, of course) is the friend of Religion.
David A. Hogg B.Sc., D.I.C., P.Eng., C.G.A.
Even assuming molecules exist of themselves and with no questioning where they come from - of how they, in their complexity, were created and excluding the complexity which exists in the atom, the statistical odds, of molecules being in the right place at the right time to form the amoeba DNA with its 6 BILLION discrete bits of information, are supra astronomical. [I cannot even choose a measly 6 numbers from 49 to win the 649 Lottery!!]
There are many problems with this assumption. While, in theory, anything that can happen will happen in an infinite system ... we clearly have not approached "infinite time" yet, so an infinite system does not yet exist.
"Anything that can happen will happen" needs to be examined for its objective truth: namely that if the amoeba DNA did occur, then as well there would also be trillions and trillions of other DNA formed through the same random process. This is really 101 Statistics: amoeba DNA being randomly formed would only be one occurrence in a extremely large population of statistical occurrences.
Dawkins not only has his statistical blinkers on, he has his tunnel vision on: focussing on one DNA and - conveniently - ignoring the immense number of other DNA which would have precisely equal statistical opportunities of occurrence.
Dawkins is a very unscientific scientist. Likely needs to go back to school?
Science (unadulterated, of course) is the friend of Religion.
David A. Hogg B.Sc., D.I.C., P.Eng., C.G.A.
Friday, October 24, 2008
President Barack Obama's To-Do List
If Barack Obama becomes president, what will be on his 'To Do' list?
1. Making America a socialist country.
2. Enacting a major distribution of wealth - in other words, taking from some Americans and giving it to others (including people here illegally).
3. Increasing the capital gains tax, which will reduce investments and new jobs.
4. Increasing the estate (death) tax, leaving more to the government and less for your children and grandchildren.
5. "Allowing" the Bush tax cuts to expire, thereby increasing taxes on most Americans.
6. Removing the cap on Social Security payroll taxes.
7. Increasing taxes on seniors who continue to work after retirement age.
8. Enacting huge taxes to fight "global warming," such as higher taxes on gasoline.
9. Merging the tax and welfare systems, disguising welfare checks as "tax cuts."
10. Creating more "welfare" programs for corporations using taxpayer money.
11. Instituting more taxpayer bailouts for Wall Street and other big corporations.
12. Imposing rules that require nearly all workers to join unions, even against their wishes.
13. Instituting a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would cause broadcast stations to eliminate radio talk shows (no more Rush Limbaugh, Jim Dobson, Laura Ingraham, etc.).
14. Issuing government mandates that increase the cost of health insurance, and making patients wait longer to see their doctors, dentists, and other health care providers.
15. Rationing health care for all, especially seniors.
16. Rationing health care for premature infants.
17. Rationing health care for people with rare diseases.
18. Rationing health care for people when doctors guess that they are terminally ill.
19. Rationing health care that uses new or expensive medicine or medical technology.
20. Having the government determining who will be your doctor.
21. Having the government deciding which hospital you will use.
22. Having the government deciding what medicines you can take.
23. Increasing welfare payments for illegal aliens.
24. Increasing taxpayers' health care spending on illegal aliens.
25. Eliminating rules that prevent vote fraud, such as requiring voter identification, and providing voting rights for felons.
26. Imposing government control over political content on the Internet.
27. Passing "hate crime" laws that would put ministers and others in jail for criticizing homosexual behavior.
28. Passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would require de facto quotas for homosexuals in every business and non-profit organization.
29. Requiring taxpayers to pay for all abortions and providing additional federal support to organizations that perform abortions.
30. Allowing all abortions, including partial-birth abortions.
31. Removing all state restrictions on abortion, including late-term abortions and requirements that health care be given to infants who survive abortions.
32. Voiding state laws on parental consent and informed consent.
33. Appointing judges who make decisions based on their political beliefs, instead of the Constitution and statutory law.
34. Ending restrictions on plaintiff lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits.
35. Signing and ratifying treaties that transfer U.S. sovereignty to the United Nations and other international organizations.
36. Making the District of Columbia the 51st state (with two Senators and a House member in Congress).
37. Making Puerto Rico the 52nd state (with two Senators and six House members in Congress).
38. Increasing federal government spending by a trillion dollars a year ($13,000 per family).
Please broadly publish this. Add your own if need be.
1. Making America a socialist country.
2. Enacting a major distribution of wealth - in other words, taking from some Americans and giving it to others (including people here illegally).
3. Increasing the capital gains tax, which will reduce investments and new jobs.
4. Increasing the estate (death) tax, leaving more to the government and less for your children and grandchildren.
5. "Allowing" the Bush tax cuts to expire, thereby increasing taxes on most Americans.
6. Removing the cap on Social Security payroll taxes.
7. Increasing taxes on seniors who continue to work after retirement age.
8. Enacting huge taxes to fight "global warming," such as higher taxes on gasoline.
9. Merging the tax and welfare systems, disguising welfare checks as "tax cuts."
10. Creating more "welfare" programs for corporations using taxpayer money.
11. Instituting more taxpayer bailouts for Wall Street and other big corporations.
12. Imposing rules that require nearly all workers to join unions, even against their wishes.
13. Instituting a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would cause broadcast stations to eliminate radio talk shows (no more Rush Limbaugh, Jim Dobson, Laura Ingraham, etc.).
14. Issuing government mandates that increase the cost of health insurance, and making patients wait longer to see their doctors, dentists, and other health care providers.
15. Rationing health care for all, especially seniors.
16. Rationing health care for premature infants.
17. Rationing health care for people with rare diseases.
18. Rationing health care for people when doctors guess that they are terminally ill.
19. Rationing health care that uses new or expensive medicine or medical technology.
20. Having the government determining who will be your doctor.
21. Having the government deciding which hospital you will use.
22. Having the government deciding what medicines you can take.
23. Increasing welfare payments for illegal aliens.
24. Increasing taxpayers' health care spending on illegal aliens.
25. Eliminating rules that prevent vote fraud, such as requiring voter identification, and providing voting rights for felons.
26. Imposing government control over political content on the Internet.
27. Passing "hate crime" laws that would put ministers and others in jail for criticizing homosexual behavior.
28. Passing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would require de facto quotas for homosexuals in every business and non-profit organization.
29. Requiring taxpayers to pay for all abortions and providing additional federal support to organizations that perform abortions.
30. Allowing all abortions, including partial-birth abortions.
31. Removing all state restrictions on abortion, including late-term abortions and requirements that health care be given to infants who survive abortions.
32. Voiding state laws on parental consent and informed consent.
33. Appointing judges who make decisions based on their political beliefs, instead of the Constitution and statutory law.
34. Ending restrictions on plaintiff lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits.
35. Signing and ratifying treaties that transfer U.S. sovereignty to the United Nations and other international organizations.
36. Making the District of Columbia the 51st state (with two Senators and a House member in Congress).
37. Making Puerto Rico the 52nd state (with two Senators and six House members in Congress).
38. Increasing federal government spending by a trillion dollars a year ($13,000 per family).
Please broadly publish this. Add your own if need be.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Advances in stem cell research
Is choosing between good science and good ethics a debate of the past?
By Derek Miedema, Researcher, Institute of Marriage and Family Canada
As Canadians contemplated the pending election last week, an important study was published in the science journal Nature Biotechnology. Quietly overlooked, it has the capacity to fundamentally alter how we conduct stem cell research. [1] Such research has been the subject of much controversy. Embryonic stem cells, some scientists claim, hold the cure for many difficult diseases, like spinal paralysis, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. [2] Yet creating human life, only to destroy it, even for admirable goals, creates an ethical dilemma. Does this recently published study make that debate a thing of the past?
Embryonic stem cells used for research are obtained through the destruction or cloning of human embryos. The ethical dilemma inspired researchers to find a new way to access the potential of embryonic stem cells without destroying human life. In 2006, two Japanese scientists announced the discovery of a process to do just this—by inserting human genetic material into adult stem cells. [3] The genetic material reprograms the adult stem cells so that they have the properties of embryonic stem cells. The new stem cells are called induced Pluripotent stem cells (iPS).
The new October 2008 study shows that reprogramming can be accomplished with half the genetic material previously required and an acid to treat the adult stem cells. They write:
Our results raise the question of whether, or how soon, it will be possible to find small molecules to replace OCT 4 and SOX2 [the two human genes inserted] and thereby achieve reprogramming through purely chemical means, making therapeutic use of reprogrammed cells safer and more practical. [4]
In short, this research opens the way for an eventual method of reprogramming that does not require human material, but rather chemical matter.
The background on stem cell research
Stem cells are like the building blocks of the human body. The Stem Cell Network, an Ottawa-based group that brings stem cell experts together, defines stem cells as those “occur[ing] at the earliest stages of development and provide the starting material for every organ and tissue.” [5]
In theory, stem cells could be used to repair or rebuild wounded or broken parts of the body—inject them into a severed spinal cord, for example, and they could become spinal cord cells and repair the break. [6]
There are two forms of stem cells (to simplify some very complex science). Embryonic stem cells come from embryos, the earliest stage of human development. [7] Adult stem cells, on the other hand, are found in infants, children and adults alike. These cells exist to repair and maintain the human body.
What’s happening in stem cell research today
Currently, stem cell research on human subjects uses adult stem cells. Adult stem cells can be harvested from such things as cord blood, bone marrow and many other human cells. The potential for the rejection of implanted cells is also greatly reduced when a patient’s stem cells are isolated and then reinserted back into their own body.
Still, some maintain that embryonic stem cells are a great hope for cures, and so research on them continues as well. It’s worth noting that the National Institutes of Health, the national medical research agency of the United States government, indicates that no treatments exist as a result of embryonic stem cell research, however, adult stem cell research has already produced successful treatments for human patients. [8]
Those intimately involved with stem cell research admit there’s an ethical issue at stake. Dr. James Thomson, the first person to isolate human embryonic stem cells, highlighted the difficulties associated with his decision to begin his research. He told the New York Times in 2007 “[i]f human embryonic stem cell research does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough.” [9]
The possible implications
Does the October 2008 study mean choosing between science and ethics on this topic is a thing of the past? Some experts in ethics and biotechnology say the reprogramming research process could eventually mean a safe source of stems cells for research. [10]
Recent iPS cell research seems in its early stages to provide a positive alternative to embryonic stem cell research. This study points to another avenue for stem cell research, which takes ethical concerns seriously while forging ahead with fruitful scientific endeavours.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endnotes
[1] Huangfu, D., Osafune, K., Maehr, R., Guo, W., Eijkelenboom, A., Chen, S., Muhlestein, W., Melton, D. A. (October 12, 2008) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from primary human fibroblasts with only Oct4 and Sox2. Nature Biotechnology. Article abstract can be retrieved at http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nbt.1502.html
[2] Health Canada. (2008) About Biotechnology, Stem Cells. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/sr-sr/biotech/about-apropos/stem_cells_souches-eng.php
[3] Takahashi, K. and Yamanaka, S. (2006) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell, 126, 663-676.
[4] Huangfu, D. et al.
[5] Stem Cell Network. What are stem cells? Retrieved October 20, 2008 at http://www.stemcellnetwork.ca/science.php
[6] Health Canada. (2008) About Biotechnology, Stem Cells. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/sr-sr/biotech/about-apropos/stem_cells_souches-eng.php
[7] These embryonic cells have the capability of becoming any cell in the human body.
Giesbrecht, G. (Spring/Summer 2006) When Does It All Begin? IMFC Review, 20-22. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.imfcanada.org/article_files/When_does_it_all_begin.pdf
[8] National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2008) FAQs. Stem Cell Information. Bethesda, MD. Retrieved October 21, 2008 at http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/faqs
[9] Kolata, G. (November 22, 2007) Man Who Helped Start Stem Cell War May End It. The New York Times. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/22/science/22stem.html
[10] See Cohen, C.B., Brandhorst, B.P. (2008) Getting Clear on the Ethics of iPS Cells. Bioethics Forum. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.thehastingscenter.org/Bioethicsforum/Post.aspx?id=710
For further study of the ethical implications of iPS, see Kaebnick, G. (2008) Embryonic Ethics. Bioethics Forum. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.thehastingscenter.org/bioethicsforum/post.aspx?id=706 to which Cynthia Cohen and Bruce Brandhorst and Francoise Baylis respond. All articles are found under author name at http://www.thehastingscenter.org/bioethicsforum/byauthor.aspx
Permission is granted to reprint or broadcast this information with appropriate attribution to the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada
(Received by email)
By Derek Miedema, Researcher, Institute of Marriage and Family Canada
As Canadians contemplated the pending election last week, an important study was published in the science journal Nature Biotechnology. Quietly overlooked, it has the capacity to fundamentally alter how we conduct stem cell research. [1] Such research has been the subject of much controversy. Embryonic stem cells, some scientists claim, hold the cure for many difficult diseases, like spinal paralysis, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. [2] Yet creating human life, only to destroy it, even for admirable goals, creates an ethical dilemma. Does this recently published study make that debate a thing of the past?
Embryonic stem cells used for research are obtained through the destruction or cloning of human embryos. The ethical dilemma inspired researchers to find a new way to access the potential of embryonic stem cells without destroying human life. In 2006, two Japanese scientists announced the discovery of a process to do just this—by inserting human genetic material into adult stem cells. [3] The genetic material reprograms the adult stem cells so that they have the properties of embryonic stem cells. The new stem cells are called induced Pluripotent stem cells (iPS).
The new October 2008 study shows that reprogramming can be accomplished with half the genetic material previously required and an acid to treat the adult stem cells. They write:
Our results raise the question of whether, or how soon, it will be possible to find small molecules to replace OCT 4 and SOX2 [the two human genes inserted] and thereby achieve reprogramming through purely chemical means, making therapeutic use of reprogrammed cells safer and more practical. [4]
In short, this research opens the way for an eventual method of reprogramming that does not require human material, but rather chemical matter.
