Showing posts with label pro-choice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pro-choice. Show all posts

Monday, October 21, 2019

Child in the womb cries "My Body My Choice"

Dear Premier Doug Ford (doug.ford@pc.ola.org) and Attorney General Doug Downey (doug.downeyco@pc.ola.org),

Please watch this short video where Fr. Mark Goring speaks at the midpoint rally of the 40 days for Life rally in Ottawa yesterday.

Please notice that all the pro-life people are outside the abortion bubble zone while the "pro-choice" people are inside the abortion bubble zone.

Can you please explain to me why pro-life citizens are restricted in where they pray, while "pro-choice" citizens are not restricted where they pray...sorry, I mean where they protest?

After all, pro-life citizens pay taxes too. Shouldn't we all have the same rights as "pro-choice" citizens?

I look forward to hearing back from you soon.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Patricia Maloney 

Thursday, April 25, 2019

Misleading, incorrect, absurd, perverse and galling

Ottawa councillors Jeff Leiper and Catherine McKenney want bus ads removed from Ottawa buses.


No surprise there. "Pro-choice" people hop on this band wagon all the time. They like to march to the drum beat of pro-abortion Joyce Arthur (her description not mine) who has a perpetual campaign to discredit anything and everything that is pro-life.



Listen here to Jeff Lieper on CFRA, who tells us the reason he wants the ads removed. It's supposedly because the phone number on the help line in the ad, doesn't actually belong to Action Life. Duh. Action Life isn't a crisis pregnancy centre. If they used their own number, that would be misleading. Because as an educational group Action Life is not qualified to help women in crisis pregnancy situations, whereas crisis pregnancy centres are qualified.

(Read Action Life Ottawa's full statement on these bus ads here.)

Lieper sounds fairly reasonable when he discusses his position, even though I don't agree with it.

1) But wait a minute. Lieper isn't actually complaining about the phone number. No No No. Lieper, and a few other councillors, don't like pro-life anything. This becomes immediately apparent when you read his written statement.

It sounds like something pro-abortion Joyce Arthur could write on the subject, and heaven knows the woman has written a lot on the subject

2) In their statement the councillors go full monty into pro-abortion nonsense land.
"A woman’s right to choose to access health services in order to terminate a pregnancy is well-enshrined in law"
There is no Charter "right to choose" abortion in Canada. This misinformation is declared three times in the statement.

3) They use the word "anti-choice" seven times in their statement. We are not anti-choice. We are "pro-life". Maybe we should start calling the "pro-choice" lobby "anti-life"?

4) This:
"In May 2016, Vancouver researchers with a pro-choice coalition studied the purported counselling services offered by anti-choice groups and found that their tactics were misleading and often based on medically incorrect information. A 2010 Toronto Star investigation found many of the same issues. For example, it’s common for anti-choice groups to assert a link between abortion and breast cancer (“resources” related to which are available from Action Life’s website). As most Canadians will recognize, such claims are absurd and have been well-debunked by the medical establishment."
Not "misleading" or "incorrect" or "absurd" or "de-bunked" at all. Please read articles below for a full rebuttal to Joyce Arthur and her Abortion Rights Coalition 2016 report where her unproven allegations are dismantled piece by piece.

And they call us "perverse" and our ads "galling". Oh wow.

5) Final point. What is this mild mannered, fairly measured single concern about the accuracy of a phone number--that suddenly morphs into a full throttled manifesto against pro-life advocates and their freedom of speech rights? What exactly is Lieper and Mckenny's hidden agenda anyway?

What it's not about, is the telephone number.

--------------------------------

Rebuttal to Joyce Arthur's report on Crisis Pregnancy Centres
Friday, May 7, 2017 (Post1)
Summary and introduction

Saturday May 8, 2017 (Post 2)
THE CRUX OF THE MATTER
I. Abortion Procedures and Risks

Sunday May 7, 2017 (Post 3)
II Other Erroneous Allegations
Part 1 - Birthright and CAPSS
Part 2 - British Columbia Humanist Association
Part 3 – CAPSS rebuttal to Joyce Arthur’s 2009 report Exposing Crisis Pregnancy Centres in BC

Monday May 8, 2017 (Post 4)
Part 4 – Do CPCs pretend they are medical clinics as Arthur states? 
And Part 5 - The Christian "problem"

