Thomas Mulcair: please don't quit, we need you

Chris Selley thinks Thomas Mulcair is the man to hold Justin Trudeau to account for all his election promises:

"They have, after all, pledged to “save home mail delivery”; to resettle 25,000 Syrian refugees by year’s end; to modify anti-terror laws in a way that satisfies civil libertarians and to implement more robust national security oversight; to ditch the F-35s and find cheaper fighter jets somewhere; to legalize and regulate marijuana; to table electoral reform legislation within 18 months; to restore the retirement age to 65; to comprehensively reform access-to-information procedures; to appoint an advertising commissioner to decide whether government ads are partisan; to “establish an independent commission to organize leaders’ debates”; to reform Senate and Supreme Court appointments; to allow MPs free votes on everything except platform items, “traditional confidence matters” and matters pertaining to “our shared values and the protections guaranteed by the Charter”; to alter the House of Commons’ standing orders to prohibit mammoth omnibus bills; to empower and enrich the Parliamentary Budget Office and to extend its purview to parties’ election platforms; to make government accounting “consistent and clear”; to restore the mandatory long-form census; to establish “a pan-Canadian framework for combating climate change” within 90 days of the Paris conference; to “renew Canada’s commitment to peacekeeping operations”; and to “enact the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission,” which at the federal level means calling an inquiry into missing and murdered women, adopting and implementing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, “eliminating the overrepresentation of aboriginal people in custody over the next decade,” closing the aboriginal educational achievement gap in a single generation, building a Residential Schools National Monument in Ottawa, “restoring and increasing” funding for CBC, statutorily exempting criminals suffering from fetal alcohol syndrome from all mandatory minimum sentences, having new citizens swear observance to treaties with indigenous peoples and outlawing spanking."

Good idea.

Notice this promise:

"And matters pertaining to “our shared values and the protections guaranteed by the Charter”

Mr. Trudeau thinks of course that abortion is a shared value and is protected by the Charter--untrue and untrue. See here and here.

And this one:

"to comprehensively reform access-to-information procedures"

I look forward to this promise. I remember when Harper said something smilar with his Federal Accountability Act, which of course didn't amount to a hill of beans. Let's hope Trudeau does a better job of it. We'll be watching.

Justin Trudeau and pro-life Canadians

With Trudeau’s election, things are about to get very personal for pro-life Canadians

By Jonathon van Maren

The columns dissecting Prime Minister-Designate Justin Trudeau’s landslide victory last Monday are already coming in fast and furious. I’ve even written one or two myself. But for the pro-life movement, Trudeau’s victory demands some introspection on what we can do moving forward. I think four things are essential to consider.

1. Politics and law are downstream from culture. Sewage flows downhill. The work of actually engaging people in conversations, going door-to-door, changing their minds—that is the only way we will ensure that pro-life principles become entrenched in our country. We really have no right to be shocked when Canada’s Supreme Court tosses out our euthanasia laws when there has been no concerted effort at the grassroots level to stem the tide of public opinion flowing in that direction for years. We are not going to affect any real change on the abortion issue from inside offices or churches, and we are not going to transform public opinion by spending all of our time talking to other pro-life people. To change public policy, you need to change public opinion, and to change public opinion, you have to actually engage with the public. Whether or not your pro-life work is a success is directly correlated to how many people you manage to persuade to become pro-life. Our standards for “pro-life work” are often far too low.

2. Most people don’t vote on the abortion issue, and that’s one reason Justin Trudeau won so big Monday night. Areas of the country that polling data tell us have strong anti-abortion sentiment were still swept up in the crimson tide—there’s a metaphor in there somewhere—in spite of the fact that Justin Trudeau is the most pro-abortion politician to ever be elected to high office. Pro-lifers are often fond of saying that over 60% of Canadians want an abortion law. That’s not quite true. If 60% of Canadians actually wanted something, you can be assured that they would get it. It’s the same with sex-selection abortion, which over 90% of Canadians profess to oppose—but when Stephen Harper shut down the debate around that issue in the House of Commons, there was nary a whisper from Canadians. Just because they agree in some languid, lackadaisical fashion that perhaps, at some point, we should stop dismembering full-term babies, doesn’t mean they actually care—and certainly doesn’t mean they’ll actually take that belief into the polling booth with them on Election Day. In order for these issues to actually impact our politicians, the voter intensity on abortion needs to be radically changed.

