Tell the TTC we love the CPC ads

The pro-abortions are at it again. They have a petition going, to take down a crisis pregnancy care centre ad, on the Toronto Transit Commission's buses:

"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.  In Canada, by law all women are allowed a safe and affordable abortion. 

To be able to make the best decisions for ourselves, we MUST receive accurate information. 

We ask that the Toronto Transit Commision [sic] Advertising Review Working Group see that the ad goes against Canadian views on women's access and health, and to remove the ad."

Their claim above is a fairy tale. In actual fact, CPCs do not provide women with false medical information or use scare tactics.

In case any of those pro-abortions would like to read some actual facts on these centres, I suggest they get their heads out of Alice in Wonderland's book, and read this.

They might learn some actual truths about CPCs, and even though the facts may be very hard for them to grasp, I'm sure if they try real hard they can do it. They just need to try.

I also suggest that we all contact the TTC with our own emails in support of this ad.

Sample letter:

I'm [delighted/pleased/happy] to see advertisements from Pregnancy Care Centres on the TTC. Pregnancy Care Centres are centres known to provide women with complete & accurate information on sexual health and abortions. They are known to use real data as well as actual videos and pictures to influence people`s decisions. Please continue these ads. To read more about the good CPCs do in Canada, please read here: http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/2014/07/why-joyce-arthurs-report-is-harmful-to.html Thank you.

Please make sure you use the TTC compliment form here.

Long winding road to read petition

(or Petitions 101)

On March 12, 2012, I emailed my Member of Parliament Mauril Belanger, and asked him to read a petition with 25 signatures. I was told by his office to send them in, which I did, and by which time I  had 50 signatures.

This was my petition:
"Whereas Canada is the only nation in the Western world and in the company of China and North Korea without any laws restricting abortion; And whereas Canada's Supreme Court has said it is Parliament's responsibility to enact abortion legislation; Therefore, we call upon the House of Commons in Parliament assembled to speedily enact legislation that restricts abortion to the greatest extent possible."

Simple, right? Wrong.

Now remember, I am not allowed to just waltz into the House of Commons any time I please, and stand up there and read my own petition in Parliament. No siree, I can't do that. I must follow the rules, and the rules say that I have to get my MP to do that (1).

I continued to email and call Mr. Belanger's office on a regular basis for the next two months, to ask if he would first of all, read my petition in the House, and second, when would he do it? I never got any absolute confirmation to either of these questions until May 24 when I was told it would be "tabled" in Parliament, but not "read".

Now I wasn't exactly sure what "tabled" meant and how that differed from "read". And this was not the first time Mr. Belanger's office had used this word. I always used the word "read", since that is what I asked my representative in Parliament to do for me: to "read" my petition. So I needed to do a bit of research.

There are two ways to "present" a petition. One is done orally by an MP (tabled and read in the House and written up in the Debates (Hansard) and Journal), and the other is to file it with the Clerk of the Petitions (tabled only and written up in the Journal only) (2). In both cases, the government responds officially to the MP. (3)

I thought about this and decided that no, if I couldn’t have my petition actually read orally in the House, and written up in the Debates, then I didn't want it just "tabled" (i.e. filed with the Clerk of the Petitions only). I wanted my petition back.

So on May 25 I called again and spoke with Mr. Belanger.

It was quite the interesting conversation.

I asked Mr. Belanger if he was going to read my petition. He said no. I said, okay, then I want it back unless you are going to read it. He said I will not read it and it has already been certified. I said I don't care what's happened to it, it's my petition and unless you are going to read it in the House I want it back. He said no. I asked him why he refused to read it. He said that it was his choice to read it, or not to read it. I am not kidding. I asked him if he was always rude to his constituents. He said he wasn't being rude. I said I want my petition back. He said no. I said I want my petition back. He hung up on me.

So I made a few phone calls...

And then, miracle of miracles, last Thursday I received another email from Mr. Belanger's office. This is what it said:
"Enclosed you will find the electronic link to the Hansard of yesterday. My colleague Sean Casey, Liberal M.P. for Charlottetown, presented the petition you had sent to my office, as per your wish that it be read into the record as opposed to being tabled."

