When politicians make sense

I have come to the realization that most politicians say things that will either make me roll my eyes or cause me to yell at the computer/tv/radio when I hear them speak. This is especially true of one politician who shall remain nameless.

Of course there are some exceptions to this general principle I will call the trustworthy index of politicians, but the exception I am talking about today is MP Leslyn Lewis. 

I receive her emails every day. Even though I don't read them all (I've already decided I am voting for her), my husband does read them. He is forever telling me how thoughtful these emails are. That they make a whole lot of sense. They do. As far as I can make out, Dr. Lewis is very unlike other politicians. 

You can read yesterday's email here: It is about Faith and science. I've included Dr. Lewis's whole statement below. If you don't read the whole thing, please read the highlighted parts. 

This statement does not make me roll my eyes. It does not make me yell at my computer. It speaks the truth. From a politician. What a concept.

"Are you a person of faith?

Or are you a person of science?

Or maybe like me, you feel like those words don’t mean what they used to anymore.

Faith has been popularly defined as “the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen.” This definition which is based on faith and a belief in God, has now been adopted by governments to get people to buy into policies.

In some cases when we are confronted with catastrophes, plagues or even a pandemic, we have to put our trust in a solution that may not have been fully tested or explained  — that’s faith.

Faith has often been confused with science. I am a social scientist, and stay away from making pronouncements in the area of natural science. But it isn’t hard to recognize that natural science has turned to beliefs that are also based on faith.

Claims like “trust the science” are actually displays of faith rather than confidence in the scientific method. The scientific method requires a hypothesis and rigorous testing. Science is not trusted, it is tested.

The past two years have been frustrating for those among us who like to ask questions in order to have a better understanding about what is going on around them. Questions were mocked, ridiculed, demonized and people were out-right silenced for asking simple questions about COVID or even vaccines. In my training as a lawyer whenever I encountered an aggressive, bullying person my instincts told me they were hiding something. Coercion always put me on alert that something wasn’t right.

At the beginning of the pandemic, we were all happy to “get vaccinated” in order to protect our neighbours, grandparents, and the vulnerable in society. Any scientist who spoke the truth that the COVID vaccine is a tool to reduce hospital burden by minimizing the symptoms - but it would not completely prevent contracting or spreading COVID - was vilified, de-platformed and ostracized as a dangerous  conspiracy theorist.

Canadians turned against their family members refusing to see them by falsely believing that vaccinated people were immune from getting COVID. Friends and coworkers yelled at colleagues to “GET VACCINATED”.  People threw down one of the major tenets of our medical system – privacy, and started divulging their vaccination status, even peer pressured into posting pictures of themselves getting vaccinated on social media. When you met someone for the first time, they often told you their vaccination status before they told you their name. And people like me were punished for insisting that we can be safe without violating the foundations of our democracy including the right to medical privacy and free and informed consent.

I accepted my punishment by not receiving a critic/shadow cabinet position even though all I had to do was simply disclose my vaccination status. I refused because I believe that my principles were worth more to me than any position. And as I watched the illogical madness around me, I refused to be dragged into a system headed for segregation and erosion of our fundamental values. I said “I will stand for my convictions — cost it what it may!"

The past few years have been based on faith, not in any deity, but in government. So many people never questioning information presented by both elected and unelected officials.

Government has seen how well this blind allegiance to faith works with policy. Now we must ask ourselves whether we will remain silent while our government:

• implements environmental policies that have little or no connection with reducing emissions;
• enters into international agreements that diminish our sovereignty, reduce farming capacity, and curtail the development of our natural resources; or
• implements health and vaccine passes that could easily be programmed to integrate with other aspects of our lives and encroach on things that we once thought personal. 

We need to end this style of government where politicians demand absolute trust and blind faith to their policies - while they demonize those who ask questions. We need to wake up and recognize that every time a politician labels something a conspiracy theory it’s often to avoid answering your question; and unfortunately, it’s often to hide the fact that they are outright lying to you!