3. To create a new pro-life consensus, we have to look outside of our own communities. Bluntly put, there aren’t enough orthodox Catholics and Protestants in the country to form a big enough voting bloc on the issue. However, Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims, and even Buddhists are very kindly disposed to the pro-life position. These are the people protesting Premier Kathleen Wynne’s radical sex education and these are the people who respond most positively to pro-life outreach. And on Monday, they turned out in droves for Justin Trudeau’s Liberals. In order to create a voting bloc that is resolutely pro-life, we will need to do much work with those whose own cultural and religious values are hostile to abortion as well as other social policies that Trudeau and his ilk hold dear. We may not agree on everything, but as Francis Schaeffer liked to say, we are still co-belligerents.

4. The Christian community will now actually have to step up and get involved, because things are about to get very personal. One of the reasons Christians so successfully ignore issues like abortion is that they assume that for the most part, it won’t have much impact on them personally. With the legalization of euthanasia coming and an already-strained healthcare system facing an aging population, life will now be threatened at both ends of the spectrum. Many Christians—I heard this dozens of times—insisted that Stephen Harper was “secretly pro-life,” as if there is any such thing. I suspect more Christians, for the sake of convenience, believed the Liberal “hidden agenda” babble than did Liberals themselves. With Trudeau the Younger firmly entrenched in power for at least the next four years, Christians are going to have to abandon the complacency that helped this happen and fight for their country. We need less poodles and more pit bulls.

For almost ten years, many Christians and pro-lifers comforted themselves with the fact that at least, things wouldn’t get worse. Now, they very much can. If Trudeau has his way, they very much will. It is up to the pro-life movement and to the churches to serve as the conscience of the nation, and maintain a relentless opposition to Trudeau’s policies. It will be hard work, but this time, no one can be absent without leave.

Abortion: doesn't protect children

Paul Lauzon took this video at the Ottawa abortion clinic at 65 Bank St. in Ottawa. It's how we dispose of aborted children in Canada. In plastic pails hauled off in the back of a truck. This is what is on the truck: "Stericycle Protecting People. Reducing Risk."

Kind of ironic. Abortion does anything but protecting and reducing the risk to very small people.

Where does Stericycle go and what is done with the remains of these slaughtered children? Unknown.

Sleeping all cozy in their warm comfy womb

I just watched the 11th undercover video of Planned Parenthood America. This video basically describes a partial birth abortion:

"[Dr. Amna] Dermish does not use the chemical digoxin to kill the unborn baby before 20 weeks because the chemical results in destroying too much of the baby’s body to salvage to sell for body parts. As a result Dermish relies on feet-first, intact extraction abortions done on living unborn babies. Using ultrasound guidance to manipulate the baby from vertex to breech orientation before extracting the yet-living fetus is a hallmark of the illegal partial-birth abortion procedure that Congress banned years ago."

The question I have is this. How do these people, who can so nonchalantly make jokes while discussing the torture and dismemberment of pre-born children who feel pain, sleep at night?

In fact, imagine an abortion doctor peacefully sleeping in their cozy warm bed after a hard day of work ripping babies apart. And imagine a cold sterile vice reaching into that cozy warm bed, to first rip off one leg, then the other leg. And imagine the vice then grabbing on to the doctor's torso and pulling it through an opening smaller than the diameter of the doctor's body. I wonder if the doctor would still be laughing?

(check out the video at 9:30 to hear Dr. Dermish discuss extracting the baby: lower extremities first, then the spine/trunk)

Comforting those affected by abortion

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/catholicnews/2015/10/with-a-childs-touch-sculpture-seeks-to-comfort-those-who-mourn-abortion/

"The statue portrays a suffering mother in imitation stone. She is grieving with her face buried in her hands. She is approached by her aborted baby, depicted in a young child’s transparent form. The child reaches up to touch the woman’s head in a tender gesture of forgiveness and healing."