The background on stem cell research
Stem cells are like the building blocks of the human body. The Stem Cell Network, an Ottawa-based group that brings stem cell experts together, defines stem cells as those “occur[ing] at the earliest stages of development and provide the starting material for every organ and tissue.” [5]
In theory, stem cells could be used to repair or rebuild wounded or broken parts of the body—inject them into a severed spinal cord, for example, and they could become spinal cord cells and repair the break. [6]
There are two forms of stem cells (to simplify some very complex science). Embryonic stem cells come from embryos, the earliest stage of human development. [7] Adult stem cells, on the other hand, are found in infants, children and adults alike. These cells exist to repair and maintain the human body.
What’s happening in stem cell research today
Currently, stem cell research on human subjects uses adult stem cells. Adult stem cells can be harvested from such things as cord blood, bone marrow and many other human cells. The potential for the rejection of implanted cells is also greatly reduced when a patient’s stem cells are isolated and then reinserted back into their own body.
Still, some maintain that embryonic stem cells are a great hope for cures, and so research on them continues as well. It’s worth noting that the National Institutes of Health, the national medical research agency of the United States government, indicates that no treatments exist as a result of embryonic stem cell research, however, adult stem cell research has already produced successful treatments for human patients. [8]
Those intimately involved with stem cell research admit there’s an ethical issue at stake. Dr. James Thomson, the first person to isolate human embryonic stem cells, highlighted the difficulties associated with his decision to begin his research. He told the New York Times in 2007 “[i]f human embryonic stem cell research does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough.” [9]
The possible implications
Does the October 2008 study mean choosing between science and ethics on this topic is a thing of the past? Some experts in ethics and biotechnology say the reprogramming research process could eventually mean a safe source of stems cells for research. [10]
Recent iPS cell research seems in its early stages to provide a positive alternative to embryonic stem cell research. This study points to another avenue for stem cell research, which takes ethical concerns seriously while forging ahead with fruitful scientific endeavours.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endnotes
[1] Huangfu, D., Osafune, K., Maehr, R., Guo, W., Eijkelenboom, A., Chen, S., Muhlestein, W., Melton, D. A. (October 12, 2008) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from primary human fibroblasts with only Oct4 and Sox2. Nature Biotechnology. Article abstract can be retrieved at http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nbt.1502.html
[2] Health Canada. (2008) About Biotechnology, Stem Cells. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/sr-sr/biotech/about-apropos/stem_cells_souches-eng.php
[3] Takahashi, K. and Yamanaka, S. (2006) Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors. Cell, 126, 663-676.
[4] Huangfu, D. et al.
[5] Stem Cell Network. What are stem cells? Retrieved October 20, 2008 at http://www.stemcellnetwork.ca/science.php
[6] Health Canada. (2008) About Biotechnology, Stem Cells. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/sr-sr/biotech/about-apropos/stem_cells_souches-eng.php
[7] These embryonic cells have the capability of becoming any cell in the human body.
Giesbrecht, G. (Spring/Summer 2006) When Does It All Begin? IMFC Review, 20-22. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.imfcanada.org/article_files/When_does_it_all_begin.pdf
[8] National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2008) FAQs. Stem Cell Information. Bethesda, MD. Retrieved October 21, 2008 at http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/faqs
[9] Kolata, G. (November 22, 2007) Man Who Helped Start Stem Cell War May End It. The New York Times. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/22/science/22stem.html
[10] See Cohen, C.B., Brandhorst, B.P. (2008) Getting Clear on the Ethics of iPS Cells. Bioethics Forum. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.thehastingscenter.org/Bioethicsforum/Post.aspx?id=710
For further study of the ethical implications of iPS, see Kaebnick, G. (2008) Embryonic Ethics. Bioethics Forum. Retrieved October 20, 2008 at
http://www.thehastingscenter.org/bioethicsforum/post.aspx?id=706 to which Cynthia Cohen and Bruce Brandhorst and Francoise Baylis respond. All articles are found under author name at http://www.thehastingscenter.org/bioethicsforum/byauthor.aspx
Permission is granted to reprint or broadcast this information with appropriate attribution to the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada
(Received by email)
Monday, October 20, 2008
URGENT prayer request from Northern Ireland
Dear Suzanne,
I have just returned from Northern Ireland and the amazing Rally for Life on Saturday in Belfast held by Precious Life, the country's foremost pro-life group.
The Rally was originally intended to celebrate recent pro-life victories there, but switched focus because of a new threat coming from the U.K. Parliament in Westminster.
Several pro-abortion Members of Parliament are trying to extend the Abortion Act of 1967 to Northern Ireland, where until now abortion has remained illegal (just as it is in the Republic of Ireland).
This WEDNESDAY, Parliament will take up the question of legalizing abortion in Northern Ireland, and our pro-life friends there are asking for our urgent prayers.
PLEASE PRAY that the Parliament will respect the convictions of the vast majority of citizens of Northern Ireland -- including all the major political parties and churches -- and keep abortion out.
You can get a full report on the Rally this past Saturday and more background on abortion in Ireland right here:
http://prolifeaction.org/#nireland
I also want to make sure you know about my father's talk at St. Francis de Sales Church in Lake Zurich, IL on Sunday:
EVENT: Pro-Life Talk by Joe Scheidler
WHEN: Sunday, October 26, 2008 at 3:30 p.m.
WHERE: St Francis de Sales, 135 S Buesching Rd, Lake Zurich, IL
MAP: http://tinyurl.com/stfrancislz
My dad promises to say something about Northern Ireland at the talk (by then we'll know the results of Wednesday's vote in Parliament).
But whether or not you can make it Sunday, please keep the situation in Northern Ireland in your prayers over the critical next three days.
Yours for Life,
-- Eric
Eric Scheidler
Communications Director
Pro-Life Action League
Tel: 630-896-1200
Pro-Life Action League
6160 N Cicero Ave, Ste 600
Chicago, IL 60646, USA
(Received by email)
I have just returned from Northern Ireland and the amazing Rally for Life on Saturday in Belfast held by Precious Life, the country's foremost pro-life group.
The Rally was originally intended to celebrate recent pro-life victories there, but switched focus because of a new threat coming from the U.K. Parliament in Westminster.
Several pro-abortion Members of Parliament are trying to extend the Abortion Act of 1967 to Northern Ireland, where until now abortion has remained illegal (just as it is in the Republic of Ireland).
This WEDNESDAY, Parliament will take up the question of legalizing abortion in Northern Ireland, and our pro-life friends there are asking for our urgent prayers.
PLEASE PRAY that the Parliament will respect the convictions of the vast majority of citizens of Northern Ireland -- including all the major political parties and churches -- and keep abortion out.
You can get a full report on the Rally this past Saturday and more background on abortion in Ireland right here:
http://prolifeaction.org/#nireland
I also want to make sure you know about my father's talk at St. Francis de Sales Church in Lake Zurich, IL on Sunday:
EVENT: Pro-Life Talk by Joe Scheidler
WHEN: Sunday, October 26, 2008 at 3:30 p.m.
WHERE: St Francis de Sales, 135 S Buesching Rd, Lake Zurich, IL
MAP: http://tinyurl.com/stfrancislz
My dad promises to say something about Northern Ireland at the talk (by then we'll know the results of Wednesday's vote in Parliament).
But whether or not you can make it Sunday, please keep the situation in Northern Ireland in your prayers over the critical next three days.
Yours for Life,
-- Eric
Eric Scheidler
Communications Director
Pro-Life Action League
Tel: 630-896-1200
Pro-Life Action League
6160 N Cicero Ave, Ste 600
Chicago, IL 60646, USA
(Received by email)
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Family Coalition Party Leader on our electoral system
Straight thoughts 173
October 15th, 2008
Major election twist
The Block gained 50 seats, with 10% of the votes. That is enough to determine which legislation will or will not pass.
However, the Green, who obtained an average of 7% across Canada (8% in Ontario) gained 0 seats: ZERO.
The most important election outcome is this: We have a system that promotes regionalism winning seats, political machines and the cult of leader’s personality, instead of a system reflecting what voters think of party programs and policies.
I am not a Green supporter, but I am for a fair system of democracy.
Giuseppe Gori
Leader, Family Coalition Party of Ontario
(Received by email)
October 15th, 2008
Major election twist
The Block gained 50 seats, with 10% of the votes. That is enough to determine which legislation will or will not pass.
However, the Green, who obtained an average of 7% across Canada (8% in Ontario) gained 0 seats: ZERO.
The most important election outcome is this: We have a system that promotes regionalism winning seats, political machines and the cult of leader’s personality, instead of a system reflecting what voters think of party programs and policies.
I am not a Green supporter, but I am for a fair system of democracy.
Giuseppe Gori
Leader, Family Coalition Party of Ontario
(Received by email)
Thursday, October 9, 2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Former abortion patients denounce Order going to Morgentaler
Women who have experienced the pain and anguish of legal abortion in Canada are outraged that the Governor General, the Director of Honours and the committee have ignored our voices and request to Terminate the Order of Canada going to an abortionist. They have also ignored thousands of letters and signatures of opposition to Henry Morgentaler getting the Order of Canada. Furthermore, they have ignored the fact that 9 former recipients of the Order of Canada have returned their medals in protest to Morgentaler being a recipient. This man immigrated to Canada and began doing illegal abortions. For years he totally ignored the laws of the land and has profited, making millions of dollars. He/his clinics have been sued for damages to women, and he has lost his medical license for inappropriate behaviour.
Canada Silent No More is collecting declarations from women hurt and injured by legal abortion for lawsuits against abortion doctors for irreparable damages and for failure to provide 'informed consent' on all of the risk factors. 'We were never told about the mountain of studies linking Breast Cancer to induced abortion since 1957(1) We were never informed that induced legal abortion would cause deep sorrow, remorse and guilt. We weren’t told it could cause depression, suicidal thoughts, self-loathing, sleeping, eating and anxiety disorders, that some of us would have irreversible cervical and uterine damage and scarring(2). We were never informed about the 48 studies linking pre-term births in subsequent pregnancies, miscarriages, and for some who would abort the only baby they could ever conceive.' states Mountenay, founder and president of CSNM. (3)
Canada Silent No More regularly receives calls from post abortive women who suffer deep physical and emotional pain. “Approximately 10% of women suffer immediate complications, of which about 2% are life threatening. (4)We get calls from women injured physically and emotionally and who suffer in silence and grieve,” Mountenay points out. “Not only that but, research confirms that women who abort are SIX TIMES more likely to commit or attempt suicide afterwards. Women who abort are also SIX TIMES more likely to turn to substance abuse and self destructive behaviour.” She explains. “A 1997 Finnish record based Study found that women who aborted were almost FOUR TIMES more likely to die in the following year, than women who gave birth to their babies. (3) It can affect their bonding with born children, because one is alive, and the other one isn’t…it can affect her sexually, because abortion is connected to sex. (4) It is certainly not a ‘safe' procedure according to the studies.” www.afterabortion.org and www.abortionbreastcancer.com
“Dr. Morgentaler has created an abortion on demand culture, where every day over three hundred babies are aborted in our nation”, states Mountenay. Abortion is not ‘real health care’ for pregnant women. For decades now, Canadian children have been exterminated in the womb, Canadian women are suffering, and we have a population dirge. It is unthinkable to assign Canada’s highest honour to a medical doctor who destroys lives. That is why, Mountenay concludes, “Canada Silent No More urges the Deputy Secretary to Terminate The Order of Canada to Morgentaler immediately on behalf of our unborn children.”
Contact: Denise Mountenay
780-939-5774
Cell: 780-267-5714
See references for studies below
Canada Silent No More is collecting declarations from women hurt and injured by legal abortion for lawsuits against abortion doctors for irreparable damages and for failure to provide 'informed consent' on all of the risk factors. 'We were never told about the mountain of studies linking Breast Cancer to induced abortion since 1957(1) We were never informed that induced legal abortion would cause deep sorrow, remorse and guilt. We weren’t told it could cause depression, suicidal thoughts, self-loathing, sleeping, eating and anxiety disorders, that some of us would have irreversible cervical and uterine damage and scarring(2). We were never informed about the 48 studies linking pre-term births in subsequent pregnancies, miscarriages, and for some who would abort the only baby they could ever conceive.' states Mountenay, founder and president of CSNM. (3)
Canada Silent No More regularly receives calls from post abortive women who suffer deep physical and emotional pain. “Approximately 10% of women suffer immediate complications, of which about 2% are life threatening. (4)We get calls from women injured physically and emotionally and who suffer in silence and grieve,” Mountenay points out. “Not only that but, research confirms that women who abort are SIX TIMES more likely to commit or attempt suicide afterwards. Women who abort are also SIX TIMES more likely to turn to substance abuse and self destructive behaviour.” She explains. “A 1997 Finnish record based Study found that women who aborted were almost FOUR TIMES more likely to die in the following year, than women who gave birth to their babies. (3) It can affect their bonding with born children, because one is alive, and the other one isn’t…it can affect her sexually, because abortion is connected to sex. (4) It is certainly not a ‘safe' procedure according to the studies.” www.afterabortion.org and www.abortionbreastcancer.com
“Dr. Morgentaler has created an abortion on demand culture, where every day over three hundred babies are aborted in our nation”, states Mountenay. Abortion is not ‘real health care’ for pregnant women. For decades now, Canadian children have been exterminated in the womb, Canadian women are suffering, and we have a population dirge. It is unthinkable to assign Canada’s highest honour to a medical doctor who destroys lives. That is why, Mountenay concludes, “Canada Silent No More urges the Deputy Secretary to Terminate The Order of Canada to Morgentaler immediately on behalf of our unborn children.”
Contact: Denise Mountenay
780-939-5774
Cell: 780-267-5714
See references for studies below
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
USA: If you think things are bad now, just wait
The upcoming election is the most critical election in the history of our nation. The very future of our nation’s foundation is at stake. Every person will be affected. If the liberals win, then our foundation will no longer be based on the traditional Judeo-Christian morality. It will gradually but assuredly be based on an ever shifting, ever moving foundation. If the liberals win, the damage can’t be stopped with elections two, four or forty years from now. America will forever be changed. We will keep seeing a gradual and growing hostility toward people of faith, especially Christians. The morals of our nation will continue to decline. Our children and grandchildren will pay the price.
