Private and Public Schools Subject to [Proposed] Transgendered Guidelines
By Staff of the Christian Civic League of Maine
Feb 19, 2010
[Public hearing scheduled for March 1, 2010]

The Record wishes to share news of urgent importance to all Christians in Maine. The Maine Human Rights Commission is preparing educational guidelines which will apply to schools across Maine, both private aneawd public. The guidelines will require schools to allow transgendered students access to facilities of the opposite sex, including bathrooms and locker rooms. The guidelines will be discussed at a public hearing in Augusta on Monday, March 1st.

The guidelines are based on Maine's "Sexual Orientation Law" passed in 2005. The Christian Civic League vigorously opposed the law in a hard-fought referendum campaign. At the time, Mike Heath, the former Executive Director of the League, warned that the law would eventually require schools to grant transgendered children access to facilities of the opposite sex. Despite the best efforts of the League, the referendum was rejected, setting the stage for the eventual application of the law to public and private schools.

The Maine Human Rights Commission first applied the Sexual Orientation Law to schools in a case involving a transgendered student at Asa Adams Elementary School in Orono. The case arose when the parents of a transgendered boy demanded that their son be allowed to use the girls' bathroom. The school offered the boy the use of the teachers' unisex bathroom, a compromise the boy's parents rejected. The MHRC ruled in favor of the boy's parents, who then sued the school in Penobscot Superior Court.

In early February, the League learned information about the proposed new guidelines which up until now has not been disclosed to the public. This new information reveals that the guidelines will apply to all schools in Maine, with the exception of Christian and parochial schools, and will have the force of law. Schools which violate the guidelines will receive a summons to appear before the Commission. The procedure for bringing a charge of discrimination against a school consists of filling out a simple one-page document. If the Commission rules in favor of the Complainant, the case can be used to bring a lawsuit against the school for monetary damages.

The League has also learned that the Boston-based homosexual rights organization GLAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders) was given a major role in writing the proposed guidelines, which are based in part on existing guidelines used by schools in San Francisco and Los Angeles.

The Maine Principals' Association, the Maine School Management Association, and a representative of the University of Maine at Orono have already opposed the guidelines. They have expressed their concern that schools will be forced to allow boys to participate in girls' sports, giving an unfair advantage to teams with transgendered players. The League has also learned that GLAD is still vigorously advocating sending transgendered boys to girls' teams, saying that to fail to do so is discriminatory.

The public hearing scheduled for March 1st came about after a representative of the Maine School Management Association voiced his concern that the guidelines were being developed without any input from the public. He reminded the Commission that it has a duty under Maine law to hold a public meeting on the issue. The Commission eventually relented, and agreed to open the proposed guidelines to public comment at one of its regularly-scheduled meetings.

The public hearing will be held at the Senator Inn in Augusta on Monday March 1st. The League urges all concerned citizens to attend the meeting to express their opposition to the proposed guidelines. If you are not able to attend the meeting, we urge you to write the Commissioners and submit your written testimony in advance. The names of the Commissioners and the contact information for the Commission is listed below. The mailing address of the Commission is 51 State House Station - Augusta, Maine 04333-0051.

Commission Members

Patricia Ryan, Executive Director

Paul K. Vestal, Jr.

Sallie Chandler

Joseph Perry

Hold the fort on 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell'

[This is an abridged version of an article on the Catholic Education Resource Centre website.]

ROBERT REILLEY

Military readiness is not the objective of having openly gay soldiers in the US armed services.

Thanks to recent statements by US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Mike Mullen, we must acclimate ourselves to what now seems the inevitable rescission of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy toward homosexuals in the US military. This policy itself was a compromise reached under President Bill Clinton, who had wished to eliminate any obstacles to homosexuals in the armed services at the beginning of his presidency. At that time, a decades-old rule stated that homosexuality was "incompatible with military service." The "don't ask, don't tell" deal prohibited asking a person if he is a homosexual, but allowed for the removal of openly declared homosexuals.

In the intervening years, the willingness to consider the moral argument against homosexual acts has eroded further. Toward the latter part of the Bush administration, the then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Marine General Peter Pace, still had the nerve to say, "I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts. I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is okay to be immoral in any way." He received zero support for his forthrightness.

Now, after President Barack Obama hosted a homosexual celebration in the White House on the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Inn riots, Admiral Mullen has appeared before Congress in favor of removing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. . . .

It might be wise to pause for a moment and think about what others may be forced to do should the policy of "don't ask, don't tell" be abandoned. I may be able to bring a certain perspective to the issue since I have both served in the military and worked extensively in the world of the arts, which homosexual culture often dominates.