Tuesday May 9, 2017 (Post 5)
Part 6 – Training and Part 7 – General nonsense

Wednesday May 10, 2017 (Post 6)
Part 8 – Arthur’s “high and low” reports
Part 9 - Exposing Crisis Pregnancy Centres in BC
CONCLUSION

Action Life Ottawa's statement on pro-life bus ads in Ottawa

Action Life Ottawa is an educational pro-life organization founded in 1971. We have never presented ourselves as a pregnancy support centre. For this very reason, we do not direct individuals who need pregnancy support to our office number – instead we direct them to a number that can address those needs.  The helpline number shown in our advertisement is one that we have used for many years in various materials and advertisements. This national helpline number originates from the Crisis Pregnancy Centre of Winnipeg and is answered 24 hours a day.

Action Life wants to inform women that pregnancy support exists in Canada. We believe that women have a right to this information. And we direct them where to find it.

Our website provides a listing of local help agencies as well as the national helpline number.

Our advertisement is neither misleading nor inaccurate.  It does not contravene any law or advertising standards. Help is available at the number shown in our advertisement.

We have used this helpline number in three previous OC Transpo bus campaigns beginning in 2016. The first campaign drew some media attention including Evan Solomon’s program.

The same helpline number was listed on a sidewalk kiosk advertisement on Bank street from 1994 to 2007 for a full twelve months of every year. 

Any woman who feels vulnerable under any circumstance should know there is help available. Members of city council should support the right of all women to have access to every support system available to them.

So members of city council should fully support the right of women to have access to this helpline number rather than attempting to have our advertisements removed from OC Transpo buses.

Louise Harbour
Executive Director
Action Life Ottawa

Sunday, April 14, 2019

Abortion doctor in Unplanned

I knew that I had recognized the abortion doctor in the movie Unplanned. So I looked up the cast, found his name and googled him. Lo and behold he is the ex-abortion doctor Dr. Anthony Levatino.

Here Dr. Levatino testifies about what a second trimester abortion looks like. It's pretty gruesome stuff. Of course this horrifying description or tearing a baby apart in utero is part and parcel of a "woman's right to choose". 

This is what the pro-abortions fight tooth and nail to protect. To celebrate. To cheer. To honour. This is what "pro-choice" means.


Dr. Anthony Levatino Destroys Abortion in 2 Minutes from TFP Student Action on Vimeo. 

Wednesday, November 7, 2018

How the abortion bubble zone creates two classes of people

One of the inconsistencies of the Bill to Create Safe Access to Abortion Services is that if you're pro-life, you can't carry a sign inside the bubble zone. But if you're "pro-choice", you can carry a sign. See here and here.

And this week, once again, we see this discrimination in action:
"We had some protesters at the 40 Days for Life mid-point rally. They were inside the bubble zone with their usual signs. I asked the Ottawa police if they (so called pro-choicers) are allowed signs within the bubble zone and I was told that they are."
In other words, we only apply freedom of expression rights to people, if they are "pro-choice". 

Saturday, February 10, 2018

Government harasses, bullies and discriminates against pro-life people

Read this email trail from the bottom up.

Here is the $64,000 question we must ask ourselves. Why is it that the government of Ontario
"does not tolerate any form of harassment against women exercising their fundamental right to choose"
but it is fine and dandy for the government of Ontario (and of course the federal government) to continually and relentlessly harass and bully and discriminate against pro-life people?

Why is that? Can someone please, please, please explain this to me?


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Patricia Maloney 
Date: Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: FW: Person arrested with sign about Freedom of Expression and Religion
To: "Yasir Naqvi, MPP (Constituency Office)"
Cc: "Nathalie Des Rosiers, MPP (Constituency Office)" , Patricia Maloney


Dear Yasir Naqvi,

A freedom of Information request of the city of Ottawa revealed that there have been no charges and no arrests of pro-life people at the Ottawa abortion site:

So can you please explain to me why the Ontario government is harassing pro-life people with this law? Harass is a strong word, but that is what is happening here. We have done nothing wrong but the government penalizes us by stomping on our freedom of expression, rights, freedom of conscience rights and freedom of religion rights.

We are taxpayers just like the rest of Ontarians, but we are not treated with the same respect as other Ontarians. If I was pro-choice and stood with the same sign at the same place, with the same sign, I would not be charged. I'm sure you see the blatant discrimination we are experiencing with this law. 