Please refer to page 8574:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/House/411/Debates/130/HAN130-E.PDF

Halleluiah! My Petition had been read. In the House of Commons. By an MP. Which is all I ever wanted.

And here is what was said in the House of Commons, and is now in the Debates (Hansard) record:
"Mr. Sean Casey (Charlottetown, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I have two petitions to present today, each of which may sound a bit familiar given the petitions that have already been presented today. The first one is on behalf of residents of the greater Ottawa area, including Gloucester, Nepean and Orléans. The petitioners point out that Canada is the only nation in the western world, in the company of China and North Korea,without any laws restricting abortion. They call upon the House of Commons to speedily enact legislation that would restrict abortion to the greatest extent possible. "

Persistence paid off.

(1) Presentation of Petitions
http://www.parl.gc.ca/MarleauMontpetit/DocumentViewer.aspx?Sec=Ch22&Seq=4&Language=E
"As outsiders are not permitted to address the House directly, petitions are presented by Members. Therefore, groups and individuals with petitions for the House must enlist the aid of Members to have their petitions certified and presented. Members are not bound to present petitions and cannot be compelled to do so; [53]  nevertheless, it is evident that many Members consider it a duty to present to the House petitions brought forward by citizens. [54]  The Member, whose role it is to make the presentation on behalf of the petitioners, is not required to be in agreement with the content of any petition he or she may choose to present, and no such inference is to be drawn. [55] 

(2) "Certified petitions may be presented in two ways: orally during Routine Proceedings, [62]  or by filing them with the Clerk of the House during any sitting of the House. [63]  In practice, the majority of petitions are presented during Routine Proceedings"

(eg. Statistics compiled by the Clerk of Petitions indicate that 2107 of 2361 petitions presented in the Second Session of the Thirty-Fifth Parliament (1996-97) were presented orally during Routine Proceedings)

"When petitions are presented during Routine Proceedings, the Members’ remarks are recorded, transcribed and printed in the Debates for that day. An entry is also made in the Journals, the official record of House proceedings. The petitions are listed as having been certified correct and presented pursuant to the Standing Orders. Petitions filed with the Clerk are of course not mentioned in the Debates, but they are listed in the Journals. Certified petitions once presented to the House (by either method) are then delivered to the Clerk of Petitions who is responsible for their reception and processing."

(3) Government Responses to Petitions  http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/House/PracticalGuides/Petitions/petitionsPG2008__Pg04-e.htm

Abortion petitions include 3,816 names

Further to my good news story about abortion related petitions being read in Parliament, I have learned the actual number of names on the petitions, and the MPs who read them.

I don't know, but I think we really need to continue doing this across the country. We need to continue gathering signatures and telling our politicians that we want protection for unborn children.

Here again are the links ARPA has on their website for the first two petitions below, here and here, for you to print and get more signatures.

We can't stop doing this.

Petitions Regarding Abortion

Presented in the House of Commons during the 1^st session of the 41^st Parliament

#1:

"Whereas Canada is the only nation in the Western world and in the company of China and North Korea without any laws restricting abortion;

And whereas Canada's Supreme Court has said it is Parliament's responsibility to enact abortion legislation;

Therefore, we call upon the House of Commons in Parliament assembled to speedily enact legislation that restricts abortion to the greatest extent possible."