I keenly recall my induction at Army basic training. It was conducted at a former WW II POW camp for Germans. At Indian Town Gap Military Reservation, we first had our heads shaved and then were told to strip naked as we, for several hours, went from station to station being prodded and poked to ascertain our fitness for the coming physical ardors. In the barracks, there were no stalls between the toilets or showers, in case any of us thought there might be some small refuge of privacy left. This was deliberately done to break us down, so we could then be reshaped into fighting men.

Now imagine inserting into this scenario some naked females. What would happen? All hell would break loose. And whose fault would it be? It would be completely unfair to both the men and the women to inject sexual tension into an already highly demanding, emotionally charged situation. Those who contrived such a state of affairs would be largely responsible for the consequences.

Since homosexuals define themselves as being sexually attracted to other men, why would anyone imagine that it is any less combustible to place openly-declared, practicing homosexuals in the same setting? It is curious that the military is the only form of association in which it is suggested that people would have to disrobe in front of others who find them sexually attractive, but with whom they do not desire any sexual intimacy. Is there a work place in which women are required to do this in front of men, or men in front of women? For obvious reasons, there is not. Why, then, make the US military such a place? The answer is, under the faux guise of civil rights, to enforce the rationalization for homosexual misbehavior on the country as a whole. What better way to achieve this than institutionalizing this rationalization in the armed forces?

The question may be asked: "If homosexuals are currently serving in the military under the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy, why hasn't the mayhem described above already happened?" The answer is precisely because the current policy requires homosexuals to be covert in their behavior and not to display their predilections openly. Overturning this policy would mean "coming out of the closet" inside the military with the consequences described. Adding to the tensions would be the fact that any heterosexual service member who objected or acted in a way that could be interpreted as "homophobic" would be the one brought up on charges or dismissed. They would be forced not to object to homosexual behavior. . . .

. . . military readiness is not the objective of those seeking to overturn the policy. Moral vindication of homosexual behavior is the goal—no matter what the price. Congress, of course, can still stop this from happening as it requires a change in legislation—which has already been prepared by Congressman Murphy, who purportedly has 187 votes lined up for it (only 31 shy of the 218 needed for passage). At least people in the United States will have the opportunity to register their views with their representatives on whether to hold the fort for US service members, or to open the gates for using them as pawns in the homosexual revolution.

Trinity Western University protests "blacklisting" by university teachers

[By Janet Steffenhagen 31 Jan., 2010 in The Vancouver Sun online ]

Trinity Western University (TWU) has appealed to the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) to reconsider a report that says TWU places unwarranted and unacceptable constraints on academic freedom by requiring a statement of faith as a condition of employment.

In a letter last month, TWU president Jonathan Raymond . . . . said . . . [the CAUT] it reached its harsh conclusion about the university without fair and careful due process.

"The use of allegations, censure and blacklists is in our view counterproductive and antagonistic," he wrote in response to CAUT's charge. "As colleagues, we urge CAUT to . . . engage with TWU in productive academic dialogue."

Read the CAUT report here and TWU's response here.

Raymond said the CAUT report appears arbitrary, since it wasn't responding to a complaint. Created by an act of the provincial legislature in 1969, TWU has an excellent academic record and there was no need for an inquiry, he added.

"Despite our requests, CAUT has never articulated a clear reason as to why it launched the inquiry now after TWU has been an accepted and respected member of the higher education community in B.C. for forty years."

. . . . The [CAUT] report says TWU recognizes academic freedom only "from a stated perspective, i.e., within parameters consistent with the confessional basis of the constituency to which the University is responsible."

"The subsequent assurance of free inquiry within these restrictions does not ensure genuine academic freedom."

The CAUT report notes the institution's own claim that "all teaching, learning, thinking and scholarship take place under the direction of the Bible, the wholly authoritative and truthful Word of God."

TWU isn't the only school on CAUT's radar. A story in the National Post says the association will now investigate three other Christian universities that require faculty to sign faith statements - Crandall University in Moncton, Canadian Mennonite University in Winnipeg and Redeemer University College in Ancaster, Ont.

[

New plan for teacher education focuses on social justice, diversity

By JANET STEFFENHAGEN, Vancouver Sun, February 1, 2010

Social justice and diversity issues would get unprecedented attention in every course offered by the University of B.C.’s education faculty if a major program overhaul that began several years ago is approved.

“It’s safe to say that every aspect of our program is going to be changed,” associate education dean Rita Irwin said in an interview. “We want to be as responsive as possible to what’s happening in schools. Right now, we’re doing our best to do that, but we think there’s a need to reconfigure.”