If ABC link is real why suppress the risks?

Barbara Kay: Tough questions on the health risks of abortion remain

October 23, 2015
(reprinted with permission from the author)

October is International Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Upcoming, November is International Preterm Birth Awareness Month. “Uh oh,” I can almost hear certain pro-choice stakeholders muttering: “Is she actually going there?” Yep. Fasten your seat belts, readers. Like they say in those corny action movies, “I’m going in!”

“In” is the political war zone of Induced Abortion (IA) research in which the contested territory are the links between IA with i) future preterm birth and ii) elevated rates of breast cancer (known as ABC). The links are there. Nations that proscribe abortion have low premature-birth rates and low breast cancer rates. Nations with high abortion rates have high rates of premature birth and breast cancer. But are the links causal or coincidental? An army of pro-choice obstetricians and gynecologists and their supporting institutions deny causality. A battalion of (both pro-life and pro-choice) researchers and epidemiologists producing reams of large-scale, peer-reviewed studies insist on causality.

Full disclosure: I have no personal dog in this hunt (never had an abortion or miscarriage or preterm birth myself, or breast cancer). My views on abortion are not dictated by religious belief. Politically I’m neither pro-life nor pro-choice. Like the majority of Canadians I believe in regulation. Sex selection abortion, for example, really disgusts me, but even pragmatically speaking, we need regulation so we can collect the data we need for research. One thing I don’t believe is that the science on any reproductive intervention on a woman’s body — IA, IVF, surrogacy or whatever — is “settled.”

My “ideology” is therefore pro-scientific research that is untainted by political correctness, and pro-informed consent. But our culture can’t seem to get beyond the “rights” aspect of abortion into the “data” aspect. Ambiguity around what is promoted as a risk-free surgery can dampen women’s confidence, obviously. But if the risks actually exist, what benefit to women is there in suppressing knowledge of it?

That is the main point I make as an interviewee in a new documentary film that just premiered in Los Angeles. “Hush” is dedicated to exploring the effects of internal politics on scientific inquiry into women’s reproductive health. To be more precise, the politics that kick in on one issue only: abortion. It’s actually kind of weird: There is no controversy surrounding the elevated breast cancer risks causally linked with childlessness, late-start pregnancy, early menstruation, the Pill and hormone replacement therapy. All these causes, known because of continuing research, have one thing in common — estrogen proliferation. But suggest a causal link between estrogen-proliferative IA and breast cancer — and watch the fur fly!

The film’s director, Punam Kumar Gill, a respected member of the arts community and a Chatelaine nominee for “woman of the year” has served as writer, director and producer on seven documentary films to date. She brings a deft combination of personal motivation and investigative acumen to her task.

Gill, who considers herself a “product of feminism,” had always assumed IA was safe and without harmful effects. That changed some years ago, when the sudden onset of pre-eclampsia in her second trimester of pregnancy resulted in the spontaneous abortion of her baby. When she attempted to gather information on possible health consequences, Gill encountered resistance amongst health professionals to discussion of any risks. She was further troubled by the bromides set out by health organizations on their websites, as well as by the disparity in public policies around informed consent in different jurisdictions. In Canada and many states, as the film notes, abortion seekers are given no routine pre-surgery counselling, while 35 states mandate pre-abortion counselling, 25 cite IA-linked fertility risks, and five cite the potential ABC link.

What you will mainly see in Hush, apart from graphically illuminated revelations of research suppression amongst health organizations, notably the National Cancer Institute, is Gill talking to people, including amongst others: women whose abortions resulted in physical and psychological complications they were not advised might happen; an internationally prominent gynecologist who denies that IA involves any significant consequences whatsoever, and who considers continued research unnecessary; a breast surgical oncologist disturbed by her growing roster of patients with aggressive breast cancer in the 25-39 cohort, many with a history of IA; and a statistician studying eight European-Scandinavian countries who finds IA “to be the best predictor of breast cancer.”