In case you may think I’m a “the sky is falling” type of person, you should know: When it comes to predictions, I am a very reserved person. But not on this one. I cannot overstate the damage a liberal victory will do to our country. The upcoming election is the most important in the history of our nation. Yes, if the liberals win you will lose some of your religious freedoms and free speech rights. Churches and pastors will not be exempt. You will not be allowed to say certain things about a particular group. Every item of the homosexual agenda will be approved. All the laws protecting the unborn will be wiped away.
I cannot overemphasize the importance of the Nov. 4 election. That is why I urge you to vote and encourage your family members, friends, Sunday School class and church members to vote. America’s future – the future of your children and grandchildren – is at stake.
Sincerely,
Donald E. Wildmon,
Founder and Chairman
American Family Association
(Received by email)
In case you may think I’m a “the sky is falling” type of person, you should know: When it comes to predictions, I am a very reserved person. But not on this one. I cannot overstate the damage a liberal victory will do to our country. The upcoming election is the most important in the history of our nation. Yes, if the liberals win you will lose some of your religious freedoms and free speech rights. Churches and pastors will not be exempt. You will not be allowed to say certain things about a particular group. Every item of the homosexual agenda will be approved. All the laws protecting the unborn will be wiped away.
I cannot overemphasize the importance of the Nov. 4 election. That is why I urge you to vote and encourage your family members, friends, Sunday School class and church members to vote. America’s future – the future of your children and grandchildren – is at stake.
Sincerely,
Donald E. Wildmon,
Founder and Chairman
American Family Association
(Received by email)
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Family Coalition Party Leader on Government and Poverty
Forwarded by Giuseppe Gori, leader of the Family Coalition Party of Ontario
Straight thoughts 172
September 30th, 2008
Why so many?
Why so many good people going to church with you (and many church leaders) vote for socialist parties?
Because generally they think that “socialism” does more for the poor than capitalism. Thus, even when they are well off themselves, they think they are more compassionate (i.e.: feel less guilty) by voting for left wing parties.
Mostly because of lack of information and biased media reports, they believe that the poor will suffer less under left wing parties who develop more social programs with tax money (that the poor do not pay anyway).
However, the above conclusion it is not morally superior and is not true.
Morally, we are all called to help the poor personally, not collectively, by imposition of taxes.
To understand why the above conclusion is not true, two concepts need to be clarified:
1. The poor are suffering most in a poor economy. We can cite examples of countries around the world, but even better, people can understand that when the salary (cash in hand) of a “rich” person is cut in half, this person can do without some unessential goods, but when the salary of a poor person is cut in half, this person will have to do without essential items, such as food and shelter.
2. More government (Total Investment in Government infrastructures and programs) does not mean a better economy or a more compassionate government:
This second point needs to be further explained:
There are two extremes: No government and Total government (everyone works directly or indirectly for the government).
When there is no government at all, then some investment in government (e.g.: police, roads) is a investment for all.
When there is too much government (e.g.: nobody has a productive job), then everyone starves.
Thus, there IS and optimum level of investment in government, in between the two extremes.
Before that optimum point, when investment in government is very low, more government social programs will raise the standard of living of the poor (by taxing most of the others), but
After that optimum point, when investment in government is very high, more government social programs will lower the standard of living of the poor (as well as everyone else’s).
This has been explained in graphical form in the article: The STING curve. For reference, click here.
Conclusion:
According to our best modeling (and a corroborating study1), the optimum point (measured in total amount of taxation) is about 20% to 35%2.
In today’s Canada the total level of taxation has risen to over 50%3 (without alleviating governments deficits4).
Thus, with today’s Canadian size of government (federal, provincial and local) any MORE investment in social programs (while maintaining the same old programs and priorities) is deleterious to the economy and lowers the standard of living of the poor (contrary to the very objective of those new programs).
Can compassionate “good people” (including many preachers) understand the negative implications of "more government" on the poor, in today's society?
Finally, they should also study what the role of government is: They should not confuse our personal call to help the poor with enforced government policies (which do not secure anyone a better place in Heaven).
Giuseppe Gori
Leader, Family Coalition Party of Ontario
NOTES
1. Georgios Karras, “The Optimal Government Size: Further International Evidence on the Productivity of Government Services,” Economic Inquiry, Vol. 34, (April 1996), p. 2
2. No previous government has tried to quantify its “size” with an econometric model, thus more studies will be required to identify the parameters and obtain a more precise definition of the “optimum point” in the STING curve.
3. Including Income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, capital taxes, business taxes and a list of hundreds of other taxes.
4. A misconception, very common in left wing circles, is that more taxes generate more government revenue. Of course, this is true when the Total Investment in Government is low (BEFORE the optimum point), but is preposterous in today’s reality, with our Total Investment in Government is well AFTER the optimum point. The fact that after the optimum point lowering taxes increases government revenue has been demonstrated (e.g.: During the presidency of Ronald Reagan).
Straight thoughts 172
September 30th, 2008
Why so many?
Why so many good people going to church with you (and many church leaders) vote for socialist parties?
Because generally they think that “socialism” does more for the poor than capitalism. Thus, even when they are well off themselves, they think they are more compassionate (i.e.: feel less guilty) by voting for left wing parties.
Mostly because of lack of information and biased media reports, they believe that the poor will suffer less under left wing parties who develop more social programs with tax money (that the poor do not pay anyway).
However, the above conclusion it is not morally superior and is not true.
Morally, we are all called to help the poor personally, not collectively, by imposition of taxes.
To understand why the above conclusion is not true, two concepts need to be clarified:
1. The poor are suffering most in a poor economy. We can cite examples of countries around the world, but even better, people can understand that when the salary (cash in hand) of a “rich” person is cut in half, this person can do without some unessential goods, but when the salary of a poor person is cut in half, this person will have to do without essential items, such as food and shelter.
2. More government (Total Investment in Government infrastructures and programs) does not mean a better economy or a more compassionate government:
This second point needs to be further explained:
There are two extremes: No government and Total government (everyone works directly or indirectly for the government).
When there is no government at all, then some investment in government (e.g.: police, roads) is a investment for all.
When there is too much government (e.g.: nobody has a productive job), then everyone starves.
Thus, there IS and optimum level of investment in government, in between the two extremes.
Before that optimum point, when investment in government is very low, more government social programs will raise the standard of living of the poor (by taxing most of the others), but
After that optimum point, when investment in government is very high, more government social programs will lower the standard of living of the poor (as well as everyone else’s).
This has been explained in graphical form in the article: The STING curve. For reference, click here.
Conclusion:
According to our best modeling (and a corroborating study1), the optimum point (measured in total amount of taxation) is about 20% to 35%2.
In today’s Canada the total level of taxation has risen to over 50%3 (without alleviating governments deficits4).
Thus, with today’s Canadian size of government (federal, provincial and local) any MORE investment in social programs (while maintaining the same old programs and priorities) is deleterious to the economy and lowers the standard of living of the poor (contrary to the very objective of those new programs).
Can compassionate “good people” (including many preachers) understand the negative implications of "more government" on the poor, in today's society?
Finally, they should also study what the role of government is: They should not confuse our personal call to help the poor with enforced government policies (which do not secure anyone a better place in Heaven).
Giuseppe Gori
Leader, Family Coalition Party of Ontario
NOTES
1. Georgios Karras, “The Optimal Government Size: Further International Evidence on the Productivity of Government Services,” Economic Inquiry, Vol. 34, (April 1996), p. 2
2. No previous government has tried to quantify its “size” with an econometric model, thus more studies will be required to identify the parameters and obtain a more precise definition of the “optimum point” in the STING curve.
3. Including Income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, capital taxes, business taxes and a list of hundreds of other taxes.
4. A misconception, very common in left wing circles, is that more taxes generate more government revenue. Of course, this is true when the Total Investment in Government is low (BEFORE the optimum point), but is preposterous in today’s reality, with our Total Investment in Government is well AFTER the optimum point. The fact that after the optimum point lowering taxes increases government revenue has been demonstrated (e.g.: During the presidency of Ronald Reagan).
Monday, September 29, 2008
HLI Launches Campaign for Conversion of Abortionists
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: John Mallon, 405-720-2575
September 29, 2008 jmallon@hli.org
HLI Launches Campaign for
Conversion of Abortionists
FRONT ROYAL, VA — The Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, STL, president of Human Life International, (HLI) today launched an international campaign to promote praying the St. Michael prayer after every Mass. The grassroots campaign is designed to encourage the laity to pray for St. Michael’s intercession for the conversion of abortionists. It is also a call to priests and bishops to include the St. Michael prayer after the final blessing at all Masses.
“The fight against the culture of death is primarily a spiritual battle,” Euteneuer said, “and Human Life International knows that with the aid of St. Michael, abortionists around the world will convert from their cooperation with evil.”
Euteneuer said, “Nowhere are the words of St. Paul that ‘our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens’ (Ephesians 6:12), more evident or obvious than in the abortion battle.”
He continued, “As a pro-life organization we are naturally concerned with the babies killed by abortion and their mothers who are ravaged by it. But we are also concerned with the eternal souls of those caught up in this evil, the abortionists, and others who promote it. We want to see them in Heaven, and as a priest that is of ultimate concern to me.”
HLI is asking people to sign a pledge of support for the campaign and pray the St. Michael prayer daily, especially after each Mass, and send copies of the pledge to parishes to be inserted in the weekly bulletins.
HLI has produced St. Michael prayer cards in five languages: English, Spanish, French, Italian, and Portuguese. A link to sign the pledge online, information on ordering the prayer cards and the text of the prayer in 19 different languages can be found at: www.hli.org/st_michael_prayer.html.
-30-
September 29, 2008 jmallon@hli.org
HLI Launches Campaign for
Conversion of Abortionists
FRONT ROYAL, VA — The Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, STL, president of Human Life International, (HLI) today launched an international campaign to promote praying the St. Michael prayer after every Mass. The grassroots campaign is designed to encourage the laity to pray for St. Michael’s intercession for the conversion of abortionists. It is also a call to priests and bishops to include the St. Michael prayer after the final blessing at all Masses.
“The fight against the culture of death is primarily a spiritual battle,” Euteneuer said, “and Human Life International knows that with the aid of St. Michael, abortionists around the world will convert from their cooperation with evil.”
Euteneuer said, “Nowhere are the words of St. Paul that ‘our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens’ (Ephesians 6:12), more evident or obvious than in the abortion battle.”
He continued, “As a pro-life organization we are naturally concerned with the babies killed by abortion and their mothers who are ravaged by it. But we are also concerned with the eternal souls of those caught up in this evil, the abortionists, and others who promote it. We want to see them in Heaven, and as a priest that is of ultimate concern to me.”
HLI is asking people to sign a pledge of support for the campaign and pray the St. Michael prayer daily, especially after each Mass, and send copies of the pledge to parishes to be inserted in the weekly bulletins.
HLI has produced St. Michael prayer cards in five languages: English, Spanish, French, Italian, and Portuguese. A link to sign the pledge online, information on ordering the prayer cards and the text of the prayer in 19 different languages can be found at: www.hli.org/st_michael_prayer.html.
-30-
Saturday, September 20, 2008
'beingHUMAN' special to air on EWTN network Sunday, Sept. 21 at 9 pm ET
WASHINGTON, DC, September 19, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - This Sunday, a brand-new, world premiere documentary about 40 Days for Life - filmed by an Emmy-winning director - will be airing in 128 million homes around the world. The program airs Sunday on the EWTN global network at 9 PM Eastern.
The program, part of the beingHUMAN series, will help launch the fall 40 Days for Life campaign, which is scheduled in communities from coast to coast beginning next Wednesday, September 24 and continuing through November 2.
"We are overwhelmed with the outpouring of involvement in 40 Days for Life," said David Bereit, director of 40 Days for Life, noting that more than 170 communities in 47 states, the District of Columbia, American Samoa and two Canadian provinces are participating this fall, making this campaign the largest and longest coordinated pro-life mobilization in history. The full list of locations is online at http://www.40daysforlife.com/location.cfm.
40 Days for Life is a community-based campaign that features 40 days of prayer and fasting, round-the-clock peaceful vigil outside an abortion facility and grassroots educational outreach. Simultaneous campaigns will be conducted coast-to-coast - and internationally - as part of a unified outreach.
Sunday's episode of beingHUMAN interviews volunteers, national leaders, and former abortionists on how 40 Days for Life is renewing hope in communities across the nation. "It focuses on the stories and successes that prayer, fasting, and peaceful vigil have accomplished through 40 Days for Life campaigns that have spread hope around the globe," said Bereit. "This show is a great opportunity to get new people involved in this life-saving initiative."
The first installment of the beingHUMAN series helped launch the first national 40 Days for Life campaign in the fall of 2007. The program was honored with a Telly Award for television excellence. "The documentary helped to spread the word about a new approach to pro-life outreach," said Bereit, "an approach that relied on prayer, fasting and peaceful action. It's an approach that has been successful in reducing abortion numbers and bringing more people into pro-life work."
Previews of the new program, as well as additional information about the production of the documentary, are available online at http://www.beinghumanshow.com.
The program, part of the beingHUMAN series, will help launch the fall 40 Days for Life campaign, which is scheduled in communities from coast to coast beginning next Wednesday, September 24 and continuing through November 2.
"We are overwhelmed with the outpouring of involvement in 40 Days for Life," said David Bereit, director of 40 Days for Life, noting that more than 170 communities in 47 states, the District of Columbia, American Samoa and two Canadian provinces are participating this fall, making this campaign the largest and longest coordinated pro-life mobilization in history. The full list of locations is online at http://www.40daysforlife.com/location.cfm.
40 Days for Life is a community-based campaign that features 40 days of prayer and fasting, round-the-clock peaceful vigil outside an abortion facility and grassroots educational outreach. Simultaneous campaigns will be conducted coast-to-coast - and internationally - as part of a unified outreach.
Sunday's episode of beingHUMAN interviews volunteers, national leaders, and former abortionists on how 40 Days for Life is renewing hope in communities across the nation. "It focuses on the stories and successes that prayer, fasting, and peaceful vigil have accomplished through 40 Days for Life campaigns that have spread hope around the globe," said Bereit. "This show is a great opportunity to get new people involved in this life-saving initiative."