It won’t simply be a matter of the university following the lead of B.C. high schools and offering an optional course similar to Social Justice 12. Rather, social justice and diversity are expected to become dominant themes in all education courses, Irwin said.

“If only one class deals with it, then teacher candidates can kind of set it aside. What we’re trying to say now is that you can’t set it aside. You have to understand that it infuses everything you’re doing.”
[boldfacing in the above three paragraphs is ours--Editor, BCPTL site]

For example, she said students taking a mathematics course might also end up discussing class, gender or race.

The changes, now being drafted, would also ensure that students wanting to become teachers are better prepared to work with special-needs, ESL and aboriginal children. And there would be a mandatory French course for those hoping to work in elementary schools, where teachers are now required to deliver French lessons in intermediate grades even when they have no training.

Irwin stressed that the redesign has not yet been approved by the university senate. “We’re pretty confident it will go through, but theoretically, it’s not quite through yet,” she said, adding she doesn’t expect changes will take effect before 2012.

The proposals are so far-reaching that Irwin described the process as the “re-imagining” of the UBC education degree. Part of that includes an expectation that education graduates would be “teacher inquirers” with an understanding of a wide range of education issues. As an example, Irwin said they would comprehend the arguments for and against the categorization of special-needs students.

“We want them not to think of teaching in a technocratic, instrumental way but ... [as something] that’s constantly evolving. They need to be attentive to the society around them, they need to be lifelong, life-wide learners, they have to take into consideration what new research in education is saying. . . . .

[Click here to read the whole article in The Vancouver Sun online.]

Comments
[Here is one of the comments that accompanied the article online:]

Tunya Audain

The Molding of “New Man” Continues

I agree with the critics who fear that this UBC proposal is more social engineering.

It was in the early days of the Soviet Revolution that one of the aims of communism was to create a “new man”. Human nature would be changed to turn labor and struggle into the greater good for the collective. Individualism was discouraged.

I really worry about these “social justice” programs, especially since it’s a major thrust of the teachers' union, the BC Teachers’ Federation, with every local having a “social justice” committee.
I'm really upset that mathematics classes “might also end up discussing class, gender or race”. Are math teachers also going to organize field trips to rich houses and poor houses to help student calculate economic disparities?

I just sent a letter to UBC to express my views to the search committee looking for a new Dean of Education.

The current Dean, Rob Tierney, has resigned to take a new post in Australia. I expressed my disappointment that he, as a dean, supports views that I see as inappropriate. He decried best practice and evidence-based practice, even suggesting it was malpractice. He strongly dismissed phonics as “simple minded” but which is a successful method of teaching reading in many schools. He also spearheaded the signing of an Accord by Canadian Deans of Education, that among other goals, aims to prepare new teachers to assume social and political activist roles, to interact with their communities so as to produce informed citizens who contribute to social change and community transformation. (Teachers as community organizers?)

As well as what’s going on at UBC, I’m disturbed about a new program just started at SFU Faculty of Education. It’s a two year Masters program in teacher unionism, the first program of its kind on this planet!

I really worry for the future of education in BC unless citizens check out what’s happening in our university teacher preparation programs. Citizens and our parliamentarians should have some say in these matters.

A different comment on the same article also posted:

When I was a kid , conservative Christians in the deep south of the US , were convinced that segregation was compatible with their religious beliefs. The process of overturning that historic injustice meant that real equality had to be shoved down their throats. Today , to the chagrin of many of those same right wingers and their ardent supporters , the country has the first African-American president in history. ( This remarkable fact is accompanied by FBI reports of a dramatic increase in death threats aimed at the leader of the free world.) Similarly , we have groups of various religious pursuasions who refuse to acknowledge the humanity and legal equality of an entitre segment of humankind ; homosexual Canadians , of course. Private religious schools may well have to face Charter rights being forced down their throats , and not one moment too soon.

A comment on the proposed changes to the teacher-education in The Peak (the Simon Fraser University student publication):

Teaching shouldn’t be indoctrination

By Eric Onderwater

Major changes to the teacher education curriculum at UBC are in the works, according to an article in the Vancouver Sun, and the biggest changes will be completely focussed on social justice and diversity issues. As quoted, “social justice and diversity issues would get unprecedented attention in nearly every course offered by the University of B.C.’s education faculty.”

For example, UBC’s associate dean of education, Rita Irwin, was quoted as saying that, “If only one class deals with it, then teacher candidates can kind of set it aside. What we’re trying to say now is that you can’t set it aside. You have to understand that it infuses everything you’re doing.” The article mentions that even courses in mathematics may end up discussing class, gender, and race.