Women’s reproductive health issues are the third rail of the medical profession. I rarely see an objective news article on abortion, fertility or female cancers that is not immediately either attacked or defended from a politicized perspective, rather than simply assessed on its own terms. I think Hush, which seems to me an objective overview of the situation, should be seen by pro-choice women, pro-life women and women who are simply concerned about themselves or their daughters achieving their reproductive goals with optimal chances for long-term health. That is to say, by pretty well all women.

Justin Trudeau and Catholics

This story from Catholic Culture is making the rounds. It says that Archbishop Prendergast will be meeting with Prime Minister Trudeau regarding his abortion stand.

But if you go to the source for the story, it appears that it is based on a LifeSiteNews article from June, 2014, and so it seems not to be current.

Many Catholics are concerned about Mr. Trudeau's election to become Canada's Prime Minister. Not only because of his pro-abortion ideology, but because many other Catholics voted for him.

If Catholics voted for Trudeau, we must ask ourselves--are they okay with his pro-abortion ideology? Or are Catholics ignorant of Trudeau's pro-abortion ideology? Or do they believe as Trudeau, does that one can separate their private beliefs from their public beliefs?

All very troubling questions.

I hope that Archbishop Prendergast will indeed speak once again with Mr. Trudeau. (The Archbishop did speak to him in 2014.)

Nobody can be both Catholic and pro-choice because these are mutually exclusive.

Pro-life people - do not be discouraged

Justin Trudeau - what were Catholics thinking?

So we got what we deserve I guess. A liberal government headed up by the most pro-abortion leader Canada has ever known, Justin Trudeau. We voted for him, and we got him.

Canada has 13.07 million baptized Catholics.

And Here in Ottawa Vanier Mauril Belanger got over 43% of the vote. Shameful considering there are a ton of Catholic Francophones in Vanier.

I hope they all went to confession today.

A just society must protect the right to life for all humans

Fr. Yves included this in his homily today, regarding voting tomorrow:

"We must be informed by our Christian faith...respect for life and human dignity from conception to natural death. Any candidate or party that opposes that fundamental right cannot serve us to build a truly just society. It's the first of rights, the right to life of the unborn in the womb. If that right is opposed, it is violated, and we cannot build a just society."

Catholics wake up to Justin Trudeau's pro-abortion agenda (the series)

I know of Catholics who will vote for Justin Trudeau. I know of Catholics who are unaware of his pro-abortion ideology. Unbelievable but true.

Now we hear that Justin Trudeau wants Canadians to fund abortions overseas as part of the Maternal, newborn and child health initiative.

This is just one more attack on the sanctity of human life, brought to you by the most pro-abortion leader Canadians have ever known.

We already know that Justin Trudeau won't let pro-life people be part of the Liberal party. Not unless they agree to park their pro-life consciences at the door. He even uses his Catholic faith as some kind of perverse justification for his pro-abortion stand:

“As someone who was raised Roman Catholic, and who attended a Jesuit school, I understand that it is difficult for people of deep faith to set their beliefs aside in order to serve Canadians who may not share those beliefs.” (From Justin Trudeau's book Common Ground)

Jonathon Van Maren says this about Trudeau:

"Justin’s comments on the Catholic Church throughout his memoir betray the fact that he is about as Catholic as the rest of Quebec—which is to say, not at all. He appreciates the spirituality, the historicity, the tradition—but not the irritating moral obligations, such as the obligation to protect all human life or the recognition of natural law. He is counting on the fact that most voters—and many Catholics—will not examine his claims too closely, and thus he will don the cultural garb of Catholicism without any of the restraints."

Justin Trudeau also thinks the Charter of Rights and Freedoms includes a right to abortion. It doesn't.

Justin Trudeau also thinks the Canada Health Act includes abortion. It doesn't. See here.

Wake up people. A vote for Justin Trudeau is a vote for a pro-abortion agenda.