It’s time we had politicians who showed a little faith in the people they are supposed to serve, and that requires that we end this era of intellectual darkness and blind faith and allegiance to the politicians and bureaucrats who underestimate our intelligence."

Catholic clergy's duty to speak out about abortion

Fr. John Lankeit SS Simon and St Jude Cathedral in Phoenix Diocese speaks out on abortion.

Fr. Lankeit does not mince any words in his delivery of this sermon on abortion.

He speaks about the obligation of priests, bishops and lay Catholics in their duty to protect the unborn.

"...A priest is bound by the fifth commandment, "Thou Shalt not Kill", if a priest doesn't speak up for the most vulnerable in society, and if the Catholic faithful in society do not actively protect the most vulnerable in our society to refusing to enable their deliberate destruction by their vote, then such Catholics, the priests and the laity, are condoning their killing by their cowardice..."

FR. Lankeit's message is a must hear for all Catholics, all clergy, and also for Catholic politicians who support abortion.

Justin Trudeau is a true politician

It didn't take Justin Trudeau long.

He's never responded to anything I've ever sent him. Not even a form letter response. Nothing. But this apparently isn't how he started out in politics.

In his 2014 memoir Common Ground, he's all ga-ga over himself and how awesome he was when he responded to a blogger with a "lengthy personal" reply:

"As the meeting date approached, I grew increasingly optimistic. At the end of April, I started to win over some critics, largely because they recognized the sheer doggedness with which I worked the riding. I also believe I had better insight than my competitors into the changing nature of politics and media. When a local blogger asked each candidate a series of questions about poverty, identity politics, immigration, and other issues, I responded with lengthy, personal replies that drew on my experiences in the riding. The other candidates chose not to respond to him at all, presumably assuming that few voters bother to read political  blogs. But even in 2007, I knew that the Internet was becoming a critical tool for expanding a political party's outreach, especially to younger supporters. 

To my delight the blogger, who had been telling his readers I was destined for failure, gave me a respectful nod on his website for taking the time to answer his questions. This was a small thing—I doubt that it swayed more than a handful of votes—but it reinforced my belief that today's activists and supporters expect and deserve direct engagement through the digital media."

As a Canadian taxpayer, I have this funny habit of writing letters to elected politicians about issues that concern me. Rarely do I get a personal response from them--if I get a response at all. (It did happen once with Stockwell Day and I was shocked.)

Even my letter with 397 signatures on it to Mr. Trudeau wasn't worthy of a response from him.

Justin Trudeau has simply morphed into a true politician. He thinks he's beyond the civil niceties of respecting people who write him. Respect is for wimps I guess.

Am I expecting too much in asking for a real answer to a real question of the men and women who run our country, on our behalf? I don't think so.

When politicians are pro-me

Christian Heritage Party (CHP):

"Canada's cultural and legal heritage are rooted in the Christian worldview which has provided freedom of speech and religion for all people. Increasingly, our governments have violated the 'separation of church and state', infringing on these guaranteed Charter rights. The Christian Heritage Party of Canada will protect Canadians' Charter rights and properly respect the separation of church and state." 

You know, I'm pretty disillusioned with politicians. Not too many of them will stand up for the unborn. Many of them, while saying they are pro-life, do nothing to show they are. In my books, that means you aren't pro-life, you're pro-me.

Yesterday I heard a story about a politician who lied. Bold faced lies. It made me realize that a lot of these people really only care about getting into power. How pathetic.

In Ontario politics, I can't even get a single politician to care about access to information on abortion services. Not one. How cowardly is that?

Last week I met with the leader of the Christian Heritage Party (CHP), Rod Taylor. What a breath of fresh air. Not only will he stand up for the unborn, but he also cares about smaller government AND freedom of Religion for all people. What a concept.

See Brian Lilley interviews with Rod here.

Maybe it's time to ditch the pro-me's and vote CHP.

Why we do what we do

I am continually surprised at the lack of publicly pro-life politicians in this country. Federally there are some, and they are very brave indeed. This posting is not about them. It's about the rest.