The first installment of the beingHUMAN series helped launch the first national 40 Days for Life campaign in the fall of 2007. The program was honored with a Telly Award for television excellence. "The documentary helped to spread the word about a new approach to pro-life outreach," said Bereit, "an approach that relied on prayer, fasting and peaceful action. It's an approach that has been successful in reducing abortion numbers and bringing more people into pro-life work."
Previews of the new program, as well as additional information about the production of the documentary, are available online at http://www.beinghumanshow.com.
Friday, September 12, 2008
OMA Urges CPSO to Abandon Draft Policy on Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code
Received by forwarded email:
----- Original Message -----
Subject: President's Update
OMA President's Update
Volume 13, No. 23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 12, 2008
OMA Urges CPSO to Abandon Draft Policy on Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code
Dear Colleague:
In recent weeks, the OMA has heard from many members expressing very serious concerns about the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) draft policy on "Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code."
The OMA Board of Directors has reviewed this issue and prepared an official response to the College, which is now posted in the Recent Issues area on the Members Home Page (www.oma.org).
In short, the OMA has advised the College to abandon the proposed policy.
We believe that it may interfere with the rights and freedoms of Ontario physicians, and we object to the notion that a charge of professional misconduct could arise from an Ontario physician acting in accordance with his or her religious or moral beliefs.
Our response emphasizes, "It is the OMA's position that physicians maintain a right to exercise their own moral judgment and freedom of choice in making decisions regarding medical care and that the CPSO not insert itself into the interpretation of human rights statutes."
Also, "the vast majority of physicians will provide patients with appropriate advice without a CPSO policy in this regard."
I would like to thank those members who contacted us to provide input on this issue.
Dr. Ken Arnold
OMA President
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMA Response to CPSO Draft Policy “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code”
September 11, 2008 - The Ontario Medical Association (OMA) thanks the College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPSO) for the opportunity to comment on the CPSO draft policy entitled, “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code”. The OMA appreciates the CPSO’s effort to offer physicians assistance in understanding their professional duties in dealing with human rights issues. In particular, the OMA agrees with the CPSO’s statement that physicians may exercise professional judgment in relation to their own clinical competence. However, the OMA is concerned that this draft policy may interfere with physicians existing rights and freedoms. The OMA urges the CPSO to abandon this policy.
First, the section of the policy entitled “Moral or Religious Beliefs” does not adequately inform physicians that their right to freedom of religion is protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The CPSO acknowledges that “the law in this area is unclear”, however, any policy that the CPSO publishes in this regard has the potential to misstate the law in this area. The CPSO’s interpretation of the Ontario Human Rights Code may conflict with publications of the Ontario Human Rights Commission or could be superseded by the developing case law and Tribunal decisions. The CPSO should refer physicians to the Ontario Human Rights Code when physicians are faced with a moral or religious conflict in the care of a patient.
Second, the draft policy introduces a professional misconduct clause, whereby a physician could be disciplined for withholding information about the existence of a procedure or treatment because providing that procedure or giving advice about it conflicts with their religious or moral beliefs. We believe that the vast majority of Ontarian physicians will provide patients with appropriate advice without a CPSO policy in this regard. We believe that it should never be professional misconduct for an Ontarian physician to act in accordance with his or her religious or moral beliefs.
It is the OMA’s position that physicians maintain a right to exercise their own moral judgment and freedom of choice in making decisions regarding medical care and that the CPSO not insert itself into the interpretation of human rights statutes.
Statement posted at:
http://www.oma.org/health/rights.asp
----- Original Message -----
Subject: President's Update
OMA President's Update
Volume 13, No. 23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 12, 2008
OMA Urges CPSO to Abandon Draft Policy on Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code
Dear Colleague:
In recent weeks, the OMA has heard from many members expressing very serious concerns about the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) draft policy on "Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code."
The OMA Board of Directors has reviewed this issue and prepared an official response to the College, which is now posted in the Recent Issues area on the Members Home Page (www.oma.org).
In short, the OMA has advised the College to abandon the proposed policy.
We believe that it may interfere with the rights and freedoms of Ontario physicians, and we object to the notion that a charge of professional misconduct could arise from an Ontario physician acting in accordance with his or her religious or moral beliefs.
Our response emphasizes, "It is the OMA's position that physicians maintain a right to exercise their own moral judgment and freedom of choice in making decisions regarding medical care and that the CPSO not insert itself into the interpretation of human rights statutes."
Also, "the vast majority of physicians will provide patients with appropriate advice without a CPSO policy in this regard."
I would like to thank those members who contacted us to provide input on this issue.
Dr. Ken Arnold
OMA President
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMA Response to CPSO Draft Policy “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code”
September 11, 2008 - The Ontario Medical Association (OMA) thanks the College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPSO) for the opportunity to comment on the CPSO draft policy entitled, “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code”. The OMA appreciates the CPSO’s effort to offer physicians assistance in understanding their professional duties in dealing with human rights issues. In particular, the OMA agrees with the CPSO’s statement that physicians may exercise professional judgment in relation to their own clinical competence. However, the OMA is concerned that this draft policy may interfere with physicians existing rights and freedoms. The OMA urges the CPSO to abandon this policy.
First, the section of the policy entitled “Moral or Religious Beliefs” does not adequately inform physicians that their right to freedom of religion is protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The CPSO acknowledges that “the law in this area is unclear”, however, any policy that the CPSO publishes in this regard has the potential to misstate the law in this area. The CPSO’s interpretation of the Ontario Human Rights Code may conflict with publications of the Ontario Human Rights Commission or could be superseded by the developing case law and Tribunal decisions. The CPSO should refer physicians to the Ontario Human Rights Code when physicians are faced with a moral or religious conflict in the care of a patient.
Second, the draft policy introduces a professional misconduct clause, whereby a physician could be disciplined for withholding information about the existence of a procedure or treatment because providing that procedure or giving advice about it conflicts with their religious or moral beliefs. We believe that the vast majority of Ontarian physicians will provide patients with appropriate advice without a CPSO policy in this regard. We believe that it should never be professional misconduct for an Ontarian physician to act in accordance with his or her religious or moral beliefs.
It is the OMA’s position that physicians maintain a right to exercise their own moral judgment and freedom of choice in making decisions regarding medical care and that the CPSO not insert itself into the interpretation of human rights statutes.
Statement posted at:
http://www.oma.org/health/rights.asp
OMA Urges CPSO to Abandon Draft Policy on Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code
Received by forwarded email:
----- Original Message -----
Subject: President's Update
OMA President's Update
Volume 13, No. 23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 12, 2008
OMA Urges CPSO to Abandon Draft Policy on Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code
Dear Colleague:
In recent weeks, the OMA has heard from many members expressing very serious concerns about the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) draft policy on "Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code."
The OMA Board of Directors has reviewed this issue and prepared an official response to the College, which is now posted in the Recent Issues area on the Members Home Page (www.oma.org).
In short, the OMA has advised the College to abandon the proposed policy.
We believe that it may interfere with the rights and freedoms of Ontario physicians, and we object to the notion that a charge of professional misconduct could arise from an Ontario physician acting in accordance with his or her religious or moral beliefs.
Our response emphasizes, "It is the OMA's position that physicians maintain a right to exercise their own moral judgment and freedom of choice in making decisions regarding medical care and that the CPSO not insert itself into the interpretation of human rights statutes."
Also, "the vast majority of physicians will provide patients with appropriate advice without a CPSO policy in this regard."
I would like to thank those members who contacted us to provide input on this issue.
Dr. Ken Arnold
OMA President
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMA Response to CPSO Draft Policy “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code”
September 11, 2008 - The Ontario Medical Association (OMA) thanks the College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPSO) for the opportunity to comment on the CPSO draft policy entitled, “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code”. The OMA appreciates the CPSO’s effort to offer physicians assistance in understanding their professional duties in dealing with human rights issues. In particular, the OMA agrees with the CPSO’s statement that physicians may exercise professional judgment in relation to their own clinical competence. However, the OMA is concerned that this draft policy may interfere with physicians existing rights and freedoms. The OMA urges the CPSO to abandon this policy.
First, the section of the policy entitled “Moral or Religious Beliefs” does not adequately inform physicians that their right to freedom of religion is protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The CPSO acknowledges that “the law in this area is unclear”, however, any policy that the CPSO publishes in this regard has the potential to misstate the law in this area. The CPSO’s interpretation of the Ontario Human Rights Code may conflict with publications of the Ontario Human Rights Commission or could be superseded by the developing case law and Tribunal decisions. The CPSO should refer physicians to the Ontario Human Rights Code when physicians are faced with a moral or religious conflict in the care of a patient.
Second, the draft policy introduces a professional misconduct clause, whereby a physician could be disciplined for withholding information about the existence of a procedure or treatment because providing that procedure or giving advice about it conflicts with their religious or moral beliefs. We believe that the vast majority of Ontarian physicians will provide patients with appropriate advice without a CPSO policy in this regard. We believe that it should never be professional misconduct for an Ontarian physician to act in accordance with his or her religious or moral beliefs.
It is the OMA’s position that physicians maintain a right to exercise their own moral judgment and freedom of choice in making decisions regarding medical care and that the CPSO not insert itself into the interpretation of human rights statutes.
Statement posted at:
http://www.oma.org/health/rights.asp
----- Original Message -----
Subject: President's Update
OMA President's Update
Volume 13, No. 23
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 12, 2008
OMA Urges CPSO to Abandon Draft Policy on Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code
Dear Colleague:
In recent weeks, the OMA has heard from many members expressing very serious concerns about the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) draft policy on "Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code."
The OMA Board of Directors has reviewed this issue and prepared an official response to the College, which is now posted in the Recent Issues area on the Members Home Page (www.oma.org).
In short, the OMA has advised the College to abandon the proposed policy.
We believe that it may interfere with the rights and freedoms of Ontario physicians, and we object to the notion that a charge of professional misconduct could arise from an Ontario physician acting in accordance with his or her religious or moral beliefs.
Our response emphasizes, "It is the OMA's position that physicians maintain a right to exercise their own moral judgment and freedom of choice in making decisions regarding medical care and that the CPSO not insert itself into the interpretation of human rights statutes."
Also, "the vast majority of physicians will provide patients with appropriate advice without a CPSO policy in this regard."
I would like to thank those members who contacted us to provide input on this issue.
Dr. Ken Arnold
OMA President
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMA Response to CPSO Draft Policy “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code”
September 11, 2008 - The Ontario Medical Association (OMA) thanks the College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPSO) for the opportunity to comment on the CPSO draft policy entitled, “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code”. The OMA appreciates the CPSO’s effort to offer physicians assistance in understanding their professional duties in dealing with human rights issues. In particular, the OMA agrees with the CPSO’s statement that physicians may exercise professional judgment in relation to their own clinical competence. However, the OMA is concerned that this draft policy may interfere with physicians existing rights and freedoms. The OMA urges the CPSO to abandon this policy.
First, the section of the policy entitled “Moral or Religious Beliefs” does not adequately inform physicians that their right to freedom of religion is protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The CPSO acknowledges that “the law in this area is unclear”, however, any policy that the CPSO publishes in this regard has the potential to misstate the law in this area. The CPSO’s interpretation of the Ontario Human Rights Code may conflict with publications of the Ontario Human Rights Commission or could be superseded by the developing case law and Tribunal decisions. The CPSO should refer physicians to the Ontario Human Rights Code when physicians are faced with a moral or religious conflict in the care of a patient.
Second, the draft policy introduces a professional misconduct clause, whereby a physician could be disciplined for withholding information about the existence of a procedure or treatment because providing that procedure or giving advice about it conflicts with their religious or moral beliefs. We believe that the vast majority of Ontarian physicians will provide patients with appropriate advice without a CPSO policy in this regard. We believe that it should never be professional misconduct for an Ontarian physician to act in accordance with his or her religious or moral beliefs.
It is the OMA’s position that physicians maintain a right to exercise their own moral judgment and freedom of choice in making decisions regarding medical care and that the CPSO not insert itself into the interpretation of human rights statutes.
Statement posted at:
http://www.oma.org/health/rights.asp
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Camille Paglia on abortion
She says:
I'm thrilled she admits that abortion is murder.
But doesn't the "powerless" human being also have a right to his biological processes?
Or does that only apply to adult women?
I like Paglia's honesty, but if she thinks investigating the issue of abortion and its consequences will further the pro-abortion cause, well history shows otherwise. It's because Americans have been shown the truth about abortion that they've turned against it.
The Canadian feminists have it right when it comes to protecting the so-called right to abortion. It's a rule in business: when you have what you want-- shut up.
That's why they want to silence pro-lifers on campus. That's why they talk about "a woman's right to choose" and never address the issue of the unborn child. Because when they do, they expose a convoluted, contradictory and illogical attitude about him.
See, feminism is rooted in post-modern thought. In post-modernism, everything is a question of perception, everything can be subjective, and therefore feminists can admit of blatant contradictions and illogical thoughts without batting an eye. They can say things like: a woman can think that her fetus is a human being with full human rights but that's her opinion; I happen to think that a fetus is a blob of tissue. But we can still disagree and agree abortion should be legal. She should not impose her views on society.
Now, of course, nobody likes having opposing views imposed on them. But most feminists genuinely believe that it's perfectly logical and morally acceptable to a posit that a fetus is a human being with rights, but that abortion should remain legal.
To people who believe in moral absolutes and in the equality of all human beings, this can seem quite shocking. They see the cognitive dissonance in this stance, but feminists do not.
Why?
Because in their worldview, morality is not black and white. It's "complicated" and the circumstances of a situation sometimes compel people to do things that are regrettable, violent or morally wrong in order to survive or behave in an ethical fashion-- I know, it's contradictory to be immoral in order to be moral (killing an innocent person for a greater purpose)-- but that's the kind of contradiction that is admissible in the feminist worldview.
Feminists don't generally argue about the fetus. Joyce Arthur says that because there will never be a consensus on the moral status of the fetus, his status should not be legislated.