INQUIRY	Member of Parliament who presented the petition (riding of the MP)	DATE*	NUMBER OF SIGNATORIES
411-0374	Mr. Cannan (Kelowna-Lake Country)	Feb 1, 2012	138
411-0416	Mr. Rafferty (Thunder Bay-Rainy River)	Feb 7, 2012	139
411-0422	Mr. Hillyer (Lethbridge)	Feb 8, 2012	99
411-0455	Mr. Allison (Niagara West-Glanbrook)	Feb 13, 2012	113
411-0457	Ms. Charlton (Hamilton Mountain)	Feb 13, 2012	25
411-0484	Mr. VanKesteren (Chatham-Kent-Essex)	Feb 15, 2012	139
411-0493	Ms. Shipley (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex)	Feb 15, 2012	25
411-0494	Ms. Shipley (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex)	Feb 15, 2012	70
411-0495	Ms. Shipley (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex)	Feb 15, 2012	66
411-0496	Ms. Shipley (Lambton-Kent-Middlesex)	Feb 15, 2012	50
411-0539	Mr. Chong (Wellington-Halton Hills)	Feb 29, 2012	47
411-0540	Mr. Chong (Wellington-Halton Hills)	Feb 29, 2012	220
411-0543	Mr. Tilson (Dufferin-Caledon)	Feb 29, 2012	25
411-0553	Mr. Komarkicki (Souris-Moose Mountain)	Mar 1, 2012	75
411-0563	Mr. Warawa (Langley)	Mar 1, 2012	25
411-0575	Mr. Sweet (Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale)	Mar 2, 2012	194
411-0576	Mr. Rajotte (Edmonton-Leduc)	Mar 2, 2012	35
411-0587	Mr. Warawa (Langley)	Mar 5, 2012	41
411-0636	Mr. Tweed (Brandon-Souris)	Mar 12, 2012	89
411-0647	Mr. Merrifield (Yellowhead)	Mar 12, 2012	25
411-0648	Mr. Merrifield (Yellowhead)	Mar 12, 2012	85
411-0649	Mr. Merrifield (Yellowhead)	Mar 12, 2012	56
411-0650	Mr. Merrifield (Yellowhead)	Mar 12, 2012	64
411-0655	Mr. Mayes (Okanagan-Shuswap)	Mar 12, 2012	130
411-0656	Mr. Mayes (Okanagan-Shuswap)	Mar 12, 2012	44
411-0657	Mr. Mayes (Okanagan-Shuswap)	Mar 12, 2012	80
411-0673	Ms. Hoeppner (Portage-Lisgar)	Mar 14, 2012	99
411-0674	Ms. Hoeppner (Portage-Lisgar)	Mar 14, 2012	102
411-0686	Mr. McColeman (Brant)	Mar 14, 2012	79
411-0687	Mr. McColeman (Brant)	Mar 14, 2012	25
411-0688	Mr. McColeman (Brant)	Mar 14, 2012	25
411-0689	Mr. McColeman (Brant)	Mar 14, 2012	42
411-0690	Mr. McColeman (Brant)	Mar 14, 2012	25
411-0703	Mr. Hillyer (Lethbridge)	Mar 15, 2012	116
411-0711	Mr. Sopuck (Dauphin-Swan River-Marquette)	Mar 16, 2012	30
411-0729	Mr. Lunney (Nanaimo-Alberni)	Mar 26, 2012	40
411-0742	Mr. Cannan (Kelowna-Lake Country)	Mar 27, 2012	75
411-0769	Mr. Wallace (Burlington)	Mar 29, 2012	143
411-0777	Mr. Schellenberger (Perth-Wellington)	Mar 30, 2012	27
411-0829	Mr. Braid (Kitchener Waterloo)	Apr 5, 2012	50
411-0831	Mr. Strahl (Chilliwack-Fraser Canyon)	Apr 5, 2012	92
411-0832	Mr. Strahl (Chilliwack-Fraser Canyon)	Apr 5, 2012	29
TOTAL SIGNATURES			3,098

* Date the petition was presented in the House of Commons.

#2:

"Whereas Canada’s 400 year old definition of a human being says a child does not become a human being until the moment of complete birth, contrary to twenty-first century medical evidence;

And whereas Parliament has a solemn duty to reject any law that says some human beings are not human;

Therefore, we call upon the House of Commons in Parliament assembled to confirm that every human being is recognized by Canadian law as human by amending Section 223 of our Criminal Code in such a way as to reflect twenty-first century medical evidence."