In Ontario, I can't even think of one publicly pro-life politician. Maybe there is one. I just wish he or she would make themselves known.

Why is that? Is it because they're scared of being demonized by the pro-abortions? Is is because they are cowards? Is it because they just don't care? Or is it all of the above?

Abortion--it's discussion in any kind of public way; the increasing lack of availability of obtaining accurate abortion statistics; the inability to get a politician to answer questions on the subject; what is all that?

The subject is going underground. It is verboten.

We used to be able to depend on Statistics Canada to provide us with accurate data. But when the quality of those statistics started deteriorating because of non-disclosure by the provinces, Statistics Canada didn't want their name attached to such inaccurate numbers. Now CIHI's numbers are inaccurate and under reported. It isn't very helpful to have numbers that paint only a partial picture of what is going on in Canada with abortion. Accurate statistics should be legislated. Why aren't they?

Federal Access to Information requests increasingly yield "cabinet confidences" and "solicitor-client privilege" excuses at an alarming rate. And information commissioners are toothless to to anything.

Ontario freedom of information requests aren't even allowed anymore. The Ontario Conservatives--who one would hope would keep the Liberals in check--did nothing to stop this from happening. These Conservatives seem to have a don't-talk-about-abortion-ever policy. They're whipped by the Government in power--a mean feat if there ever was one.

All the while children continue to be killed

Those of us who are marginalized because of our pro-life views keep on doing what we can to change the tide. It sometimes feels like we will never make any headway.

Looking over the past year though, I notice a common hopeful thread in all the people who I know who are pro-life. They are committed to the plight of the unborn. Really committed. They are driven. They don't give up and they don't give in. They speak up. Continually. They educate women. They support women in crisis pregnancies. They pray in front of abortion clinics. They write letters to the editor and op-eds for newspapers. They push for legal protection and advise politicians who will listen. They legally challenge the government, sometimes for no pay.

They do what they can, and they never stop doing it. They do it for the children. They inspire me to keep going. They are my super-heroes.

Happy New Year and God bless every one of us.

Ireland's abortion debate teaching moment for Canadian politicians and doctors

(This appeared in the July/August 2013 issue of LifeCanada Journal)

It is very important that doctors and politicians speak out in defense of pre-born citizens. These professionals are uniquely able to do something the rest of us cannot do: save lives and enact laws. Both hold a lot of sway.

Unfortunately, I think many of them have given up the pro-life fight. I am hopeful though, that Ireland's recent abortion debate will spur them on again.

Up until recently, Ireland had been abortion free. Now the Irish government is changing this with its Protection of Life during Pregnancy Bill. This bill allows abortions in cases where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of a pregnant woman including suicide.

Following the ensuing abortion debate while visiting Ireland, I witnessed both politicians and doctors provide a strong and principled offensive against the bill. The doctors were especially vocal.

The reason for the bill was "an attempt to legislate for a 1992 Supreme Court judgement, known as “the X Case,” that interpreted the 1983 pro-life constitutional amendment as allowing abortion where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of a woman...the bill allows for abortion in cases of threatened suicide if, in the “reasonable opinion” of two psychiatrists and one obstetrician, the threat of suicide can only be avoided by the destruction of unborn life." (1)

The ruling Fine Gael party had promised in the 2011 election not to introduce legislation to legalize abortion. This bill accomplished what the ruling party said they would not do.

One brave Teachta Dála (2) and Minister, Lucinda Creighton, was vocal in her defense of the unborn. She gave a powerful speech in the Irish Parliament highlighting the fact that in Ireland unborn children have full human rights: "I am entirely perplexed as to why the right to legal representation for the unborn is excluded from this legislation. It is the minimum protection required to be afforded to unborn children. It is important to remember, at every step of this legislative process, that the unborn child is a human being, a person and has full rights as such under our Constitution. This means that as a “constitutional person” an unborn baby has the exact same right to life as any other living “constitutional person”.