What feminists look at first is the result. The result they want is that women be able to compete with men in every sphere of activity, and women's fertility can often impede them in this pursuit. In order for a woman to be as free as a man, she has to be able to control whether or not she will carry a pregnancy to term. If she does not have that control, she cannot compete with a man. It's like a handicap for them.
That's why abortion is necessary. If abortion is not in the picture, then women cannot compete with men. If a woman is not free to abort, she cannot act freely; she is at the mercy of others; she cannot fulfill her aspirations.
This is the necessary result for women. That is their starting point.
Then they work backwards.
So long as the end result is that abortion is considered completely legal and accessible, it is irrelevant what else you happen to believe about the fetus. Legally recognizing a fetus' right to life would undermine the very heart of feminist belief. If women must respect the right to life of the unborn, then they are at the mercy of people and forces that interfere with their aspirations. Their autonomy would be illusory.
Most people don't think that way. Most people believe that killing innocent human beings is wrong. Some people go along with the abortion ideology to conform with mainstream opinion. But there is some black-and-white thinking in their moral analysis, especially when it comes to fundamental rights like the right to life.
In the media-driven public discourse on abortion, The "woman's right to choose" meme has rested on the belief that a fetus is not a human being, that he's just a blob of tissue, and does not merit human rights. It's about empowering what is considered to be a long-oppressed "minority" (or at the very least, preventing more oppression, but letting them get a "safe and legal" abortion rather than dying from a coathanger abortion, which is completely preventable).
If Canadians were called to examine their views on abortion, I strongly doubt that they would come to Camille Paglia's conclusion. Her conclusion is a feminist conclusion based on an extreme moral relativism that very few people espouse, save for perhaps those who inhabit ivory-towers, or their acolytes.
Moral relativism wreaks havoc, but it cannot and will not survive. Why? Because it leads to human devastation on the scale of the Holocaust, and although the human individual is quite capable of ignoring morality in the moment, humanity on a collective scale cannot live with that level of violence and degradation over the long term. Accepting moral relativism means implicitly accepting extreme violence and potential self-destruction. Once you allow that people can kill innocent lives for a "greater purpose"-- that the ends justify the means, then you implicitly allow for people to self-justify the killing of any human being. Camille Paglia said so herself: abortion is the killing of the powerless by the powerful. Well that's the law of the jungle, isn't it? That's the law of the strong over the weak, and they get to make the rules. And eventually the lack of standards leads to a lack of means to mediate social conflict. There are no moral rules to make people stop fighting.
Most people have some crude understanding that there's right and wrong. Post-modernism is a fancy, "nuanced" way of making people seem sophisticated for not accepting basic morality. The elites have adopted that view to seem acceptable. But in day-to-day life, we know that you cannot live without "black-and-white" morality.
And it's this rootedness in right and wrong that would lead to Canadians rejecting abortion should a serious and protracted investigation of the procedure ever take place in Canada. From a strategic perspective, Canadian feminists are perfectly right in shutting up about abortion and trying to silence their opponents. They know full well that once we start talking about abortion and the moral of the fetus, it's game over for them.
H/T Kathy Shaidle
But the pro-life position, whether or not it is based on religious orthodoxy, is more ethically highly evolved than my own tenet of unconstrained access to abortion on demand. My argument (as in my first book, "Sexual Personae,") has always been that nature has a master plan pushing every species toward procreation and that it is our right and even obligation as rational human beings to defy nature's fascism. Nature herself is a mass murderer, making casual, cruel experiments and condemning 10,000 to die so that one more fit will live and thrive.
Hence I have always frankly admitted that abortion is murder, the extermination of the powerless by the powerful. Liberals for the most part have shrunk from facing the ethical consequences of their embrace of abortion, which results in the annihilation of concrete individuals and not just clumps of insensate tissue. The state in my view has no authority whatever to intervene in the biological processes of any woman's body, which nature has implanted there before birth and hence before that woman's entrance into society and citizenship.
I'm thrilled she admits that abortion is murder.
But doesn't the "powerless" human being also have a right to his biological processes?
Or does that only apply to adult women?
The gigantic, instantaneous coast-to-coast rage directed at Sarah Palin when she was identified as pro-life was, I submit, a psychological response by loyal liberals who on some level do not want to open themselves to deep questioning about abortion and its human consequences. I have written about the eerie silence that fell over campus audiences in the early 1990s when I raised this issue on my book tours. At such moments, everyone in the hall seemed to feel the uneasy conscience of feminism. Naomi Wolf later bravely tried to address this same subject but seems to have given up in the face of the resistance she encountered.
I like Paglia's honesty, but if she thinks investigating the issue of abortion and its consequences will further the pro-abortion cause, well history shows otherwise. It's because Americans have been shown the truth about abortion that they've turned against it.
The Canadian feminists have it right when it comes to protecting the so-called right to abortion. It's a rule in business: when you have what you want-- shut up.
That's why they want to silence pro-lifers on campus. That's why they talk about "a woman's right to choose" and never address the issue of the unborn child. Because when they do, they expose a convoluted, contradictory and illogical attitude about him.
See, feminism is rooted in post-modern thought. In post-modernism, everything is a question of perception, everything can be subjective, and therefore feminists can admit of blatant contradictions and illogical thoughts without batting an eye. They can say things like: a woman can think that her fetus is a human being with full human rights but that's her opinion; I happen to think that a fetus is a blob of tissue. But we can still disagree and agree abortion should be legal. She should not impose her views on society.
Now, of course, nobody likes having opposing views imposed on them. But most feminists genuinely believe that it's perfectly logical and morally acceptable to a posit that a fetus is a human being with rights, but that abortion should remain legal.
To people who believe in moral absolutes and in the equality of all human beings, this can seem quite shocking. They see the cognitive dissonance in this stance, but feminists do not.
Why?
Because in their worldview, morality is not black and white. It's "complicated" and the circumstances of a situation sometimes compel people to do things that are regrettable, violent or morally wrong in order to survive or behave in an ethical fashion-- I know, it's contradictory to be immoral in order to be moral (killing an innocent person for a greater purpose)-- but that's the kind of contradiction that is admissible in the feminist worldview.
Feminists don't generally argue about the fetus. Joyce Arthur says that because there will never be a consensus on the moral status of the fetus, his status should not be legislated.
What feminists look at first is the result. The result they want is that women be able to compete with men in every sphere of activity, and women's fertility can often impede them in this pursuit. In order for a woman to be as free as a man, she has to be able to control whether or not she will carry a pregnancy to term. If she does not have that control, she cannot compete with a man. It's like a handicap for them.
That's why abortion is necessary. If abortion is not in the picture, then women cannot compete with men. If a woman is not free to abort, she cannot act freely; she is at the mercy of others; she cannot fulfill her aspirations.
This is the necessary result for women. That is their starting point.
Then they work backwards.
So long as the end result is that abortion is considered completely legal and accessible, it is irrelevant what else you happen to believe about the fetus. Legally recognizing a fetus' right to life would undermine the very heart of feminist belief. If women must respect the right to life of the unborn, then they are at the mercy of people and forces that interfere with their aspirations. Their autonomy would be illusory.
Most people don't think that way. Most people believe that killing innocent human beings is wrong. Some people go along with the abortion ideology to conform with mainstream opinion. But there is some black-and-white thinking in their moral analysis, especially when it comes to fundamental rights like the right to life.
In the media-driven public discourse on abortion, The "woman's right to choose" meme has rested on the belief that a fetus is not a human being, that he's just a blob of tissue, and does not merit human rights. It's about empowering what is considered to be a long-oppressed "minority" (or at the very least, preventing more oppression, but letting them get a "safe and legal" abortion rather than dying from a coathanger abortion, which is completely preventable).
If Canadians were called to examine their views on abortion, I strongly doubt that they would come to Camille Paglia's conclusion. Her conclusion is a feminist conclusion based on an extreme moral relativism that very few people espouse, save for perhaps those who inhabit ivory-towers, or their acolytes.
Moral relativism wreaks havoc, but it cannot and will not survive. Why? Because it leads to human devastation on the scale of the Holocaust, and although the human individual is quite capable of ignoring morality in the moment, humanity on a collective scale cannot live with that level of violence and degradation over the long term. Accepting moral relativism means implicitly accepting extreme violence and potential self-destruction. Once you allow that people can kill innocent lives for a "greater purpose"-- that the ends justify the means, then you implicitly allow for people to self-justify the killing of any human being. Camille Paglia said so herself: abortion is the killing of the powerless by the powerful. Well that's the law of the jungle, isn't it? That's the law of the strong over the weak, and they get to make the rules. And eventually the lack of standards leads to a lack of means to mediate social conflict. There are no moral rules to make people stop fighting.
Most people have some crude understanding that there's right and wrong. Post-modernism is a fancy, "nuanced" way of making people seem sophisticated for not accepting basic morality. The elites have adopted that view to seem acceptable. But in day-to-day life, we know that you cannot live without "black-and-white" morality.
And it's this rootedness in right and wrong that would lead to Canadians rejecting abortion should a serious and protracted investigation of the procedure ever take place in Canada. From a strategic perspective, Canadian feminists are perfectly right in shutting up about abortion and trying to silence their opponents. They know full well that once we start talking about abortion and the moral of the fetus, it's game over for them.
H/T Kathy Shaidle
DISABLED CALIFORNIA WOMAN SAVED FROM GOVERNMENT-SANCTIONED STARVATION
Washington, D.C. (10 September 2008) – Heart attack victim Janet Rivera, who, like Terri Schiavo, was denied food and water for 11 days in July, was saved from the specter death by starvation Sep. 9 when her brother was named her permanent conservator.
"Praise God, this woman was snatched from such an excruciating death," said Judie Brown, president of American Life League. "Janet was spared the fate of Terri Schiavo, but still we hope this case exposes the threat that hangs over us all - government euthanasia for the sick, elderly and disabled."
The victory marks the final win for the Rivera family who has fought unceasingly for her life since she was placed in the hands of Fresno, California government officials in June. Rivera's public guardian ordered her death by starvation in July and had her feeding tube removed.
Public outcry ensued and Rivera's feeding tube was reinserted.
The 46-year-old woman suffered a heart attack in 2006. According to Judge Debra Kazanjian, Rivera's husband, Jesus Rivera, relinquished custody as he was unable to provide for Rivera's medical care. When doctors indicated Rivera might never recover, the public guardian ordered her feeding tube removed.
Rivera's brother Michael Dancoff plans to take his sister back to her San Francisco family where he hopes she will awaken and recover.
"We hope this case will shed light on the other victims of government abuse. Janet's case is not an isolated incident. Sick people all over the country are in serious danger of being denied their basic needs under the guise of compassion," Brown said. "None of us should feel safe while our right to food and water, ordinary care, is viciously trampled on. No one should die by starvation."
American Life League was cofounded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death. For more information or media inquiries, please contact Katie Walker at 540.659.4942.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
American Life League: Disabled California Woman Saved (10 September 2008)
http://www.all.org/article.php?id=11583
CBS-47: Conservatorship Granted to Janet Rivera's Brother (9 September 2008)
http://www.cbs47.tv/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=ac538e5c-57b7-4c36-9021-4f1e4ac05326
Fresno Bee: Borther May Be Sister's Conservator (13 August 2008)
http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/796768.html
Fresno Bee: Don't Take Away Basic Care from the Disabled (23 August 2008)
http://www.fresnobee.com/283/story/816672.html
# # #
"Praise God, this woman was snatched from such an excruciating death," said Judie Brown, president of American Life League. "Janet was spared the fate of Terri Schiavo, but still we hope this case exposes the threat that hangs over us all - government euthanasia for the sick, elderly and disabled."
The victory marks the final win for the Rivera family who has fought unceasingly for her life since she was placed in the hands of Fresno, California government officials in June. Rivera's public guardian ordered her death by starvation in July and had her feeding tube removed.
Public outcry ensued and Rivera's feeding tube was reinserted.
The 46-year-old woman suffered a heart attack in 2006. According to Judge Debra Kazanjian, Rivera's husband, Jesus Rivera, relinquished custody as he was unable to provide for Rivera's medical care. When doctors indicated Rivera might never recover, the public guardian ordered her feeding tube removed.
Rivera's brother Michael Dancoff plans to take his sister back to her San Francisco family where he hopes she will awaken and recover.
"We hope this case will shed light on the other victims of government abuse. Janet's case is not an isolated incident. Sick people all over the country are in serious danger of being denied their basic needs under the guise of compassion," Brown said. "None of us should feel safe while our right to food and water, ordinary care, is viciously trampled on. No one should die by starvation."
American Life League was cofounded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death. For more information or media inquiries, please contact Katie Walker at 540.659.4942.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
American Life League: Disabled California Woman Saved (10 September 2008)
http://www.all.org/article.php?id=11583
CBS-47: Conservatorship Granted to Janet Rivera's Brother (9 September 2008)
http://www.cbs47.tv/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=ac538e5c-57b7-4c36-9021-4f1e4ac05326
Fresno Bee: Borther May Be Sister's Conservator (13 August 2008)
http://www.fresnobee.com/263/story/796768.html
Fresno Bee: Don't Take Away Basic Care from the Disabled (23 August 2008)
http://www.fresnobee.com/283/story/816672.html
# # #
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Cardinal Pell to members of the XT3 Catholic Social Networking site
Greetings to all on Xt3.com,
For those of you who were pilgrims and those who participated from afar, I greet you in the name of Jesus Christ.
Xt3.com is just one of the fruits from World Youth Day 2008 and I am pleased to see that there are already more than 30,000 users of this online Christian community. I join you today, 50 days after World Youth Day to continue to walk with you on your journey.
During our week together we experienced much joy and celebration, connection with a faithful fellowship of pilgrims, and unprecedented excitement and enthusiasm. This powerful experience can be very difficult to sustain after you return to your home, parish, study and work. It is not expected that you could continue in this state of celebration and nor is it feasible to stage the kind of events we hosted in Sydney everyday. However, it is possible - and very important - that we sustain our relationship with Jesus Christ. For those of you who are flagging or finding some difficulty after your pilgrimage here are some thoughts that might be helpful:
Search; Pray and Listen – WYDs are notoriously noisy and involve a hyperactive schedule of events. It is important to spend time in prayer, and seek the grace of the Holy Spirit that we learned so much about with our theme “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you and you will be my witnesses” (Acts 1:8). If you are not used to prayer, start with something simple each day, talk to your parish priest or prayerful people that you know.