INQUIRY	Member of Parliament who presented the petition (riding of the MP)	DATE*	NUMBER OF SIGNATORIES
411-0677	Mr. Hoback (Prince-Albert)	Mar 14, 2012	25
411-0685	Mr. McColeman (Brant)	Mar 14, 2012	26
411-0695	Mr. Mayes (Okanagan-Shuswap)	Mar 14, 2012	50
411-0704	Mr. Hillyer (Lethbridge)	Mar 15, 2012	99
411-0730	Mr. Lunney (Nanaimo-Alberni)	Mar 26, 2012	37
411-0733	Mr. Chong (Wellington-Halton Hills)	Mar 26, 2012	25
411-0768	Mr. Miller (Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound)	Mar 29, 2012	52
411-0780	Mr. Cannan (Kelowna-Lake Country)	Apr 2, 2012	25
411-0783	Mr. Woodworth (Kitchener Centre)	Apr 2, 2012	25
411-0810	Mr. Hillyer (Lethbridge)	Apr 4, 2012	52
411-0813	Mr. Kamp (Pitt Meadows-Maple Ridge-Mission)	Apr 4, 2012	52
411-0828	Mr. Hillyer (Lethbridge)	Apr 4, 2012	75
411-0833	Mr. Strahl (Chilliwack-Fraser Canyon)	Apr 5, 2012	96
TOTAL SIGNATURES			639

* Date the petition was presented in the House of Commons.

#3:

We, the undersigned Citizens of Canada, draw the attention of the House to the following:

That the Supreme Courte on January 28^th 1988 stated that it is for Parliament to enact the appropriate defences of its legitimate interest in the lives of all subjects, including those yet in the womb.

That a destructive vacuity in the Criminal Code has resulted in the failure of the Supreme Court to strike down the phrase ‘after becoming a human being’ (223(2)) along with the then Section 251 of the Criminal Code;

That this phrase has long exposed to destructive harm a child in anyone’s womb at anytime in Canada;

Therefore, your petitioners request that Parliament consider restoring to the Criminal code the prudence it held prior to 1968, by removing the words ‘after becoming a human being’ from Section 223(2).

INQUIRY	Member of Parliament who presented the petition (riding of the MP)	DATE*	NUMBER OF SIGNATORIES
411-0249	Mr. Norlock (Northumberland-Quite West)	Dec 7, 2011	40
411-0357	Mr. Norlock (Northumberland-Quite West)	Jan 30, 2012	39
TOTAL SIGNATURES			79

* Date the petition was presented in the House of Commons.

GRAND TOTAL: 3,816

Source: Office of the Clerk of Petitions

Abortion petitions for Canada

Some good news on abortion. We have had numerous Members of Parliament presenting abortion related petitions in the House of Commons.

The first petition states:
"Whereas Canada is the only nation in the Western world and in the company of China and North Korea without any laws restricting abortion;

And whereas Canada's Supreme Court has said it is Parliament's responsibility to enact abortion legislation;

Therefore, we call upon the House of Commons in Parliament assembled to speedily enact legislation that restricts abortion to the greatest extent possible."

Every time I read or write about the fact that the Supreme Court told Canadians that Parliament was the place to enact protection for the unborn--and the fact they never have--I feel a sense of utter disbelief. But it's true. After all these years, Parliament still has done nothing about abortion legislation. What are they waiting for?

The second petition calls on Parliament to examine the Criminal Code's definition of a human being (based on Stephen Woodworth's motion):
"Whereas Canada’s 400 year old definition of a human being says a child does not become a human being until the moment of complete birth, contrary to twenty-first century medical evidence;
And whereas Parliament has a solemn duty to reject any law that says some human beings are not human;

Therefore, we call upon the House of Commons in Parliament assembled to confirm that every human being is recognized by Canadian law as human by amending Section 223 of our Criminal Code in such a way as to reflect twenty-first century medical evidence."

Here are the names and dates of the MPs who have already brought forward some of these petitions. Good for them:

James Rajotte - March 2nd
David Sweet – March 2nd
Mark Warawa - March 1
Ed Komarnicki  - March 1
David Tilson – Feb 29
Michael Chong - Feb 29
Bev Shipley – Feb 15
Dave VanKesteren – Feb 15
Dean Allison – Feb 13
Chris Charlton – Feb 13

But we need more.