I think we are owed an explanation as to why you are doing this.

Thank you

Sincerely,
Patricia Maloney

On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Yasir Naqvi, MPP (Constituency Office) <ynaqvi.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org> wrote:
Dear Patricia,

Thank you for writing the Constituency Office of Yasir Naqvi, MPP for Ottawa Centre.  Our government does not tolerate any form of harassment against women exercising their fundamental right to choose.  All women across Ontario should have access to safe health care services and our government will continue to defend a woman’s right to make her own healthcare decisions and to feel safe while doing so.

We appreciate the time you have taken to email MPP Naqvi, however, It is not within the purview of the MPP’s office to respond to questions related to the Ottawa Police Service.  Should you wish to gain more information about any police file, I would suggest contacting the Ottawa Police directly at 613-236-1222.  I did notice in the article you attach that “police did not specify which sections of the act were allegedly broken”.

Should we wish to learn more about Bill 163, Protecting a Woman's Right to Access Abortion Services Act, 2017, I would be happy to direct any specific questions you have to the Ministry of the Attorney General.

Thank you,

Jessica Dawson | Constituency Assistant |
Office of Yasir Naqvi, MPP Ottawa Centre


If you require communication supports or alternate formats to make this email more accessible, please let me know.



From: Patricia Maloney [mailto:maloneyp64@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 5:54 PM
To: Naqvi, Yasir MPP
Cc: Des Rosiers, Nathalie MPP CO; Patricia Maloney
Subject: Fwd: Person arrested with sign about Freedom of Expression and Religion

Dear Yasir Naqvi,

A person was arrested in Ottawa this week because he was holding a sign that said: 

"Freedom of Expression and Religion, No Censorship. Above those words was a copy of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and a large crucifix."

I thought the new abortion bubble zone law was for people protesting against abortion. His sign said nothing about abortion. So why was he arrested? 


Thank you.

Sincerely,
Patricia Maloney

Thursday, October 12, 2017

Is Jagmeet Singh pro-life or pro-choice?

By all accounts the NDP's new leader Jagmeet Singh is a practicing Sikh: here, here and here.

And Sikhism is pretty much against abortion except in a couple of circumstances:
"While Sikhism denounces abortion, allowance in circumstances such as when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have serious defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. In all other cases such as unfit parents, rape, failed contraceptive, social and economic factors abortion is wrong. Those who are unable to raise a child because of number of different reason; adoption is a wonderful alternative that should be considered."
Sikhism is also against female gendercide through abortion:
"Unfortunately abortion is portrayed as a quick and easy process, however the reality of the operation is not covered. Abortion is not a benign procedure. It is the violent and unnatural destruction of a living human being. It not only harms the baby but psychologically impacts the mother.
It is common in Indian culture, to prefer the birth of boys over girls. As a result of this, families put pressure on women to abort females in pursuit of having boys. This is a great epidemic in particularly amongst the Panjabi community in India, however it is also practiced by people living abroad who will sometimes go back to India to have a sex scan if they are refused one in UK."
So. How does Jagmeet Singh reconcile these Sikh values with the NDP party's being officially "pro-choice"?

Monday, June 26, 2017

Stephanie Gray speaks to Google about abortion

Stephanie Gray hits the ball out of the park. Again.



She speaks about abortion to Google employees. Over 41,000 views.

If you are pro-life. Or if you are pro-choice. Please watch it.

Thank you Google.

Wednesday, January 4, 2017

Stop Censorship Tour begins in Ottawa Jan 7, 2017

It doesn't matter if you are pro-life or pro-choice. You should be concerned about the Ontario Government's decision to hide all abortion information from Freedom of Information (FOI) requests.

Together with ARPA Canada I am taking the Ontario Government to court, to challenge my freedom of expression rights--rights that were trampled on when the Government secretly changed the law which previously allowed access to all abortion information.

This meant I could no longer request the number and cost of abortions performed in Ontario every year. It is now hidden from the public. This is information about only one tax-payer funded medical procedure--abortion. This government does not hide information about any other medical procedure. Not yet anyway.

This information has been unavailable through FOI requests since 2012 (the last year we have data for is 2010).

