Dear Mr. Unit, well no, it isn't of any assistance

My letter to Minister Marco Mendicino was answered (well sort of). By someone called Public Correspondence Unit.

As you can see, the letter didn't address any of my concerns. But it did inform me that under section 12 of the CSIS Act, their mandate is:

"to investigate and advise the Government of Canada as defined in section 2 and are limited to terrorism, espionage, sabotage and foreign interference."

So pro-life people are now terrorists, spies and saboteurs? Good grief.

Then this: 

"Should you be unsatisfied with this [non] response you may contact the National Security Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA). "

Good idea.

Canada kills 1,913+ children by barbaric abortion procedure

Imagine if someone pulled off one of your arms, then a second arm, then a leg, then a second leg. Then crushed your head. This is what a D&E abortion is.

In 2020 alone, there were at least 1,913 of these dilation and extraction abortions in Canada (based on CIHI for 2020, Tab 7). A you can see form the chart, this number only represents those D&E abortions performed in hospitals, and not in clinics. This means that there could be double to triple this number of D&E abortions, since clinics don't report these abortions to CIHI. (This estimate is based on the fact that in Ontario, there are twice as many abortions done in clinics as in hospitals).

According to a pro-abortion extremist, there are at least 20 facilities that perform abortions D&E abortions in Canada, all the way up to 24 weeks. 

At 24 weeks gestation a child can live outside the womb.

Below are two videos of what a second trimester surgical abortion looks like. The first is the testimony of an ultrasound technician who was present at the abortion. The second is from Dr. Kathi Aultman a former abortion doctor.

https://youtu.be/nd_9y1-L60c

D & E ABORTION

These three facilities all provide abortions up until 24 weeks.

Cabbagetown Women's Clinic, Toronto

Vancouver Island Women's Clinic, Victoria

Pregnancy Options Program/Abortion Clinic, London Health Sciences, Victoria Hospital, London

"Ideologically motivated violent extremism threats such as anti-abortion groups"

Dear Mr. Marco Mendicino,

I was greatly disturbed by reading this article, in today's National Post. In particular regarding this paragraph:

CSIS breaks down IMVE into four categories of violence: xenophobic (like white supremacy, neonazis), anti-authority (anti-government, such as Jan. 6, 2021, storming of the U.S. Capitol), gender-driven (like Incels or violent misogyny) and “other grievance-driven” threats (such as violent environmental or anti-abortion groups).

Having been closely involved in the pro-life movement in Canada for over 14 years, and knowing many many many pro-life persons, I can assure you that pro-life people in Canada are one of the most peaceful prayerful and joyful groups of people you will ever meet. To single us out as a "threat" is not only totally untrue, it is extremely disrespectful to millions of Canadians. 

To label pro-life people as "Ideologically motivated violent extremism" and a "threat" is an insidious lie perpetuated by those who despise us for our beliefs that human life is precious from the moment of conception until natural death. This lie is subsequently repeated over and over again by politicians and the media.

Have you ever attended the annual March for Life where thousands and thousands of us peacefully March in Ottawa, and other Canadian cities? Or the annual 40 days for life vigils where we pray outside abortion clinics? Or the annual Life Chain where we quietly pray on street corners? If you have ever done so, I challenge you to tell all Canadians about what you witness there. There is never violent extremism and we are never a threat to anyone.

I can tell you though, that there are pro-choice people who are violent towards us. As Canada's top security agency have you investigated these people? If you haven't then I suggest you start. I guarantee you that if you reach out to the pro-life people whom you vilify and call violent extremists and a threat, you will uncover years of abuse, violence and extreme behaviour towards us.

The lies about pro-life people are so rampant that even our Prime Minister believes them. He has threatened to revoke charitable status to crisis pregnancy centres and other pro-life groups who he said in his 2019 election platform:

"In 2021, women’s rights should not be up for debate. Yet the Conservatives want to roll back abortion access.
Meanwhile, anti-choice organizations are actively working to spread misinformation about abortion, putting the health and safety of young people and vulnerable women at risk.

 

Provide up to $10 million to Health Canada to develop an easily accessible portal that provides accurate, judgement-free, and evidence-based information on sexual and reproductive health and rights, which will include a section that counters misinformation about abortion.

 

No longer provide charity status to anti-abortion organizations (for example, Crisis Pregnancy Centres) that provide dishonest counseling to women about their rights and about the options available to them at all stages of the pregnancy." (emphasis added)

The Prime Minister has yet to produce any evidence regarding his smears about this "misinformation about abortion" and "dishonest counseling to women". That is because he has no evidence. This is just one more example of the lies perpetuated by people who do not believe what we believe.

So please Mr. Mendicino, either remove pro-life people from your definition of threats of violent extremism, or tell us where we have been violently extreme. You, the media, politicians, and the government--may not like what we stand for. That is your prerogative. But please don't lump us in with white supremacist and neonazis because you don't like us.