Seek; the Sacraments - through our Church we have access to the Power that Christ teaches to the Apostles. In particular, I encourage you to regularly seek out the Eucharist, the means in which our WYD Fellowship is held in Communion with Jesus Christ. You can also experience the power of the Holy Spirit through the mercy and compassion of forgiveness in the beautiful sacrament of Reconciliation. Seek your vocation and do not be afraid, for through this commitment we find life.
Act; as the apostle you know you are - Pope Benedict XVI reminded us that our life is not governed by chance. Our existence is not random – it has been willed by God, blessed and given a purpose. Make use of your gifts and build the civilization of love starting with your family, friends and parish. We have prepared a 10 chapter guide to supporting you called Activ8 Witness: Mission and Love and made this available at www.xt3.com/activ8
I look forward to continuing our friendship as we walk together as one body. Stay strong and keep close to the Lord!
In Christ
Cardinal George Pell
To join the 50 Day Reunion group on Xt3, follow this link:
http://www.xt3.com/group/view.php?id=323
Per rispondere a questo messaggio o per leggerne la traduzione in italiano clicca qui:
http://www.xt3.com/discussion/thread.php?id=3954
Sent by Cardinal George Pell yesterday at 9:03am
(Received throught Xt3 private messaging system).
For those of you who were pilgrims and those who participated from afar, I greet you in the name of Jesus Christ.
Xt3.com is just one of the fruits from World Youth Day 2008 and I am pleased to see that there are already more than 30,000 users of this online Christian community. I join you today, 50 days after World Youth Day to continue to walk with you on your journey.
During our week together we experienced much joy and celebration, connection with a faithful fellowship of pilgrims, and unprecedented excitement and enthusiasm. This powerful experience can be very difficult to sustain after you return to your home, parish, study and work. It is not expected that you could continue in this state of celebration and nor is it feasible to stage the kind of events we hosted in Sydney everyday. However, it is possible - and very important - that we sustain our relationship with Jesus Christ. For those of you who are flagging or finding some difficulty after your pilgrimage here are some thoughts that might be helpful:
Search; Pray and Listen – WYDs are notoriously noisy and involve a hyperactive schedule of events. It is important to spend time in prayer, and seek the grace of the Holy Spirit that we learned so much about with our theme “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you and you will be my witnesses” (Acts 1:8). If you are not used to prayer, start with something simple each day, talk to your parish priest or prayerful people that you know.
Seek; the Sacraments - through our Church we have access to the Power that Christ teaches to the Apostles. In particular, I encourage you to regularly seek out the Eucharist, the means in which our WYD Fellowship is held in Communion with Jesus Christ. You can also experience the power of the Holy Spirit through the mercy and compassion of forgiveness in the beautiful sacrament of Reconciliation. Seek your vocation and do not be afraid, for through this commitment we find life.
Act; as the apostle you know you are - Pope Benedict XVI reminded us that our life is not governed by chance. Our existence is not random – it has been willed by God, blessed and given a purpose. Make use of your gifts and build the civilization of love starting with your family, friends and parish. We have prepared a 10 chapter guide to supporting you called Activ8 Witness: Mission and Love and made this available at www.xt3.com/activ8
I look forward to continuing our friendship as we walk together as one body. Stay strong and keep close to the Lord!
In Christ
Cardinal George Pell
To join the 50 Day Reunion group on Xt3, follow this link:
http://www.xt3.com/group/view.php?id=323
Per rispondere a questo messaggio o per leggerne la traduzione in italiano clicca qui:
http://www.xt3.com/discussion/thread.php?id=3954
Sent by Cardinal George Pell yesterday at 9:03am
(Received throught Xt3 private messaging system).
Richard Viguerie: “Sarah Palin is the next Ronald Reagan”
(Manassas, Virginia) With her acceptance speech, “Now we know why liberal Democrats hate and fear Sarah Palin,” Richard A. Viguerie said.
“A week ago, conservatives and most Republicans were down-in-the-dumps, listless, unengaged. That lack of enthusiasm is a thing of the past. Tonight, thanks to Senator McCain and Governor Palin, conservatives and Republicans are fired up as they have not been since Ronald Reagan was president,” he said.
“Sarah Palin is the next Ronald Reagan,” Viguerie, the Chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, said.
“In less than a week, Governor Sarah has captured the heart and soul of this convention, the Republican Party, and the conservative movement. She brings together social conservatives, and economic conservatives and libertarians, and people who are fed up with the Culture of Corruption that infests our nation’s politics,” he said.
“From this moment forward, there’s no limit on where Sarah Palin might go,” Viguerie concluded.
-- 30 --
(Received by email)
“A week ago, conservatives and most Republicans were down-in-the-dumps, listless, unengaged. That lack of enthusiasm is a thing of the past. Tonight, thanks to Senator McCain and Governor Palin, conservatives and Republicans are fired up as they have not been since Ronald Reagan was president,” he said.
“Sarah Palin is the next Ronald Reagan,” Viguerie, the Chairman of ConservativeHQ.com, said.
“In less than a week, Governor Sarah has captured the heart and soul of this convention, the Republican Party, and the conservative movement. She brings together social conservatives, and economic conservatives and libertarians, and people who are fed up with the Culture of Corruption that infests our nation’s politics,” he said.
“From this moment forward, there’s no limit on where Sarah Palin might go,” Viguerie concluded.
-- 30 --
(Received by email)
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
ECP Centre Fall 2008 Update
What a great time to be a Canadian. And it’s even a better time to be a Canadian Christian.
I bet you don't hear too many Canadians talking like that these days. I know, with so many Canadian Christians continuing to face threats from secularists it can be hard to focus on the positives but the beauty in being a Christian is that we can and we must believe in the power of God's grace.
Some might find my view a little too "platitudinous". I wouldn't blame them. Far too many people have a cavalier view of God's grace these days. But my positive outlook isn't grounded in a platitude. It's based both on faith and in the results I've witnessed over the first five years of the ECP Centre's existence.
As you know the ECP Centre is committed to defending the free and public expression of Christian thought and speech in Canada. To that end we have been fighting to defend our freedoms and the freedoms of all Canadians against the aspirations of "human rights" activists.
We've done this primarily by raising awareness, and raising lots of money to help support brothers who found themselves victimized for practicing their faith in the public square -- friends like Scott Brockie, the Toronto printer who surprisingly discovered that his faith had no business influencing his business practices, and Chris Kempling, the BC school
teacher who discovered that being an employee of the state meant he had to check his Christian morality at the door, and Rev. Stephen Boissoin, who has discovered that he has no right ever to communicate in speech or writing his undoubted belief in the Bible's view of human sexuality. And now Ron Gray and the Christian Heritage Party Canada have joined the rest of the stalwart defenders of the faith, discovering that even our political freedoms are no longer guaranteed if the HRC gets involved.
We in the ECP Centre believe that it is absolutely essential to join in solidarity with these fine friends and to be numbered among those who are fighting to defend the freedom of speech in Canada because, in the end, freedom of speech isn’t just an important democratic principle, it is by far the best avenue for ministry that we Christians have.
Consider the options. Given the choice, would you rather be involved in ministry and attending Church in an environment where the government respects freedom of speech and therefore, freedom of worship, or in an environment where the government doesn't recognize this principle and where you are subject to arbitrary inquisition and the brutal repression of religious freedom -- you know, the kind of environment Christians experience every day in countries like the Sudan, North Korea and Indonesia. Given these options, where would you prefer to live, pay your taxes, raise your children?
I think the answer is clear. In a country that respects freedom of speech.
Because freedom of expression is our primary concern, we have determined to focus on three specific measures.
1. An Alternative Media: we want to motivate Christians with new and informative media - No Apologies - (which has gained national notoriety) - is produced with the idea of informing you about important international and national news items from a Christian perspective.
2. Legal Defence: Because we advocate on behalf of Christians who are facing the Human Rights Commissions and other legal challenges, we are dedicating considerable resources to help fellow Christians who are suffering for the sake of the faith in Canada. This will be an on-going initiative.
3. Equipping and Training: Our name says, "Equipping Christians for the Public Square" and we are taking that seriously. Presently we are developing two market place seminars designed to train Christians in the area of apologetics and Canadian citizenship. These will be ready for your edification this fall.
However, these initiatives take commitment not only for us at the Centre but from you our generous supporters. Many of you have been faithful supporters of the Centre’s work and vision for several years now. Some of you have discovered the ECP Centre more recently and have found an organization that resonates with your vision for this great country.
We have been quiet over the summer months when many other organizations are asking for help to get through the summer slump, but we have experienced the same downturn in donations that other non-profit groups experience, so we are asking you again today if you would dip in to your pockets once again to send us the best donation you can as we hit the ground running again this fall.
Please consider partnering with us today to build these projects – this Alternative Meida, our Legal Defence fund and our vital apologetics training programs. As you know, we need funds to pursue each of these commitments. If you believe in the work of the ECP Centre, we ask you to support this work and send in your best donation today. Many of you have already donated to the work of the Centre, more than once, and we truly thank you for your commitment to this work and to the support of your Christian brothers and sisters who are at the forefront of Canada's culture wars.
Take a few moments to consider what you can give today to help expand our No Apologies media site, to fund the legal appeals against outrageous human rights commission decisions and to build our training tools. Whatever gift you are able to send today will go towards this important work in strengthening our ability as Christians to advance our faith in Canada's public square.
Thank you in advance for partnering with us.
May God bless your service in the advancement of His Kingdom,
Tristan Emmanuel
ECP Centre, President
You can make your donation to the ECP Centre today online at: http://www.ecpcentre.org/products.php?Category=7
Or send it in to: ECP Centre PO Box 112, Jordan Station, ON L0R1S0
I bet you don't hear too many Canadians talking like that these days. I know, with so many Canadian Christians continuing to face threats from secularists it can be hard to focus on the positives but the beauty in being a Christian is that we can and we must believe in the power of God's grace.
Some might find my view a little too "platitudinous". I wouldn't blame them. Far too many people have a cavalier view of God's grace these days. But my positive outlook isn't grounded in a platitude. It's based both on faith and in the results I've witnessed over the first five years of the ECP Centre's existence.
As you know the ECP Centre is committed to defending the free and public expression of Christian thought and speech in Canada. To that end we have been fighting to defend our freedoms and the freedoms of all Canadians against the aspirations of "human rights" activists.
We've done this primarily by raising awareness, and raising lots of money to help support brothers who found themselves victimized for practicing their faith in the public square -- friends like Scott Brockie, the Toronto printer who surprisingly discovered that his faith had no business influencing his business practices, and Chris Kempling, the BC school
teacher who discovered that being an employee of the state meant he had to check his Christian morality at the door, and Rev. Stephen Boissoin, who has discovered that he has no right ever to communicate in speech or writing his undoubted belief in the Bible's view of human sexuality. And now Ron Gray and the Christian Heritage Party Canada have joined the rest of the stalwart defenders of the faith, discovering that even our political freedoms are no longer guaranteed if the HRC gets involved.
We in the ECP Centre believe that it is absolutely essential to join in solidarity with these fine friends and to be numbered among those who are fighting to defend the freedom of speech in Canada because, in the end, freedom of speech isn’t just an important democratic principle, it is by far the best avenue for ministry that we Christians have.
Consider the options. Given the choice, would you rather be involved in ministry and attending Church in an environment where the government respects freedom of speech and therefore, freedom of worship, or in an environment where the government doesn't recognize this principle and where you are subject to arbitrary inquisition and the brutal repression of religious freedom -- you know, the kind of environment Christians experience every day in countries like the Sudan, North Korea and Indonesia. Given these options, where would you prefer to live, pay your taxes, raise your children?
I think the answer is clear. In a country that respects freedom of speech.
Because freedom of expression is our primary concern, we have determined to focus on three specific measures.
1. An Alternative Media: we want to motivate Christians with new and informative media - No Apologies - (which has gained national notoriety) - is produced with the idea of informing you about important international and national news items from a Christian perspective.
2. Legal Defence: Because we advocate on behalf of Christians who are facing the Human Rights Commissions and other legal challenges, we are dedicating considerable resources to help fellow Christians who are suffering for the sake of the faith in Canada. This will be an on-going initiative.
3. Equipping and Training: Our name says, "Equipping Christians for the Public Square" and we are taking that seriously. Presently we are developing two market place seminars designed to train Christians in the area of apologetics and Canadian citizenship. These will be ready for your edification this fall.
However, these initiatives take commitment not only for us at the Centre but from you our generous supporters. Many of you have been faithful supporters of the Centre’s work and vision for several years now. Some of you have discovered the ECP Centre more recently and have found an organization that resonates with your vision for this great country.
We have been quiet over the summer months when many other organizations are asking for help to get through the summer slump, but we have experienced the same downturn in donations that other non-profit groups experience, so we are asking you again today if you would dip in to your pockets once again to send us the best donation you can as we hit the ground running again this fall.
Please consider partnering with us today to build these projects – this Alternative Meida, our Legal Defence fund and our vital apologetics training programs. As you know, we need funds to pursue each of these commitments. If you believe in the work of the ECP Centre, we ask you to support this work and send in your best donation today. Many of you have already donated to the work of the Centre, more than once, and we truly thank you for your commitment to this work and to the support of your Christian brothers and sisters who are at the forefront of Canada's culture wars.
Take a few moments to consider what you can give today to help expand our No Apologies media site, to fund the legal appeals against outrageous human rights commission decisions and to build our training tools. Whatever gift you are able to send today will go towards this important work in strengthening our ability as Christians to advance our faith in Canada's public square.
Thank you in advance for partnering with us.