Let’s get one thing straight: the faculty of education is responsible for training elementary, middle, and secondary school teachers for schools in British Columbia, and it wants to brainwash our future teachers by “infusing” them with social justice and diversity. Bear in mind that UBC is responsible for training teachers on how to teach students, not what the teachers teach students. That is the domain of the Ministry of Education in Victoria.

To my mind, this is profoundly disturbing. The idea that my future children may have to spend 12 years listening to brainwashed teachers expounding on the glories of left-wing social theory is deeply unsettling.

Social justice is a leftist concept that arose like a phoenix from the ashes of academic Marxism. In reality, social justice is the big, bad old wolf of Marxism all dressed up as little red riding hood’s innocent grandma in bed. It seems so right and innocent, but in reality it is only concerned with the old failed ideas of the redistribution of income and the state-controlled society.

You have to give it to them, as their ability to resurrect old ideas from the ash heap of history really is remarkable — almost as remarkable as their complete failure to think of ideas that aren’t fused like a baby to the teat of Marxism. . . . .

The goals of social justice are reasonable and relatively good things for society to pursue. The problem comes with the solution to these problems. The solution, invariably, is government control, government programs, government activism, government whatever; the solution is always built on the idea that the state is the solution to all society’s problems. Thus, the left returns to Marxism and state control.

My point is this: regardless of its merits, social justice is a political and ideological issue, not something into which we should be indoctrinating all teachers or elementary school students. Keep it out of the classroom. Nobody should have to be infused with social justice and diversity.

Rally Planned – “Let the Ad Run!”

Local Pro – lifers Organize Rally at Global TV

February 7, 2010, Kelowna, BC; A rally is being planned at the Global Okanagan building at 342 Leon Avenue for Tuesday, February 9 beginning at 4:00 pm. Members of the local pro life community are organizing the event in an attempt to respectfully but firmly ask Global Okanagan to run the pro life ad, “Everyone Against Abortion, Please Raise your Hand.” The ad contains an image of the severed arm of an unborn child who was killed by abortion.

All who value life and truth in media are welcome to take part.

The ad at the centre of the controversy received prior approval by Global TV and the Television Bureau of Canada. Last week, CHBC news director Derek Hinchliffe told The Province that it would be wrong for Global to refuse the ad, "It has met with [TVB] approval, so if we were to say, ‘No, we're not going to run it,’ we would have been offensive," he said.

Despite their initial approval, Global TV did a last minute about-face and decided not to run the ad. Station manager Dennis Gabelhouse said Thursday, “The more we looked at it, the more convinced we were that this ad was probably going to be objectionable to a lot of our viewers.”

Rally co-organizer Marlon Bartram responds that “disturbing imagery is shown on TV all the time, much if it far more graphic than what's in this ad.” He adds that, “this issue is more than just pro-life vs pro-choice, it is a matter of truth in media and their persistent refusal to show the reality of abortion. Certainly abortion is one of the most, if not the most important moral and social issue of our time, and it is an affront to the idea of informed civil discourse to deliberately keep the truth of it hidden from public view.”

A facebook group entitled “Let the Ad Run!” is attracting people from across Canada and elsewhere, and an on-line petition sponsored by the Campaign Life Coalition is also gaining steam. An on-line poll, access to see the ad, and a link to sign the petition are all available at www.prolifekelowna.com.

- 30 -

Contact:

Marlon Bartram

250 862-8202

kelownarighttolife@telus.net

More on the Colbourne Testimony [in the Paul and Zabeth Bayne Court Case]

[From Dr. Ron Unruh, blogging at GPS]

(The first portion was written earlier today and near the bottom you see an urgent addition in red font. The first is positive, the second is a concern)

I return to recap the results of the testimony and cross examination of Dr. Margaret Colbourne. She was in the witness box Wednesday and Thursday. She is a pediatric emergency medicine physician at BC’s Children’s Hospital, Vancouver , BC , and as a pediatrician with the Child Protection Service Unit of the hospital. She was a witness for the Ministry of Children and Family Development. It was her well intentioned diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome in connection with Bethany Bayne that initiated the October 2007 police action MCFD actions against the Baynes. It was her testimony of this diagnosis that was pivotal to the continued claim by MCFD that the Baynes are unfit parents. On Wednesday, when Judge Crabtree stepped from the bench and deliberated for one hour and returned to rule on the matter of whether Dr. Colbourne was qualified to testify that seven week old Bethany Bayne’s injuries were accidental or non accidental, and whether she was qualified to state categorically that Bethany’s injuries had been sustained by being shaken by an adult, the earth stopped on its axis for a moment. Then it continued to turn while simultaneously the sun shone more brightly and the landscape became clearer. Finn Jensen and Dr. Colbourne were informed that Dr. Colbourne’s testimony concerning the nature of the injuries she observed on the day in October 2007 when she examined Bethany was admissible, but that Dr. Colbourne was not permitted to state her opinions about whether the injuries were non accidental or accidental nor was she permitted to state her belief that Bethany was a shaken baby.
Fundamentally, this is a ruling which speaks to the requisite expertise for distinguishing accidental injuries from injuries inflicted by someone, the latter leading possibly to criminal charges and other consequences such as removal of the children when the injury inducer is a parent. This ruling on this day is specific at the moment to this one case. In time it may serve as the precedent in British Columbia for subsequent cases in which assumptions of cause have been rendered or will be rendered by medical professionals who are unqualified precisely in the disciplines needed for making such critical diagnoses. It is a ruling that speaks to an understanding that certain types of injuries require particular professional credentials. This may become a standard by which to assess the reliability of an expert witness in such cases as shaken baby and other suspected abuse cases that could have differential diagnoses.