This week We Need a Law begins a series of open events to explain our case. The Stop Censorship tour begins this Saturday here in Ottawa from 7:30 to 9:00 at the Ottawa Reformed Presbyterian Church, 466 Woodland Ave, Ottawa.

Other venues in Ontario will take place around the province.

If we want an open, transparent, accountable government; if we want to protect our charter rights; if we want to be able to freely debate and comment on what our government does on our behalf, we have to fight for it. I hope you can attend one of the information sessions.

Tuesday, August 2, 2016

Another student union discriminates against pro-life clubs

University student unions act in a cowardly way when it comes to pro-life clubs on campuses. They are also grossly intolerant of those who don't share their "pro-choice" opinions. They are also discriminatory. Not very nice adjectives for young people at a place of higher learning.
NEWS RELEASE: Students at Brandon University Sue their Student Union after Club Banned from Campus
Brandon, MB: Pro-life students at Brandon University have filed a lawsuit after having their club status withdrawn by their student union in November without warning. The Brandon University Student Union alleged that the pro-life stance made some students feel “uncomfortable” and “intimidated” them. The union also argued that the club’s beliefs were contrary to the Canadian Federation of Students’ official pro-choice stance, and that the club itself was redundant because other campus groups (the LGBTQ Collective and the Women’s Collective) addressed the issue of abortion.
The club is not unfamiliar with censorship, as this is not the first time they have had to resort to legal aid in order to regain their official club status. “Our student union claims to serve students and support them in their efforts to share their passions and advocate for various causes,” states Catherine Dubois, president of Brandon University Students for Life, “However, over the past 4 years our club has been repeatedly censored and denied these opportunities offered to every other student. We are tired and frustrated with being treated in such a discriminatory manner.”
“It is unacceptable that a student on a university campus should have to resort to a court challenge to ensure they can enjoy the same freedoms as their peers on campus,” states Anastasia Pearse, Executive Director of National Campus Life Network, an organization dedicated to supporting post-secondary pro-life students, “It is disconcerting that campuses in our country are choosing to censor controversial issues rather than allow for open dialogue and debate.”
Currently, four other lawsuits initiated by pro-life student clubs are working their way through courts across the country. This is the highest number of lawsuits regarding campus free speech issues to be filed by pro-life clubs within a one-year period. The other universities include Ryerson University, the University of Toronto Mississauga, the University of Ontario Institute of Technology, and the University of Alberta.
“Abortion is an issue that personally affects women of the university age,” states Pearse, “we believe that women deserve to know everything about this procedure, even if the information makes people feel uncomfortable. Universities should not be afraid to accommodate opposing views on important and even controversial issues. With over 250 abortions occurring every day in Canada, this is a conversation that students ought to be having.”
For further information:
Anastasia Pearse
Executive Director, National Campus Life Network
director@ncln.ca
604-365-3484
Catherine Dubois, Brandon University Students for Life
204-570-1710 or duboiscm52@brandonu.ca
–33–

National Campus Life Network

Friday, June 17, 2016

Abortionist Robert Santella - someone you could trust?

Abortion doctor Robert Santella reminds me of someone.

Watch the first two minutes of the video at the site.

Even if I were pro-choice, and willing to have an abortion, I would be quite distraught to witness the behaviour of this man.

Wednesday, December 30, 2015

How can Justin Trudeau present himself as being Catholic?

From SHEILA GUNN REID at Rebel Media:
"I'm pro-life. I believe that a unique and precious human life exists at conception. 
I say I believe it but what I mean is that I know it to be true, ethically, medically and spiritually. 
"We never really knew how Stephen Harper felt on the subject personally. He never proclaimed anything the way I just did. But as a man of principle, he realized that abortion is a matter of conscience. Stephen Harper understood that for many people, people like me, being pro-life is a matter of our very salvation. Asking us to be pro-choice is like asking us to literally sell our soul. So when the issue of opening up a debate about when life begins arose, Stephen Harper did not whip the vote. How could he ask anyone to put their soul on the line for the party? 
But that’s what Justin Trudeau is doing. He insisted all of his MPs be pro-choice. 
Trudeau made being pro-choice a condition for being given the green light to run as a Liberal party candidate. He really did. I'm not a theologian but I am a lifelong Catholic. 
Trudeau's position is a strange one for a man who presents himself as publicly Catholic and moreover it's totalitarian. How could anyone demand that a person of faith choose the Liberal party over their own moral convictions?"