Creighton called what she was witnessing "groupthink": "If you do not succumb to the accepted view that abortion  is a "liberal issue", a "women's right issue", a cornerstone of the "progressive agenda", then you are deemed to be a backward, illiberal, Neanderthal fundamentalist who belongs to another era. The distinct irony of this prevailing view, is that it is so illiberal its intolerance of any other outlook." (3)

Standing behind her principles, she voted against the bill. For this, she was fired.

Four other Fine Gael members were also expelled for voting against the bill.

Another Fine Gael member also had reservations about the bill, but voted for it. Michelle Mulherin said: "I am now faced with either supporting the bill, or being booted out of the party, my party, and I am not going to allow myself to be booted out, so I am supporting the legislation." (3) At least, she gets points for honesty.

Five politicians were expelled from Parliament for voting against a bill that would introduce abortion into Ireland.

Remember what happened when our own MP Rona Ambrose voted against Canada's "groupthink", when she voted in favour of Stephen Woodworth’s Motion 312? She was demonized by “abortion activists”.

MPs know when they defend the unborn they will be marginalized, scorned and ridiculed, not only by  "pro-choice" activists, but also by their own peers in Parliament. No wonder they shut up.

At the Irish health committee hearings, numerous perinatal psychiatrists were against the suicide clause. Three of them said that they had never seen a single case of suicidal intent during pregnancy. (4)

John Sheehan, a top perinatal psychiatrist said: "In practice, it would be impossible for any psychiatrist to accurately predict who will die. So it could lead to multiple false negatives."

Dr. Sean O'Domhnaill said: "The legislation would turn doctors into abortionists. Abortion has no role in modern medicine. Termination is a medieval response to crisis pregnancies."

Dr. Jacqueline Montwill said "The appropriate treatment for any suicidal patient is to ensure their safety either at home or at hospital, to offer psychological support and counseling and psychotropic medication."

Many Irish doctors also wrote letters to the editor. There were letters on both sides of the debate, but it was the pro-life doctors who wrote most convincingly against the bill.

One letter was signed by 56 Irish doctors. All of them had grave concerns about the suicide clause: "Many of us have practised in jurisdictions where such legislation was the first step towards what has become abortion on demand." They said there was no evidence in the "psychiatrist evidence heard by the Supreme Court in 1992" and in the "statements of the psychiatrists called before the Oireachtas Health Committee hearings in 2012" that supported the suicide clause. (This quote and the following quotes are all from letters to the editor as reported by the Irish Times - 5)

Another letter stated: "Recently more that 100 psychiatrists signed a statement saying that legislation, which would allow abortion for threat of suicide, has no basis in medical evidence."

Dr. Sam Coulter stated that the suicide clause "posed major ethical dilemmas for obstetricians and could lead to an increase in women seeking terminations."

Dr. Ruth Foley said: "If the Bill is passed, and some doctors authorize terminations for women whose risk of suicide could have been managed by other treatments, how would anyone know about it? How would these doctors be held to account? If politicians have no satisfactory answer to this question, then passing this Bill in its present form including suicide is an irresponsible and reckless act."

There were some doctors who weren't against the change. But the most they could say in its defense were arguments like Dr. Holohan, who said : "We simply cannot say that the circumstances of a real and substantial risk to a woman's life could never occur as a consequence of suicidal ideation."

I think Canadian doctors and politicians can learn from the example and tenacity of these Irish doctors and politicians. They need to speak up more often, and more loudly.

Yes they will be marginalized, scorned and ridiculed by the strong and vocal pro-abortion lobby, as well as by their peers. My hope is that they will speak up anyway. The rest of us are not giving up the fight. Why should they?

1) http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/how-ireland-traveled-from-a-pro-life-ethos-to-legalized-abortion
2) TD stands for Teachta Dála, and is a member of Dáil Éireann, the lower house of the Oireachtas, the Irish Parliament
3) http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/down_with_stifling_groupthink_says_irish_minister
4) http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/psychiatrists-are-being-asked-to-be-judges-in-assessing-suicide-risk-abortion-hearings-told-1.1400638
5) Letters to the Editor in the Irish Times