In all the incidents of life that are horrific and painful, the understandable instinctive response is to ask, ‘WHY?’ It is possible and even likely that Paul and Zabeth Bayne asked this simply question. But two years and three months have crawled by. During these past months they began to reflect more seriously on the grand scheme of things and the possibility that their agony might one day result in not only redemption for their family but also the restoration of other families where there have been mistaken diagnoses yet no legal recourse because of the strength of condemning testimonies by professionals.

The following is a quick addendum to the post above. It's important to supporters of the Baynes because it shows they need your support and prayers so much more. If you can be at one of the court days, your presence helps them and makes a point to the Court.

I now have had to hastily add this addendum to my previously more positive note about the testimony of Dr. Margaret Colbourne. Yesterday, Thursday, Finn Jensen cleverly began his examination of Dr. Colbourne this way. Since on Wednesday he had received the Judge’s ruling that he could not have Colbourne speak to the cause as accidental or non accidental, he asked for her opinion on what causes she could rule out for Bethany ’s injuries. Despite Doug Christie’s objections she was permitted ultimately to narrow the causes until shaken baby was the only statement of cause left standing. (This, in spite of the previous day’s ruling.)

It was revealed during cross examination that Dr. Colbourne now views this injury as ‘blunt impact’ and shaking. She was reminded that she did not state this in her initial diagnosis. When asked at what time she arrived at this conclusion, she stated in the spring of 2008. Doug Christie suggested that this would have been following her receipt of the experts’ reports that had been supplied by the Baynes – reports which validated the history of events as the Baynes had described. Her response was that she had believed the ‘blunt impact’ component at the beginning but had omitted it in her initial report. (The point is that her exclusive shaken baby diagnosis was damning and did not allow for other causal possibilities.)

Dr. Colbourne disagreed that Zabeth witnessed the accident of Baden falling on Bethany . Colbourne’s testified that Zabeth told her Baden fell on Bethany but that Zabeth had not seen this happen. (That account of the event contradicts the doctors’ reports that preceded Colborne’s involvement – reports which make reference to a witnessed accidental fall of one child on the other.)

Dr. Colbourne also denied knowing that for three weeks prior to admission at Children’s Hospital, Bethany had severe vomiting. When Colbourne was shown an expert’s article which stated that a head injury accompanied by severe vomiting increases intracranial pressure and can cause supplementary bleeding and eye bleeds, Colbourne disagreed.

When Mr. Christie referenced numerous biomechanical papers to which she had access, articles on shaken baby and the physical impossibility for shaken baby to produce the symptoms under discussion, Dr. Colbourne disagreed. (She admitted that when reading the articles she did not comprehend them since biomechanics is not her specialty.)

The witness also disagreed with the published research papers by noted biomechanic and pathology experts which contend that a shaken infant will bear signs of a neck injury. She said that she could not state with assurance that she had ever observed a neck injury on any of the shaken infants she has diagnosed.

Today, Friday, Dr. Randell Alexander has been flown from Florida to give supporting testimony for Dr. Colbourne’s evidence. (His testimony in numerous other cases has assisted the successful prosecution of parents who are in prison today and their children adopted into new families and some parents have faced the death penalty.) More about him later.

Calgary church loses charitable status for its "non-partisan political activities"

January 22, 2010, by Gillian Grace

Charles Lewis, National Post

A Calgary church has lost its charitable status in part because it spends too much of its time advocating on social issues such as abortion and marriage.

In October, the Kings Glory Fellowship Association, a non-denominational Protestant group, was told by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) that for several reasons, including a lack of clarity on how it spends it money, they could no longer issue charitable receipts.