May God bless your service in the advancement of His Kingdom,
Tristan Emmanuel
ECP Centre, President
You can make your donation to the ECP Centre today online at: http://www.ecpcentre.org/products.php?Category=7
Or send it in to: ECP Centre PO Box 112, Jordan Station, ON L0R1S0
Thursday, August 28, 2008
CHP urges Canadians to dump Tories
NEWS RELEASE
August 28, 2008
For immediate release
CHP urges Canadians to dump Tories
Blasts Prime Minister Harper & Justice Minister Nicholson as ‘protectors of the abortion industry’
OTTAWA, August 28, 2008 (CHPNews) — With a federal election looming, the Christian Heritage Party has seized on the Conservative government’s move to kill its own MP’s Unborn Victims of Violence Act as a reason to urge Canadians to dump the Conservative Party and join the CHP.
In a strongly-worded statement, CHP leader Ron Gray today noted that Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson “have promised to protect the abortion industry against the risk of legislation on abortion coming before Parliament.”
“They have made their party the protector of the abortion industry,” Gray said.
The Prime Minister said at the 2005 policy convention: “I will use whatever influence I have to ensure that no legislation on abortion comes before Parliament.” And in a recent statement announcing a government bill to replace Tory MP Ken Epp’s Unborn Victims of Violence Act, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said, “Let me be clear, our government will not reopen the debate on abortion… the government will introduce legislation that will punish criminals who commit violence against pregnant women but do so in a way that leaves no room for the introduction of fetal rights.”
Gray retorted: “That’s patently absurd. The pre-born child is a full human being. If left undisturbed, it will be born as a human being. The pregnant woman is not ‘going to become a mother’—she is a mother. That child will emerge from the womb. The only question is whether it emerges alive and healthy, or dead and dismembered.
“The fact that courts and legislatures decree that the pre-born child ‘is not a person’ is irrelevant, illogical—and wrong. There was a time when courts and legislatures said people of African ancestry were ‘not persons’; they were wrong. There was a time when the Supreme Court of Canada said women were ‘not persons’; they were wrong.
“The pre-born child is as much a member of the human family as you or I.
“We believe that if we can ever get an honest debate going in Parliament on this issue, the vast majority of Canadians will agree with us on four important points:
• Abortion deliberately takes the life of an innocent human being—and that’s the definition of murder;
• Adoption is the humane and rational alternative to killing the baby.
• A woman facing an unanticipated pregnancy should be given full information, counsel, comfort, and material aid to help her realize that there are non-lethal solutions to her dilemma;
• Canada urgently needs the 105,000 young lives we carelessly snuff out each year.
“We can do better than ‘death as the solution to inconvenient pregnancy’,” Gray said. “We must—our humanity demands it!
“The Conservative Party has every right to join the Liberals, NDP, Bloc, Greens and Marxists as defenders of the abortion industry,” Gray said. “But 70 percent of Canadians consistently say they want restrictions on abortion; about 40 percent believe abortion is the murder of an innocent human being.
“That vast number of Canadians now have no one left to speak for them in the political arena—except the CHP. That’s why we’re urging all pro-life Canadians to abandon the sinking ship of the morally bankrupt left—which includes the Tories—and come to the CHP: it’s the only pro-life, pro-family federal political party in Canada.”
The full statement can he read on the CHP website at www.chp.ca/news
=30=
Contact: Ron Gray 1-888-868-3247
_________________
August 28, 2008
For immediate release
CHP urges Canadians to dump Tories
Blasts Prime Minister Harper & Justice Minister Nicholson as ‘protectors of the abortion industry’
OTTAWA, August 28, 2008 (CHPNews) — With a federal election looming, the Christian Heritage Party has seized on the Conservative government’s move to kill its own MP’s Unborn Victims of Violence Act as a reason to urge Canadians to dump the Conservative Party and join the CHP.
In a strongly-worded statement, CHP leader Ron Gray today noted that Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson “have promised to protect the abortion industry against the risk of legislation on abortion coming before Parliament.”
“They have made their party the protector of the abortion industry,” Gray said.
The Prime Minister said at the 2005 policy convention: “I will use whatever influence I have to ensure that no legislation on abortion comes before Parliament.” And in a recent statement announcing a government bill to replace Tory MP Ken Epp’s Unborn Victims of Violence Act, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said, “Let me be clear, our government will not reopen the debate on abortion… the government will introduce legislation that will punish criminals who commit violence against pregnant women but do so in a way that leaves no room for the introduction of fetal rights.”
Gray retorted: “That’s patently absurd. The pre-born child is a full human being. If left undisturbed, it will be born as a human being. The pregnant woman is not ‘going to become a mother’—she is a mother. That child will emerge from the womb. The only question is whether it emerges alive and healthy, or dead and dismembered.
“The fact that courts and legislatures decree that the pre-born child ‘is not a person’ is irrelevant, illogical—and wrong. There was a time when courts and legislatures said people of African ancestry were ‘not persons’; they were wrong. There was a time when the Supreme Court of Canada said women were ‘not persons’; they were wrong.
“The pre-born child is as much a member of the human family as you or I.
“We believe that if we can ever get an honest debate going in Parliament on this issue, the vast majority of Canadians will agree with us on four important points:
• Abortion deliberately takes the life of an innocent human being—and that’s the definition of murder;
• Adoption is the humane and rational alternative to killing the baby.
• A woman facing an unanticipated pregnancy should be given full information, counsel, comfort, and material aid to help her realize that there are non-lethal solutions to her dilemma;
• Canada urgently needs the 105,000 young lives we carelessly snuff out each year.
“We can do better than ‘death as the solution to inconvenient pregnancy’,” Gray said. “We must—our humanity demands it!
“The Conservative Party has every right to join the Liberals, NDP, Bloc, Greens and Marxists as defenders of the abortion industry,” Gray said. “But 70 percent of Canadians consistently say they want restrictions on abortion; about 40 percent believe abortion is the murder of an innocent human being.
“That vast number of Canadians now have no one left to speak for them in the political arena—except the CHP. That’s why we’re urging all pro-life Canadians to abandon the sinking ship of the morally bankrupt left—which includes the Tories—and come to the CHP: it’s the only pro-life, pro-family federal political party in Canada.”
The full statement can he read on the CHP website at www.chp.ca/news
=30=
Contact: Ron Gray 1-888-868-3247
_________________
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Brian Rushfeldt Answers Colby Cosh on the judicial complaint
Received by email...
We thank Colby Cosh for re-clarifying comments judge McLachlin made regarding her role on the Order of Canada Advisory Council. However, notably absent in his column were several key facts.
Canada Family Action Coalition (CFAC) operated with the best evidence available to us on August 13 when we filed the complaint with the Canadian Judicial Council. Some information came from news stories (one from the National Post); some from past council decisions, and some from the Constitution of the Order. All attempts we made to confirm the accuracy of information were stonewalled. We were stonewalled by the governor general’s office and the justice. Requests for information under the Freedom of Access to Information failed. We were informed the Governor General is exempt from requirements of the Freedom of Information Act, which allows her to operate in a code of secrecy. Additionally, a one-liner on GG webpage states, “All deliberations of the Advisory Council for the Order of Canada, as well as for any Canadian honour, are confidential.”
The major concern for CFAC and others who supported the letter is what was missing from the selective writing of Colby Cosh, the selective public response of McLachlin, and what seems to be an avoidance of facts by some media and academics defending McLachlin.
The letter of complaint’s point one and two are based upon the Policy Section 3 (b) (i) and (ii) of the Constitution which says:
3. The Advisory Council shall consider the termination of a person's appointment to the Order of Canada if (b) the conduct of the person
(i) constitutes a significant departure from generally-recognized standards of public behaviour which is seen to undermine the credibility, integrity or relevance of the Order,or
(ii) has been subject to official sanction, such as a fine or a reprimand, by an adjudicating body, professional association or other organization.
The conduct in 3 b(i) may be debated. Cosh and some others argue Morgentaler’s conduct did not seem to depart from generally recognized standards. But Morgentaler himself admitted to violating the laws of Canada for some 18 years before he was exonerated and the law struck down by a court. Surely the chief judge and Advisory Council don’t approve of that conduct to change laws ?
The conduct in 3 b(ii) is certainly not open to debate. It is a legal fact that Morgentaler was sanctioned by the Disciplinary Committee of the Professional Corporations of Physicians in Quebec. His medical license was revoked for one year and not because he was doing abortions.
So at issue is conduct of the Advisory Council which ignored the law that it operates under. McLachlin said her role “is to make sure the meeting runs well and fairly and that the vote is taken fairly - and not to weigh in for, or against, any particular candidate.” Surely as chair and judge her role would also include ensuring the Council obeyed the law.
Judge McLachlin Chairs the Council, Chair’s the Canadian Judicial Council, and is Chief Justice. To have a code of secrecy around her conduct is not acceptable. The public needs to be reassured of judicial impartiality and fairness. That happens with transparency not secrecy. Hence the need for investigation.
Since Morgentaler was wrongly awarded the honor, termination of the award should now occur. Reprimands for those involved for not following the Policy and law should also occur. Asking people to obey the law is not a “ludicrous attack” as stated in the Cosh piece.
(To clarify , the link on CFAC’s website was broken for one day)
Brian Rushfeldt
Executive Director
Canada Family Action Coalition
For Immediate Release - Dejavu - Advertising group says ads are "deceptive"
Edmonton Pro-Life - August 25, 2008
In a bizarre - yet anticipated - ruling last week, Advertising Standards Canada (ASC), rejected fact based evidence from Stats Canada, confirming, abortions do occur throughout all nine months of pregnancy and a ruling from the Supreme Courts, which shows that there are no laws against abortion in Canada.
Corry Morcos, president of Edmonton Prolife, the group behind the billboards, said the decision was "unbelievable, but expected" given the previous ruling regarding the Life Canada ads. "Governments have failed to enact any legislation as requested by the Supreme Court in the 1988 Morgentaler decision, and that is why today we have no protection for the unborn in Canada. Abortions are totally unrestricted by any laws. But apparently educating, through advertising, about this truth is not allowed."
The ad "9 Months, that is the amount of time the government say it is legal to have an abortion. Abortion. Have we gone too far? "has been running for two years and one complaint has been received. The ad is speaking solely to the legal status of abortion in Canada, yet ASC wanted the ads to include various medical guidelines. Women will be
interested to note that according to ASC women may not be assured an abortion simply upon request particularly after the first trimester.
In the appeal ruling, Ad standards was silent on many of the grounds for appeal issues raised by Edmonton Prolife. In particular the issue of competing interests. "Council did not do its due diligence in looking for "competing interest". The complainant in the case is an activist in the "pro choice" movement and clearly has a "competing interest".
The ASC, a self-regulating body of Canada's advertising industry, wants to appear to be the gatekeeper for consumers, to make sure we are receiving the truth. Their website states: "ASC is the industry body committed to creating and maintaining community confidence in advertising." Confidence? The very media organizations that the Ad Standard represents have written numerous articles deriding the Ad standard council's prior decisions against similar ads. When your own membership questions your integrity, the confidence that the general public has in the ASC is compromised. When ASC calls facts deceptions, the authority of the ASC to be keeper of all that is "truthful, fair and accurate" in advertising rings hollow to many.
It is completely mind boggling for Edmonton Prolife to be held to the ruling of a self-regulating, unnamed complaints panel of anonymous people who can claim anything they want, without providing a shred of documentation. Yet when Edmonton Prolife, provides documentation, including government statistics, and legal rulings, those facts are dismissed as false, misleading and inaccurate.
Prolife groups and their messages of facts and truth are being censored, that is the bottom line.
For more information, contact Corry Morcos at 780-455-5249 or Edmonton
Prolife at 780-425-1637
In a bizarre - yet anticipated - ruling last week, Advertising Standards Canada (ASC), rejected fact based evidence from Stats Canada, confirming, abortions do occur throughout all nine months of pregnancy and a ruling from the Supreme Courts, which shows that there are no laws against abortion in Canada.
Corry Morcos, president of Edmonton Prolife, the group behind the billboards, said the decision was "unbelievable, but expected" given the previous ruling regarding the Life Canada ads. "Governments have failed to enact any legislation as requested by the Supreme Court in the 1988 Morgentaler decision, and that is why today we have no protection for the unborn in Canada. Abortions are totally unrestricted by any laws. But apparently educating, through advertising, about this truth is not allowed."
The ad "9 Months, that is the amount of time the government say it is legal to have an abortion. Abortion. Have we gone too far? "has been running for two years and one complaint has been received. The ad is speaking solely to the legal status of abortion in Canada, yet ASC wanted the ads to include various medical guidelines. Women will be
interested to note that according to ASC women may not be assured an abortion simply upon request particularly after the first trimester.
In the appeal ruling, Ad standards was silent on many of the grounds for appeal issues raised by Edmonton Prolife. In particular the issue of competing interests. "Council did not do its due diligence in looking for "competing interest". The complainant in the case is an activist in the "pro choice" movement and clearly has a "competing interest".
The ASC, a self-regulating body of Canada's advertising industry, wants to appear to be the gatekeeper for consumers, to make sure we are receiving the truth. Their website states: "ASC is the industry body committed to creating and maintaining community confidence in advertising." Confidence? The very media organizations that the Ad Standard represents have written numerous articles deriding the Ad standard council's prior decisions against similar ads. When your own membership questions your integrity, the confidence that the general public has in the ASC is compromised. When ASC calls facts deceptions, the authority of the ASC to be keeper of all that is "truthful, fair and accurate" in advertising rings hollow to many.
It is completely mind boggling for Edmonton Prolife to be held to the ruling of a self-regulating, unnamed complaints panel of anonymous people who can claim anything they want, without providing a shred of documentation. Yet when Edmonton Prolife, provides documentation, including government statistics, and legal rulings, those facts are dismissed as false, misleading and inaccurate.
Prolife groups and their messages of facts and truth are being censored, that is the bottom line.
For more information, contact Corry Morcos at 780-455-5249 or Edmonton
Prolife at 780-425-1637
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Spain - Aborting the Disabled May Breach UN Convention
More than nine out of every 10 unborn babies diagnosed with Down's syndrome in Spain is aborted. The Women's Help Line Foundation of Madrid reportedly says that aborting the disabled breaches the 2006 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which Spain has signed. Article 10 of the convention says: "States Parties reaffirm that every human being has the inherent right to life and shall take all necessary measures to ensure its effective enjoyment by persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others."