Sincerely,

Patricia Maloney

We need to take care of these people not kill them

 

Letter to my MP on supporting people not killing them

Dear Mona Fortier MP,

I was very troubled by a letter written in the National Post today regarding MAID. I am asking that you, as my representative in Parliament, bring my concerns to the Prime Minister regarding MAID.

Instead of killing people, we should be able to provide every single Canadian who wants palliative care, to receive it. Palliative care should be deemed an essential service, available to everyone.

We should be able to provide every single Canadian who needs to see a psychiatrist, the ability to see one. 

If there are people who cannot afford to live anymore because of disabilities (we've heard of many tragic cases like this) and so instead opt for MAID, we need to help them.

Canada spends billions of dollars every year on groups to promote abortion, LGBT and other progressive ideologies. Could we not divert some of those dollars to helping people get the care they need so they don't have to resort to MAID?

It is morally wrong to kill human beings. It is morally right to help them. It really is very simple.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Patricia Maloney

My letter in today's Ottawa Citizen

 

Talking about the ethics of abortion is not allowed

A while ago there was a radio show called the Ethics Lab. It was a weekly radio show that explored ethical issues from 2016 to 2021.

The show discussed the ethics of all manner of topics. But I never heard the topic of abortion discussed. In fact, I couldn't think of a more likely candidate for a discussion on ethics. So I emailed the host and asked him if he would do a show on the ethics of abortion. 

His response was this:

“I doubt that we'll address the abortion question anytime soon. I have very unsettled views about it and I'm not sure what we could add to the discussion on that topic in our short segment...”

What an odd answer. Can't add to the discussion? Why not? The show's purpose was to talk about ethical situations, why not abortion? It's because people who support abortion really really don't want to discuss the ethics of it because this leads into very uncomfortable territory. Conscience territory. Squirming territory.

Pro-choice people far prefer the world of euphemistic slogans, none of which make any sense, never mind, not being true. “My body my choice” (no, the fetus is not your body), “A woman's right to choose” (the standard never finishing the sentence tactic thinking nobody is going to notice), “Abortion is healthcare” (killing a child in the womb is never healthcare for the child being killed), etc.

Then there was this story from actress Anne Hathaway on the View who when talking about abortion said this:

"This is not a moral conversation about abortion, this is a practical conversation about women's rights and by the way human rights. Because women's rights are human rights.... Abortion can be another word for mercy."

Although Hathaway immediately discounts any moral discussion about abortion, she does actually use the word "moral", which I thought was interesting -- a pro-choice person using the word moral and abortion in the same discussion. 

Of course abortion is a moral conversation. Just like murder is a moral conversation and rape is a moral discussion. Yes,women's rights are human rights but pre-born rights are also human rights. And abortion is never merciful to the child being killed.

So that is what we have come to as a society. We cannot talk about the ethics or morality of abortion. If we did, people's conscience might get in the way.

Discriminatory bubble zone law 'not in the public interest'

The charges against Fr. Tony have been dropped. Good. But they never should have happened in the first place.

'Bubble zone' law constitutionally challenged

“Our position is the legislation is such a serious Charter breach that it should never have been available to prosecute a man in his 80s peacefully carrying out his priestly duties, and protesting legislation that effectively amounts to anti-blasphemy laws,” Polizogopoulos said. “Just its attempt to outlaw ‘discouraging language’ on a public street in the nation’s capital — or anywhere in Canada — seems to exemplify what the courts have defined as legal overreach.” ... 

..."On the day he was arrested four years ago, Van Hee was deemed to be within the 50 metre legal “bubble zone” around the Morgentaler clinic on Bank Street.He held signs that read: “The Primacy of Free Speech: Cornerstone of Western Civilization” and “Without Free Speech the State is a Corpse.” 

He was subsequently charged with intimidation or attempted intimidation. The single initial charge was later dropped and replaced by two charges of “inform(ing) or attempt(ing) to inform a person concerning issues related to abortion services, by any means, including oral, written or graphic means,” and “perform(ing) or attempt(ing) to perform an act of disapproval concerning issues related to abortion services, by any means.”"

Fr. Tony's charges were a witch hunt. I have been with Fr. Tony when he holds that sign--a sign that does not even mention abortion. Charged with 'intimidation or attempted intimidation' is a joke. Fr. Tony is the least intimidating person I have ever met. He surely did not 'inform anyone concerning issues relating to abortion'. How could he? He never speaks to anyone about abortion when he sits there quietly holding his sign, and his sign said nothing about abortion.

In fact, if a person of the pro-choice variety, with purple hair and a ring through their nose and carrying the same sign, they would never have been arrested. Fr. Tony was arrested because he was a Catholic priest protesting the freedom of speech that this law violates. Everyone knows Fr. Tony is pro-life, so that just ticked off another of the check boxes that makes him a perfect a scapegoat for this Charter violation law that only targets pro-life people most of whom are Catholics or Evangelical Christians.

Fr. Tony's Charter Challenge against this discriminatory law goes ahead. Thank God for that.