(To know more about Justin Trudeau and his pro-abortion agenda, the following links will take you all to my blog posts on the Liberal leader. Note that each page has multiple blog postings:)
http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/search/label/Justin%20Trudeau
http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/search/label/Justin%20Trudeau?updated-max=2015-07-23T16:52:00-04:00&max-results=20&start=20&by-date=false
http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/search/label/Justin%20Trudeau?updated-max=2014-09-19T07:38:00-04:00&max-results=20&start=40&by-date=false

What Catholics/Christians should know about Justin Trudeau before they vote

It still surprises me how so few Catholics know the truth about Justin Trudeau.

Last year a reader of my blog sent me a copy of a letter they wrote to Liberal leader Justin Trudeau, regarding his decree that pro-life persons would be disqualified from becoming Liberal candidates. The letter deserves a re-read as we are about to possibly elect a Liberal Government.

Mr. Trudeau never responded to the letter. Which doesn't surprise me since he's never bothered to answer my letter either.

What on earth is Canada thinking anyway?

Novena to St. Joseph for the election

I received this from someone this past week. What a great idea for a Novena to St. Joseph. It should have started yesterday for the nine days, but I'm sure God will understand if you only start it today.

The Federal election is in less than 3 weeks! It is only my opinion, but I think it would be a good idea at this time to pray for our beautiful country. Since voting day this year happens to be exactly one week after our Thanksgiving Holiday, let’s remember the blessings that God has bestowed on us, and ask His help in obtaining the best possible outcome.

To my fellow Catholics, I would even suggest: Why not a novena to St-Joseph, who was chosen as early as the 17th century, by Saint Mgr. de Laval, as the Patron Saint of Canada? Below is a prayer that I have tried to write for this purpose, and I would suggest to try to say this prayer on each of the 9 days preceding voting day (beginning on the Saturday before Thanksgiving), followed by the Lord's Prayer, and/or one decade or all of a Rosary, whatever you are comfortable with.

Prayer to St. Joseph

For a blessing on this year's Federal Elections

O Saint Joseph, loving father, faithful guardian of Jesus and spouse of the Mother of God, we pray you to remind God the Father of all the love He has shown for us in offering up the death and resurrection of His Son to give us life.

Our beautiful country, Canada, has been consecrated to you from its very beginnings. Just as Mary and Jesus recognized in you the protector given to them by the Father, so too we are placing ourselves under your protection.

We humbly ask you to intercede through the power of Jesus, and obtain for us from the eternal Father the grace to choose the best possible team of men and women to lead our country, men and women who will be true leaders, who are not going to be in government for their own ego, personal advantage, or agenda, but who are going to see themselves as servants of society and will focus on the common good, while working as wise stewards of the riches of our country, in harmony with God's design.

Amen

Justin Trudeau doesn't understand the Canada Health Act

In this "up for debate" interview with Justin Trudeau, the interviewer asks a question--based on a falsehood--and Trudeau just as sweet as can be, goes along with it. Either Trudeau knows it is false and doesn't correct the interviewer which is a scary thought, or he doesn't know it's false which is even a scarier thought.

Check out page 8 where Trudeau is asked about the Canada Health Act and how it requires abortion to be funded (the CHA does no such thing), and Justin says if he's elected he will have a conversation with any jurisdiction not living up to their responsibilities under the CHA:

FP: Another question which does not get much air time because it’s a question that is seen as something that was settled 30 years ago and I’m talking about reproductive rights, abortion. The Canada Health Act stipulates that every Canadian woman has a right to a free, accessible abortion without conditions. That is not being applied right now. PEI, a Liberal government, has turned away from its obligations. What are you prepared to do about that?

JT: I had a conversation with the Premier about this just a few months ago. The fact is they have moved in the right direction, made a significant change. There is no a 2 doctor rule around that. But you’re right, there are presently no abortions offered on the island of Prince Edward Island. And I certainly hope that that’s going to change. Because it’s important that we make sure that full medical access to reproductive services are available to every woman across this country. And that is something that the Liberal Party is engaged in. 