But the letter highlighted that the group spent more than 10% of its time on “non-partisan political activities and therefore strayed into activities “outside its stated purpose.”

“We note ... the members of the Board of Directors espouse strong negative vies about sensitive and controversial issues, which may also be viewed as political, such as abortion, homosexuality, divorce, etc.”

The CRA allows charitable organizations to spend some time on “political activities,” but the cutoff is 10%. A spokesman for the CRA was not immediately available to explain how the percentage of time a group spends on non-charitable works is determined.

Artur Pawlowski, the head of the Kings Glory Fellowship, said his group “has nothing to do with politics and we do not advertise for a party or a candidate. The only political activity you can connect us to is defending our right to speak.”

Mr. Pawlowski said the primary mission of his church is to feed homeless people. He said this group supplies food for about 150,000 a year, mainly to people “that no one else wants to deal with.”

“When we feed people we don’t care whether they are homosexuals or have had abortions or been divorced but we preach what the Bible says about those issues.”

He said the financial issues are just a “smoke screen” and the real agenda is to “keep us quiet.” Mr. Pawlowski also noted that his church has never been audited by the CRA.

Mr. Pawlowski and his group have a long and loud history of dealing with Calgary officials. In 2007 he was arrested for obstruction and littering after attempting to preach the Gospel at a alternative theatre festival. The case was thrown out. . . . .

[Read the whole of the above National Post "Holy Post" online article .]

Ontario Bishops Reject High School “Gender Studies” Course

By Patrick B. Craine

TORONTO, Ontario, January 15, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Assembly of Catholic Bishops of Ontario have rejected a “Gender Studies” course that is being promoted by the Ontario Ministry of Education.

The grade 11 course aims to help students “understand the meaning of gender identity and norms of femininity and masculinity,” according to the draft document, which is available on a Ministry website.

The bishops' education commission decided to reject the course at a December 7th meeting, after which they sent a letter to all of the Catholic chairs and directors of education in the province.

“The fundamental thrust of this proposed optional course reflects an ideology which is at variance with Catholic anthropology and moral teaching,” wrote Bishop Paul-André Durocher, chair of the education commission and Bishop of Alexandria-Cornwall.

“Consequently, we would recommend that Catholic secondary schools NOT include the proposed Gender Studies course in their syllabus of course offerings,” he continued, in bold print.

Among many expectations, the course plans to inculcate an appreciation for “the struggle for women's rights,” including “access to birth control information” and “reproductive rights.” Additionally, students will analyze the “struggle for the recognition of rights for sexual minorities,” dealing with such issues as same-sex “marriage” and homosexual adoption.

One section of the expectations seeks to have students evaluate individuals or groups who have promoted “equality between men and women and changing gender roles in society.” According to the course draft, one such model of “equality” is the infamous Canadian abortionist Henry Morgentaler. Another is Egale, one of Canada's leading homosexualist organizations.

In their letter, the bishops suggested two alternative courses, both dealing with “equity and social justice,” if Catholic high schools desire to offer more social science options. They indicated that once the expectations for these courses are released, the Institute for Catholic Education will integrate Catholic social teachings into the curriculum.

LifeSiteNews attempted to contact the Bishops' Assembly for comment, but did not hear back by press time.

The education commission's decision about the “Gender Studies” course followed their reception of a December 1st letter of concern from Campaign Life Catholic, which was presented at the meeting.

“We were pleased with [the bishops'] response,” said Mary Ellen Douglas of Campaign Life Catholic.

“When we discovered this [program], it didn't take long to read it to alert us to the concerns that were in there that were not following Catholic teaching,” she told LifeSiteNews. “There were very serious things the matter with this program that might have gone right into grade 11.”

Not all Catholic parties agree, however. The Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association (OECTA), which has become notorious for its promotion of feminist and homosexualist causes despite its role as the official Catholic teachers union, has actually made a public stand in promoting the course.

In March 2008, OECTA representatives joined Ontario NDP Women's Issues Critic Cheri DiNovo and the Miss G__ Project for Equity in Education in holding a press conference in which they called on the McGuinty government to implement the course. The Miss G__ Project, which currently has the implementation of this course as its main objective, lists the OECTA Toronto Secondary Unit as a financial supporter on its website.

“They're going to have to step back,” commented Douglas. OECTA's support of the course “doesn't surprise me at all,” she said, “but I'm hoping that they still have enough respect for the Church that they will listen to the Assembly of Bishops in Ontario.”

While it would appear the Ontario bishops' leadership will prevent the course from being taught in Catholic schools, it continues to be promoted for inclusion in the public high schools.

“I think the parents in the public school are going to have to be aware of curriculum changes that are coming in for their own students and speak up when things are contrary to their faith,” said Douglas. “I don't think there's any doubt they're going to have to take that role, as we do in the Catholic schools.”