Thursday, October 22, 2015

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.

Monday, August 3, 2015

Mauril Belanger: will he win in Ottawa-Vanier again?

I wonder how many residents of Ottawa-Vanier know that our current MP Mauril Belanger is pro-choice? I wonder if they realize that his party's leader, Justin Trudeau, has banned pro-life people from being candidates in this riding? Something to think about.

Justin Trudeau: watch this before you decide

The Canadian election was called yesterday. So who to vote for? Well early days, but in case you're thinking of voting for Justin Trudeau, I suggest you watch this video first.

Friday, July 3, 2015

Pro-choice violence - not in Wikipedia

A while ago anonymous blogger said in a comment on my blog, that she was anonymous because she feared pro-lifers. Because we are "scary". Her source was wiki-pedia:
"I'm psedonymous because your lot are fairly scary, BTW. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence"
Since Wikipedia was happy to publish violence attributed to pro-life people, I thought I'd check out their entry for "pro-choice" violence. Quelle surprise. There is no such entry. What was I thinking?

Of course there are a ton of examples of "pro-choice" violence out there. This morning I saw the first one below. A "pro-choice" person punches a pro-life protester, who then falls backwards into a fence hitting his head. The assailant then drives off but not before using the F word a couple of times. In fact this seems to be standard language for these very angry "pro-choice" people.

And anonymous blogger is afraid of us? She should check out her own kind. They are the scary ones.

Below is my own version of Wikipedia "pro-choice" violence. The entry you'll never see in Wikipedia.


In this video "pro-choice" people repeatedly taunt pro-lifers who are peacefully praying. It is quite the spectacle these "pro-choice" people make.


This video has a bicyclist attacking peaceful protesters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOD0MeMxa4I

Here are some naked women taunting and using markers on peaceful pro-life people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgW3SVMPBz8

More here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpM7vOR0RC4

This man uses more profanity than I thought possible.
https://vimeo.com/104897784

A knife-wielding attacker is found guilty of assaulting pro-life woman at Toronto Life Chain.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/knife-wielding-attacker-found-guilty-of-assaulting-pro-life-woman-at-torono

A woman attacks pro-life protesters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8CxUtAKnxk

A pro-life person is shot and killed.
http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2009/09/antiabortion_activist_shot_in.html

Police Had to Form Human Shield Around Pro-Lifers to Protect Them From Abortion Activists
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/01/31/police-had-to-form-human-shield-around-pro-lifers-to-protect-them-from-abortion-activists/

In Columbus Ohio Pro-Choice Woman Attacks Pro Life Protesters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yv9dcYIuZBw

A woman attacks pro-lifers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJPuzKfmt-8

UPDATE July 9, 2015 - More "pro-choice" violence against pro-lifers

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/media-repeatedly-ignores-violent-attacks-against-pro-lifers-but-lots-of-tom/
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pro-abortion-groups-fail-to-condemn-attempted-bombing-of-pro-life-sidewalk
http://www.jillstanek.com/2011/12/planned-parenthood-deathscort-charged-with-assault-and-battery-of-pro-lifer/
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-41-month-sentence-for-man-who-threatened-fr.-pavone-and-pro-life-l
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/australian-pro-aborts-lament-portrayal-in-media-as-violent-during-march-for
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/video-belgian-police-put-a-violent-end-to-a-legal-pro-life-rally-in-brussel
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/two-gun-incidents-threatening-pro-lifers-outside-abortion-clinics-but-only
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pennsylvania-woman-threatened-republican-candidate-for-his-uncompromising-p
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/protester-planned-parenthood-abortionist-threatened-elderly-pro-life-man-wi
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/youre-lucky-i-didnt-have-my-pistol-video-shows-pro-lifers-violently-attacke
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/60-year-old-guardian-angel-put-himself-between-knife-wielding-man-attacking
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/feminist-men-physically-attack-pro-life-women-during-a-womens-rights-rally
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/video-pro-obamacare-activist-attacks-pro-life-volunteers-u.s.-flag
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/69-year-old-pro-life-personhood-petitioner-attacked-suffers-broken-hip
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/personhood-founders-home-attacked-at-night-children-terrorized
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/caught-on-video-man-rips-away-abortion-images-assaults-pro-life-witness
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pro-life-school-bus-firebombed-in-rockford-local-media-ignore-the-incident
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/property-destruction-the-new-free-speech