Print off the petitions, have them signed, and bring to your MP to be read in the House. (Check out ARPA's petition links above for information on the best way to do this).

This is a great start. But we need a lot more of these calls from ordinary Canadians, to tell Mr. Harper what they want for Canada and for the unborn. Maybe we can even get Mr. Harper to finally listen to us.

What Canada can learn from Poland

Canada can learn some valuable lessons from Poland and their fight against abortion.

Just like Poland once did, Canada has no legal restrictions on abortion. Also just like Poland, our own government still refuses to debate abortion and our own media is heavily biased in favour of abortion.

The similarities are striking. Yet Poland is about to make all abortions illegal.

It began in 1980 when the Polish people set out to abolish their existing abortion law. It was a very difficult task, especially because of communism. According to Dr. Eng. Antoni Zięba:
"The regime in force at that time promoted abortion and made any public debate on this subject impossible – through media censorship and the ban on publishing not only magazines or materials but even leaflets about it... Doctors and nurses who refused to perform abortions lost their jobs....officially in the year 1980 we had 138,000 abortions per year, but in reality it was 3 or 4 times more. We posses some scientific estimations speaking about 600,000 abortions in Poland a year. These tragic numbers shocked us, forced us to act. But it was the communists propaganda which worried us the most, because of it the social consciousness concerning the evil of abortion was alarmingly low."

(Dr. Zięba's lecture is quite amazing. I suggest you read it.)

So what could be done within this repressive Communist Polish regime? Well the Poles had a powerful arrow in their quiver. Although this tool is readily available to all people everywhere, I would hazard to guess that people of the "pro-choice" persuasion, don't use it too often.

The Polish people had prayer. And the Polish people started to pray.

In 1979 Pope John Paul II visited his homeland and told the people of Poland:
“You need to pray always, and never stop. Jesus said to pray and form your life through prayer ... I express the wish and I always pray for this, that the Polish family may beget life and may be faithful to the sacred right to life” (Nowy Targ 8 June 1979).

What were the goals of this prayer initiative? Two things.

The first goal was to change Polish social consciousness regarding abortion:
“the social consciousness concerning the killing of unborn children and sensitize our society to the value of life and responsibility for each conceived human being..."

It seemed to be working. Opinion polls started to show that the objection to abortion was increasing:
"from about 35% in 1991 to 50% in 2010...this year, about 53% of Poles stood for the constitutional strengthening of the protection of human life, and around 33% of them were against."

The second goal was to create legal protection:
"to pray in the intention of abolishing the Abortion Law of 27 April 1956 and of recognizing the right to life for all conceived children...This law, let me remind you the overall number, resulted in the death of over 20 million Polish children."

By 1993 the existing abortion law was changed. Now there were now only three exceptions:
"when the life or the health of mother is endangered, when the foetus was seriously malformed and when there is suspicion that the pregnancy was a result of a criminal act".

(This law did not punish the women, but rather the doctor. Something else for Canada to think about.)

The latest success story in Poland's abortion story came at the beginning of this July.

After a successful 600,000 signature petition, which included obstetricians, gynaecologists, lawyers and journalists among its signatories, Poland’s government voted to tighten their abortion laws further by an overwhelming vote of 254 – 151 with 11 abstentions.

The fact that Poland's medical profession, lawyers and journalists were so supportive of this initiative, is key to Canada's situation too. We must get them on side.

The new law would:
"protect the right to life from the moment of conception in all circumstances by removing all exceptions from the nation's abortion laws. The law currently permits abortion for matters dealing with maternal health, rape and incest and fetal disability, which has been interpreted to include treatable issues such as cleft palate. The measure is most likely to be referred to a commission prior to the October election."

Canada can do like Poland did. We can pray. We can change social consciousness. We can blog. We can start our own grass roots movement. We can start our own petition. Maybe a petition all Canadians can agree on--like one that would ban all third-trimester abortions. We can write letters to Mr. Harper, to our MPs and to our newspapers. Repeatedly. Until they listen.

We can do it. Just like Poland did.