See related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

Ontario Gvmt Won’t Say Whether Catholic Schools Can Teach Beliefs on Homosexuality
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10010807.html

Lesbian Ontario Education Minister Hires "Homophobia" Watchdog for Schools
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/mar/08031309.html

Ontario Catholic Teachers Run Far Left Conference Promoting Gay Activism
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/aug/06082202.html

Half of Urban Teen Girls Acquire STIs within 2 Years of First Sexual Activity

INDIANAPOLIS, December 15, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Half of urban teenage girls may acquire at least one of three common sexually transmitted infections (STI) within two years of becoming sexually active, according to an Indiana University School of Medicine and Regenstrief Institute study.

The study appears in the December 2009 issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.

The researchers followed 381 girls enrolled at ages 14 to 17 years and found that repeated infection with the organisms that cause chlamydia, gonorrhea and trichomoniasis also was very common.

"Depending on the organism, within four to six months after treatment of the previous infection, a quarter of the women were re-infected with the same organism," said Wanzhu Tu, Ph.D., associate professor of medicine at the IU School of Medicine and a Regenstrief Institute investigator.

Within two years, about three-quarters of participants with an initial sexually transmitted STI were diagnosed with a second STI, although not necessarily of the same type. Within four years of an initial STI, virtually all (92 percent) of the participants had a subsequent STI.

"To our knowledge, this study provides the first data on the timing of the initial STI and subsequent STI following the onset of sexual activity in urban adolescent women," said Dr. Tu.

The study also found that screening for STI may not be initiated until several years after sexual activity begins, especially for girls with earlier onset of sexual activity.

"This is important because many clinicians are reluctant to address sexual activity with younger teens, and may miss important prevention opportunities," said J. Dennis Fortenberry M.D. M.S., professor of pediatrics at the IU School of Medicine, and senior author of the study.

The study focuses on lower income urban adolescents; a group characterized by early onset of sexual activity, multiple sexual partners, and high STI rates.

From a December 16th, 2009, MassResistance "Update" e-mail:

Resolution introduced in Congress to remove "safe schools" czar Kevin Jennings.
MassResistance work cited.

MassResistance's research and activism exposing Obama's "safe schools" czar Kevin Jennings and has again made it to Congress. Back on October 15, 53 Congressmen signed a letter demanding Jennings be fired. But as more horrible information has surfaced, the pressure to remove Jennings is boiling over. . . . .

Dec. 11, Congressman Michael Burgess (R-TX) introduced a resolution to Congress that Jennings be removed! The resolution cites Jennings' involvement in the "Fistgate" conference (which we uncovered in 2000) and his admiration of NAMBLA supporter Harry Hay, which the MassResistance blog recently helped bring to light.

111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. RES. 966

Calling on the President and the Secretary of Education to fire Kevin Jennings from his post as 'Safe Schools Czar'.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
December 11, 2009

Mr. BURGESS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

RESOLUTION

Calling on the President and the Secretary of Education to fire Kevin Jennings from his post as 'Safe Schools Czar'.

Whereas, on December 11, 2009, The Washington Times reported that Kevin Jennings was involved in promoting a reading list for children 13 years old or older that made the most explicit sex between children and adults seem normal and acceptable;

Whereas recorded tapings from conferences previously sponsored by Kevin Jennings had presenters explicitly conveying to adolescents certain types of sexual behavior;

Whereas Kevin Jennings has praised Harry Hay, a vocal supporter of the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA); and

Whereas Kevin Jennings in his capacity as 'Safe Schools Czar' may not promote criminal behavior: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) considers the behavior of a 'Safe Schools Czar' promoting sexual relationships between adults and children reprehensible;

(2) supports the belief that any and all who occupy the position of 'Safe Schools Czar' should not promote criminal behavior; and

(3) calls on the President and the Secretary of Education to find an immediate replacement for Kevin Jennings.

Copenhagen: China pushing Population Control as the Final Solution

By Hilary White

COPENHAGEN, December 11, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Population control has emerged as a key issue for "climate change" talks in Copenhagen, after the issue was brought forward by Chinese delegates. Zhao Baige, vice-minister of National Population and Family Planning Commission of China (NPFPC) said, "Population and climate change are intertwined, but the population issue has remained a blind spot when countries discuss ways to mitigate climate change and slow down global warming."

"Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture."

The Chinese newspaper China Daily quotes Zhao saying that China's population program has made a great historic contribution to the well-being of society. China has reduced the number of births by 400 million since instituting its one-child "family planning" policies, and this has resulted in 18 million fewer tons of CO2 emissions per year, Zhao continued.