UPDATE: April 20, 2017
http://www.lifenews.com/2017/04/19/abortion-activist-steals-pro-life-sign-and-hits-priest-with-her-vehicle-as-she-drove-away/

UPDATE January 23, 2020
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/man-who-roundhouse-kicked-pro-life-woman-in-viral-video-gets-8-months-probation
https://thebridgehead.ca/2019/05/02/canadian-abortion-activist-pleads-guilty-to-assaulting-pro-lifers/
https://globalnews.ca/news/4602617/woman-arrested-abortion-protest-ryerson/
https://www.lifenews.com/2017/10/17/topless-feminists-attack-a-catholic-church-to-protest-abortion/
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pro-lifer-files-lawsuit-against-google-employee-for-assault-outside-planned-parenthood

UPDATE February 22, 2020
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pro-lifers-file-lawsuit-against-abortion-activist-after-assault-at-toronto-university

Saturday, June 27, 2015

Pro-life clubs - What are universities afraid of anyway?

Another University pro-life group has been denied club status. This time at Ryerson University:
"In the fall semester we came together to form a student group called Students For Life at Ryerson (SFLR) and applied for club status through the Ryerson Student Union (RSU). In order to be approved and gain club status, we needed a majority vote from Ryerson Student Groups Committee. Unfortunately this did not happen.  Instead we got an email from a student group’s representative stating that we were denied club status because the union  “opposes…groups, meetings, or events that promote misogynist views towards woman [sic] and ideologies that promote gender inequity, challenges women’s right [sic] to bodily autonomy, or justifies [sic] sexual assault”. They provided us no evidence on how our group promoted misogyny or how we justified sexual assault which left us confused and offended. It was never (and never will be) our intention to marginalize, discriminate or judge women and so for our student union to make such allegations against us proves their misunderstanding of our group. After launching an appeal, our group waited a full month before being given the opportunity to appeal the denial of our student club. As a result of our meeting with our student union we were given the opportunity to plead our case for club status one last time in front of our Board of Directors. After an hour long meeting of more scrutinizing questions we were denied club status yet again by a unanimous vote."
What is it about Universities, that they are so offended by pro-life people, that they must be barred from campuses? What are these universities afraid of anyway, the truth?

And what ever happened to free speech on university campuses anyway?
"Legal action requires finances, and as two university students, there is not much we can do to contribute to the financial side of fighting for our rights. We need to raise $20,000 for various legal fees. Although this poses a great challenge, we refuse to let finances hold us back! We are aiming to reach out to pro-life individuals, groups, and communities, as well as individuals who support free speech, to help support us reach our financial goal. 
It is challenging being a pro-life student and advocate, but it is even more challenging when our own student union will not allow us to express our right to free speech because we do not align with the status quo. Please consider donating so that you can help us stand up for our rights but more importantly  the rights of the unborn. 
Click here for more information on donating."

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

Pro-life truths use real photos

It's strange that the pro-abortions think that an abortion can't possibly look like a child. Why is that?

They seem to prefer to think of it as bloody tissue sitting in a flask. I think it must make them feel better, when the child that's been vacuumed to death bears no resemblance to its humanity.

But why then, do they have to call pro-life people liars when we show them an aborted child that looks too human for them?

Do they just need to ease their own consciences?