Dear Justin: Repeating a falsehood doesn't make it true.

Canada's shame: Leaders refuse to protect pre-born children

Mike Schouten in today's National Post:

"Justin Trudeau’s attempt to play wedge politics with the abortion issue fell flat at last week’s French language debate. This must have been disappointing for him as his position has been clear for some time: he supports every form of abortion — including for the sole purpose of terminating the lives of girl babies simply because they are female — at every stage of pregnancy. He even issued an edict stating that anyone who questioned the status quo was not welcome in the Liberal party. 

The de facto position of Thomas Mulcair and Stephen Harper is, in principle, no different. When questioned directly by Trudeau last Friday, Harper said the same as he has been saying for years, “My position for 10 years has been I don’t intend to re-open this debate...”

...In effect Stephen Harper, Thomas Mulcair and Justin Trudeau all support sex-selective abortion. They care less about the fact that girls are targeted for abortion much more frequently than boys. Their refusal to act is a sign that they endorse this misogynistic practice in Canada. 

All three leaders also support late-term abortion. They show no regard for the reality that every year thousands of babies lose their lives by being aborted in the latter stages of pregnancy, after the stage when children of the same age are born, survive outside of the womb, and live productive lives as Canadian citizens..."

Mauril Belanger - assisted suicide and applause

There was another thing that came out of last night's debate. Mauril Belanger said:

"I have always voted for assisted suicide, never euthanasia. I will never support that."

What was depressing, was the big round of applause Belanger got for his support for assisted suicide.

We used to say it was tragic when someone committed suicide. Now we clap our hands.

Ottawa-Vanier - splitting the left vote

Interesting debate last night at Colonel By high school for Ottawa-Vanier candidates. I thought all the candidates did fairly well. Not too sure though about the Marxist-Leninist candidate, couldn't quite understand him and his thoughts weren't overly coherent.

There were a lot of the left leaning persuasion persons in the room and they seemed to applaud a lot for the NDP, Liberals, and Green parties. But it definitely wasn't a crowning of Belanger as I had feared.

There was some disruptive laughing/snickering/rudeness going on when Conservative David Piccini was speaking about how his party is allowed to vote with their conscience. I know that Harper controls his MPs pretty tightly, but really? Isn't it both the Liberals and NDP who don't even allow people into their party who are pro-life (and so never even get to vote their conscience) and NOT the Conservatives?

My take away from the debate is that I found the NDP and Green candidates were both quite strong, especially the NDP's Emilie Taman. Hopefully this will translate into taking away votes from Liberal Mauril Belanger who is well past his best before date.

Confessions of a pro-life bigot

Today I learned that I am a bigot. HJHORNBECK says so, because I am pro-life. So it must be true:

"When you tolerate bigots, they find safe harbour with you. And if the Conservatives regain power, Harper will find it harder to keep them under control…"

According to the Merriam Webster dictionary, a bigot is

"a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)".

I must admit I'm confused though. Because if I am a bigot, what does that make Justin Trudeau, who refuses to accept pro-life people as members of his Liberal party?

Oh well. No matter.

So today this bigot, and her bigoted sister Maureen, went out to deliver flyer's in our riding of Ottawa-Vanier. Liberal Mauril Belanger has held this riding for 20 years. Time for a change I say. We're tired of having an MP who is pro-choice and whose party refuses to accept pro-life people as members of said Liberal party.

We've now delivered about 300 flyer's. We will continue to deliver flyer's until election day. Bigots that we are.

"Team Trudeau" ensures pro-life candidate abandons beliefs

Khalil Ramal will vote to protect womens’ "right to choose" abortion. Nothing strange there. Except that Ramal used to be pro-life:

"Hours after Liberal candidate Khalil Ramal’s pro-life bonafides were brought up in an AM980 interview, a Team Trudeau spokesperson has said that Ramal will fall in line and vote pro-choice, if elected."

Seems getting into power is more important than standing by his beliefs. How can you trust a person like this anyway?