Source: SPUC (information@spuc.freeserve.co.uk) via Dave's Digest (email)
Source: SPUC (information@spuc.freeserve.co.uk) via Dave's Digest (email)
Killed in Darkness, Remembered in Light
Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director, Priests for Life
On the afternoon of Sunday, July, 27, 2008, close to five hundred of the faithful filled the tremendous Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament that Mother Angelica built in Hanceville, Alabama. They were gathered for the funeral of three children Karen Esther, Enoch, and Rebekah.
The three children were all in the same small white casket. All had been killed just weeks earlier by abortion, and discarded in the trash outside of an abortion mill in Livonia, Michigan. Dr. Monica Miller, Director of Citizens for a Pro-life Society, transported the children to Alabama.
I conducted the funeral ceremony. Mother Angelica's community of sisters sang. The People of Life prayed, worshipped, mourned, and rejoiced in the hope of resurrection. As they honored the dead, they recommitted themselves to protect the living.
I have done funerals like this in various parts of the country. It was especially important, however, that this funeral took place at Mother Angelica's Shrine. I remember when she first told me, years ago, that at the heart of her vision for that Shrine was the unborn child. This was to be a place dedicated to the Divine Child, and a place where children in the womb "so easily forgotten and discarded in this culture of death" would be remembered and celebrated.
That's what we did on July 27.
I reminded the congregation of the funeral that Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago conducted back in 1988, when he buried two thousand aborted babies. When asked about the legal implications of the burial, he responded that such concerns paled to insignificance in comparison to the evil of taking innocent human life. He said he was doing a corporal work of mercy to bury the dead.
That's what the People of Life do. They protect the living, and they bury the dead. They are not ashamed or afraid to honor in public those who are dishonored in secret by the hidden violence of abortion. By gathering in large numbers to bury aborted children, and by letting as many people as possible know about it, they make up in some small way for the callous disregard in which these children are held by many in our society.
That's why the 16,500 babies found in a large container in the Los Angeles area in the mid-1980's had to wait for three years before they were buried, as abortion supporters launched a legal battle to block the burial. They did not want society to acknowledge in any way that there was any humanity there to be honored. Just throw them away and the more secret, swift, and private the better. So the abortion advocates believe.
But the Church believes different, and as we believe, so we worship. The congregation "including children holding their parents' hands" filed by the casket, which was open, and viewed the remains of these babies. There were tears of sorrow, but full of hope.
Each person left that church more committed than ever to bring the killing to an end.
Blessings and prayers,
Fr. Frank Pavone, M.E.V.
National Director, Priests for Life
Source: Priests for Life (pfl@priestsforlife.org) via Dave's Digest
On the afternoon of Sunday, July, 27, 2008, close to five hundred of the faithful filled the tremendous Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament that Mother Angelica built in Hanceville, Alabama. They were gathered for the funeral of three children Karen Esther, Enoch, and Rebekah.
The three children were all in the same small white casket. All had been killed just weeks earlier by abortion, and discarded in the trash outside of an abortion mill in Livonia, Michigan. Dr. Monica Miller, Director of Citizens for a Pro-life Society, transported the children to Alabama.
I conducted the funeral ceremony. Mother Angelica's community of sisters sang. The People of Life prayed, worshipped, mourned, and rejoiced in the hope of resurrection. As they honored the dead, they recommitted themselves to protect the living.
I have done funerals like this in various parts of the country. It was especially important, however, that this funeral took place at Mother Angelica's Shrine. I remember when she first told me, years ago, that at the heart of her vision for that Shrine was the unborn child. This was to be a place dedicated to the Divine Child, and a place where children in the womb "so easily forgotten and discarded in this culture of death" would be remembered and celebrated.
That's what we did on July 27.
I reminded the congregation of the funeral that Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago conducted back in 1988, when he buried two thousand aborted babies. When asked about the legal implications of the burial, he responded that such concerns paled to insignificance in comparison to the evil of taking innocent human life. He said he was doing a corporal work of mercy to bury the dead.
That's what the People of Life do. They protect the living, and they bury the dead. They are not ashamed or afraid to honor in public those who are dishonored in secret by the hidden violence of abortion. By gathering in large numbers to bury aborted children, and by letting as many people as possible know about it, they make up in some small way for the callous disregard in which these children are held by many in our society.
That's why the 16,500 babies found in a large container in the Los Angeles area in the mid-1980's had to wait for three years before they were buried, as abortion supporters launched a legal battle to block the burial. They did not want society to acknowledge in any way that there was any humanity there to be honored. Just throw them away and the more secret, swift, and private the better. So the abortion advocates believe.
But the Church believes different, and as we believe, so we worship. The congregation "including children holding their parents' hands" filed by the casket, which was open, and viewed the remains of these babies. There were tears of sorrow, but full of hope.
Each person left that church more committed than ever to bring the killing to an end.
Blessings and prayers,
Fr. Frank Pavone, M.E.V.
National Director, Priests for Life
Source: Priests for Life (pfl@priestsforlife.org) via Dave's Digest
Planned Parenthood Supporters Vandalize Yards in Cincinnati
Anti-Planned Parenthood protesters in Cincinnati have been waking up to empty yards that once displayed signs poignantly expressing opposition to Planned Parenthood's desire to move into a residential neighborhood. Signs that said "Save Our Children, Stop Planned Parenthood" have been stolen from all but a few yards. However, the action of what appear to be Planned Parenthood's supporters did not stop there. A facility where the anti-Planned Parenthood campaign stored extra signs, T-shirts and brochures has been vandalized and looted.
Planned Parenthood of Southwestern Ohio has been implementing Planned Parenthood's current strategy of acquiring new property under a different name, to avoid arousing opposition. PPSW purchased property at 2016 Ferguson Road in Western Hills under the name Mount Auburn Parking LLC. The facility will be located within a block of a local high school that is predominantly African- American, which is not surprising, since Planned Parenthood aggressively targets minorities.
Source: Stop Planned Parenthood (stopp@all.org) via Dave's Digest (email)
Planned Parenthood of Southwestern Ohio has been implementing Planned Parenthood's current strategy of acquiring new property under a different name, to avoid arousing opposition. PPSW purchased property at 2016 Ferguson Road in Western Hills under the name Mount Auburn Parking LLC. The facility will be located within a block of a local high school that is predominantly African- American, which is not surprising, since Planned Parenthood aggressively targets minorities.
Source: Stop Planned Parenthood (stopp@all.org) via Dave's Digest (email)
California Passes Reproductive Rights Law Enforcement Act
California is allowing Planned Parenthood to continue its aggressive fight against the pro-life movement. Last week, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law a bill that means that California pro-lifers are going to have a tougher time protesting against abortion mills. The new law extends the "Reproductive Rights Law Enforcement Act" into the year 2014 and requires the state to gather data on crimes against abortion providers. Planned Parenthood is also trying to create a tougher law enforcement stance against what they consider "aggressive protesting." Planned Parenthood has complained that the statistics on crimes against abortion providers are misleading because many police officers are not properly trained to deal with protesters and that law enforcement is systematically underreporting such crimes. However, it is actually Planned Parenthood that has often bullied pro-life protesters outside of its clinics.
Source: Stop Planned Parenthood (stopp@all.org) via Dave's Digest (email)
Source: Stop Planned Parenthood (stopp@all.org) via Dave's Digest (email)
Where Are The Chinese Brothers And Sisters?
"Television commentators have been dutifully telling Olympics watchers that China is changing and becoming modern," said Jim Sedlak, vice president of American Life League. "Yet, none of them speak of the horror of China's one-child policy and its numerous forced abortions."
China's one-child policy took effect in 1979. The Chinese government employs coercion and infant abandonment to enforce it. It is estimated that it has caused over 100 million forced abortions. The United Nations Population Fund has supported the one-child policy.
"As the world watched 15,000 individual Chinese performers during the Olympic opening ceremonies on August 8, it was sobering to think that probably not one of these performers has a living brother or sister," Sedlak observed. "With China's one-child per family policy in existence for decades, it is likely many of these young performers' brothers and sisters were sacrificed, often brutally, to China's Communist regime."
Source: Pro-Life Wisconsin (info@prolifewisconsin.org) via Dave's Digest (email)
China's one-child policy took effect in 1979. The Chinese government employs coercion and infant abandonment to enforce it. It is estimated that it has caused over 100 million forced abortions. The United Nations Population Fund has supported the one-child policy.
"As the world watched 15,000 individual Chinese performers during the Olympic opening ceremonies on August 8, it was sobering to think that probably not one of these performers has a living brother or sister," Sedlak observed. "With China's one-child per family policy in existence for decades, it is likely many of these young performers' brothers and sisters were sacrificed, often brutally, to China's Communist regime."
Source: Pro-Life Wisconsin (info@prolifewisconsin.org) via Dave's Digest (email)
Friday, August 15, 2008
Proposed policy could severely limit freedom of Ontario physicians to practice according to conscience
Ottawa) - In a letter today to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, the president of Canadian Physicians for Life, Dr. Will Johnston, expressed concern over a draft policy relating to freedom of conscience and the lack of sufficient notice given by CPSO to all interested stakeholders that a consultation process, which officially ends today, has been underway since the end of June.
Canadian Physicians for Life is asking the College for a 90-day extension on the deadline “due to the importance of the issues at stake and the lack of opportunity interested stakeholders were given to comment on the proposal.”
The draft policy, that CPL only learned of late yesterday, would appear to severely limit the freedom of Ontario physicians to practice according to their conscientious/religious beliefs. The College apparently posted the draft policy document, “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code” on its website at the end of June and had set a deadline of today for input on the proposal.
In his letter, Dr. Johnston expressed surprise that the College would not have been more proactive in soliciting input on a policy that could have profound impact on both individual doctors and on the profession as a whole. CPSO does not appear to have issued a news release on the consultation process, and pro-life physicians have been taken by surprise.
Dr. Johnston wrote, “The College must have been aware that groups such as Canadian Physicians for Life -- which represents doctors from across Canada who respect the dignity of all human life, regardless of age or infirmity -- would have concerns with the College’s view that “decisions to restrict medical services offered….that are based on moral or religious belief may contravene the [Ontario Human Rights] Code, and/or constitute professional misconduct.”
“Refusal on conscientious or religious grounds to refer a woman for an abortion could be deemed professional misconduct under this new policy,” Dr. Johnston said.
A similar requirement (that doctors must make abortion referrals regardless of their conscientious beliefs) was put forward in a July 2006 guest editorial in the Canadian Medical Association Journal. It triggered such a firestorm of controversy, that the Journal was compelled to publish a letter from CMA’s Director of Ethics stating that CMA policy did not require physicians to refer for abortions if it would violate their conscientious or religious beliefs.
Dr. Johnston concluded, “There could be serious problems with what the Ontario College is proposing and we need time to study the implications of this policy in detail. If doctors feel coerced into compromising their deepest convictions as a result of this policy, certainly that’s a problem—not only for the integrity of physicians, but also for the welfare of their patients.”
- 30 -
CPSO's draft policy, "Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code" can be found at this link: http://www.cpso.on.ca/Policies/consultation/HumanRightsDRAFT_08.pdf
For further comment, please contact:
Will Johnston, MD, President
Canadian Physicians for Life
ph: 613-728-5433
email: info@physiciansforlife.ca
Canadian Physicians for Life is an educational organization representing physicians who hold that reverence for every human life lies at the root of all medical tradition. Through the ages, this tradition has been expressed in the Oath of Hippocrates. It was rephrased in modern times in the Declaration of Geneva (1948), which says in part, “I will maintain the utmost respect for human life, from the time of conception; even under threat, I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity.”
Canadian Physicians for Life is asking the College for a 90-day extension on the deadline “due to the importance of the issues at stake and the lack of opportunity interested stakeholders were given to comment on the proposal.”
The draft policy, that CPL only learned of late yesterday, would appear to severely limit the freedom of Ontario physicians to practice according to their conscientious/religious beliefs. The College apparently posted the draft policy document, “Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code” on its website at the end of June and had set a deadline of today for input on the proposal.
In his letter, Dr. Johnston expressed surprise that the College would not have been more proactive in soliciting input on a policy that could have profound impact on both individual doctors and on the profession as a whole. CPSO does not appear to have issued a news release on the consultation process, and pro-life physicians have been taken by surprise.
Dr. Johnston wrote, “The College must have been aware that groups such as Canadian Physicians for Life -- which represents doctors from across Canada who respect the dignity of all human life, regardless of age or infirmity -- would have concerns with the College’s view that “decisions to restrict medical services offered….that are based on moral or religious belief may contravene the [Ontario Human Rights] Code, and/or constitute professional misconduct.”
“Refusal on conscientious or religious grounds to refer a woman for an abortion could be deemed professional misconduct under this new policy,” Dr. Johnston said.
A similar requirement (that doctors must make abortion referrals regardless of their conscientious beliefs) was put forward in a July 2006 guest editorial in the Canadian Medical Association Journal. It triggered such a firestorm of controversy, that the Journal was compelled to publish a letter from CMA’s Director of Ethics stating that CMA policy did not require physicians to refer for abortions if it would violate their conscientious or religious beliefs.
Dr. Johnston concluded, “There could be serious problems with what the Ontario College is proposing and we need time to study the implications of this policy in detail. If doctors feel coerced into compromising their deepest convictions as a result of this policy, certainly that’s a problem—not only for the integrity of physicians, but also for the welfare of their patients.”
- 30 -
CPSO's draft policy, "Physicians and the Ontario Human Rights Code" can be found at this link: http://www.cpso.on.ca/Policies/consultation/HumanRightsDRAFT_08.pdf
For further comment, please contact:
Will Johnston, MD, President
Canadian Physicians for Life
ph: 613-728-5433
email: info@physiciansforlife.ca
Canadian Physicians for Life is an educational organization representing physicians who hold that reverence for every human life lies at the root of all medical tradition. Through the ages, this tradition has been expressed in the Oath of Hippocrates. It was rephrased in modern times in the Declaration of Geneva (1948), which says in part, “I will maintain the utmost respect for human life, from the time of conception; even under threat, I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