Friday, May 22, 2015

For pro-abortions' petition - see Charter

Regarding this ridiculous pro-abortion petition, here is what lawyer Carol Crosson had to say to me in an e-mail on this petition:
The TTC, as a government entity, is subject to the Charter, in particular section 2(b), which guarantees the right to freedom of expression. Government transit was found to be subject to the Charter in Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority in 2009, where the Supreme Court ruled that advertising on the sides of buses is protected under the Charter and when transit policies prohibit expression, this prohibition is subject to the Charter. 
The TTC does not have the right to prohibit a pro-life message due to the controversial nature of the message. Freedom of expression included the right to communicate controversial and unpopular messages. The Supreme Court has noted that the purpose of protection for freedom of expression extends to protecting “beliefs which the majority regard as wrong or false”, frequently involving “a contest between the majoritarian view of what is true or right and an unpopular minority view”. The Court has also ruled that section 2(b) protects all non-violent expressive activity, without discrimination based on content, however unpopular, distasteful, or contrary to the mainstream. 
In Wilson v University of Calgary, 2014 ABQB 190, a case about a pro-life display on the campus of the University of Calgary, the Court determined that the pro-life message lies "at the very heart of freedom of expression". 
There are exceptions to the rule that speech should be protected. Speech that threatens violence, public incitement of hatred, genocide as well as obscenity, is prohibited under the Criminal Code. “Hate speech” is not protected in Canada. However, the legal standard for hate speech is very high, as affirmed at the Supreme Court of Canada in Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott, 2013 SCC 11.  These ads in no way violate the Criminal Code or legally qualify as hate speech. 
Other than these few exceptions, the right to share a particular message, despite its disturbing nature, is protected by the Charter. 
So, individuals may fill out petitions because they view these pro-life ads as "scare tactics and christian [sic] propaganda", but Pregnancy Care Centre advertisements posted on City transit buses are protected under the Charter. They cannot be prohibited because some individuals disagree with them, find them distasteful or even controversial.
It is of note that the Canadian Code of Advertising is a mechanism of Advertising Standards Canada, which is a private entity, holding no legal power, and not compelled to adhere to the Charter. The TTC may use the Code as a guide in regulating its advertising. However, If the ad in question is not found in accordance with the Code, the TTC is still compelled to adhere to the Charter, which gives a broad berth to controversial messages.

Carol Crosson 
Barrister and Solicitor
Crosson Constitutional Law

For pro-abortions, the truth is what they say it is

I wrote here about a nasty petition going around, that was trying to get the TTC to remove this ad:


The pro-abortions used this "logic" to defend their petition:
"Pregnancy Care Centers are anti-choice and are known to provide women with false medical information on abortions. They use scare tactics and christian propaganda to influence people's decisions."
This is what Brian Norton of Christian Advocacy Society had to say about the petition:
"Oh no! Due to the politics of abortion, this is another one of those uninformed, misleading petitions being circulated.
   
The faith-based charity where I work has governed, now for 25 years, two pregnancy centres in BC, along with a residential shelter for abused women, and a sexual assault counselling consortium.
   
The issue of concern articulated in this petition is as follows: “Pregnancy Care Centers are anti-choice and are known to provide women with false medical information on abortions.”
   
In fact, pregnancy centres in Canada (to avoid any claim of source material bias) disproportionately refer to prochoice sources and prochoice affirmed epidemiological studies.
   
For example, regarding all physical risk factors (except one controversial risk still being studied), these are directly sourced from abortion clinics across Canada. Space permits noting only a few such abortion clinics: Women’s Health Clinic (Winnipeg), Brampton Women’s Clinic, Clinique Médicale Fémina (Montreal) and Kootenay Boundary Regional Hospital.
   
In addition, the client brochure with abortion medical information (which many or most pregnancy centres have available) has been “reviewed by more than 45 specialized practitioners in Canada, including perinatal nurses, family physicians, obstetricians/gynaecologists, medical ethicists, psychologists and social workers.”
   
Finally, the majority of pregnancy centres in Canada are members of the national best practice association, Canadian Association of Pregnancy Support Services (CAPSS). Any member centre which does not adhere to CAPSS’ stringent ‘Commitment of Care & Competence’ and ‘Code of Counselling Ethics’ will be disaffiliated.
   
For the few of you still reading this comment post …
   
To read about other erroneous allegations on pregnancy centres in Canada, you may wish to google “A Respectful Rebuttal to a Disrespectful Report”.
   
Whether we are “prochoice” or “prolife” or “undecided” on the ethics of abortion, we likely will agree that if a centre is able to offer a client accurate information – with realistic options and solutions to her unique barriers for continuing her pregnancy to term – she becomes more empowered to make an informed decision in accordance with what is most important to her.
   
Brian Norton
www.christianadvocacy.ca"
It's the petition that's saying things that are not true, and not CPCs at all.

I think our take away from this is that the pro-abortions have decided they just don't like crisis pregnancy centres, because they are life affirming. So instead, the pro-abortions have to make stuff up about CPCs.

(Note that as of writing, 14,496 people have thus far actually signed this petition. Do they really have any idea of what they're signing, and that what the petition is saying isn't even true? That...is a scary thought.)