Although she declined to mention China's laws forcing women into abortion and sterilization, Zhao did acknowledge that her country faces what some have called a looming demographic crisis because of the policy, with an aging population, a reduced work force and a severe nationwide gender imbalance from sex-selective abortion.

"I'm not saying that what we have done is 100 percent right, but I'm sure we are going in the right direction and now 1.3 billion people have benefited," she said.

Todd Stern, the US Special Envoy to the conference told journalists yesterday that China is the world's largest emitter of CO2, calling the data "frightening."

"By 2020, China will be a 60% bigger emitter than the US; by 2030, it will be 80% bigger. The inescapable conclusion: major developing economies must be brought into an international framework that obligates them to curb emissions," Stern said.

The conference is proceeding despite the recent revelations that some leading climate scientists may have falsified or withheld scientific information to inflate the data on "global warming." Information was released on the internet by unidentified hackers in November that appeared to show that researchers at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, one of the world's key sources of the climate change theories, had sought to prevent dissenting scientific papers from being published and deleted e-mails and raw data that would have refuted the global warming theory.

After the internet world was immediately filled with stories and theories on what quickly became dubbed "Climategate," the University of East Anglia announced it would conduct an independent review of the matter.

The 15th Session of United Nations Climate Change Conference . . . runs from December 7 to 18.

Prominent Canadian Journalist Calls for Imposed Planetary One-Child Policy

By John-Henry Westen

TORONTO, December 9, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a column published yesterday in one of the major Canadian national newspapers, Diane Francis, the Editor-at-Large of the National Post, has called for a globally enforced one-child policy taken after the example of China. "A planetary law, such as China's one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently of one million births every four days," writes Francis.

Commenting on the ongoing climate talks in Copenhagen, where world leaders are deliberating on possible solutions to hypothetical environmental catastrophes, Francis says, "None will work unless a China one-child policy is imposed."

In an attempt to forestall criticism of her proposal Francis stated, "For those who balk at the notion that governments should control family sizes, just wait until the growing human population turns twice as much pasture land into desert as is now the case or when the Amazon is gone, the elephants disappear for good and wars erupt over water, scarce resources and spatial needs."

Don Feder, a free-lance journalist and former media consultant for the documentary films Demographic Winter and the Demographic Bomb responded to Francis' assertions in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com.

The films document scientific evidence that, rather than overpopulation, civilization will soon be feeling the effects of the collapse of demographic growth, with most nations not achieving even a replacement birthrate of 2.1 children per woman.

Questioning Francis' proposal to impose a one-child policy, Feder asked: "Did she say how she wants to enforce this, if she wants to enforce it with fines, or imprisonment, or execution, or castration?" Feder added, "It's amazing that someone can look at China, with forced abortions, forced sterilizations and female infanticide, and can see that as a model and say 'we need that on a planetary scale.' It's mind boggling."

Francis' comments, he said, "expose these neo-Malthusians as the coercive utopians that they are. They actually want to punish people for having large families, and I think they would if they had the means to do so."

While Francis is well known for her fiscally conservative stance, she is also radically pro-abortion. In a 2002 column she exclaimed: "Any law that would force someone to have a child she did not want, or could not look after or have to put up for adoption, would be an act of state-sanctioned violence."

Francis has a particular animosity towards religion. Lamenting the inability to enforce a one-child policy, she said, "Unfortunately, there are powerful opponents. Leaders of the world's big fundamentalist religions preach in favor of procreation and fiercely oppose birth control."

Reporter Fired Over Gay Marriage E-Mail

11 Dec 2009 on MyFOXMaine.com

WATERVILLE - Larry Grard, a veteran newspaper reporter at The Morning Sentinel in Waterville, says he was fired for sending an angry e-mail to a pro-gay marriage group.

Grard says he was offended by an e-mail he received from the DC-based Human Rights Campaign the day after the November 3rd vote overturning Maine's same-sex marriage law. He fired off a response, which read, in part, "You hateful people have been spreading nothing but vitriol since the campaign began. Good riddance!"

Grard says he was immediately fired when his boss found out about the e-mail.

The union representing Grard has filed a grievance against the owners of The Sentinel.

Abortion an obstacle to health-care bill

Some Democrats vow to block final passage if amendment stays

By Alec MacGillis

Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 9, 2009

President Obama and Senate Democrats sought on Sunday to generate momentum from the House's passage of health-care legislation, even as a new hurdle emerged: profound dismay among abortion-rights supporters over antiabortion provisions inserted into the House bill.

The House passed its version of health-care legislation Saturday night by a vote of 220 to 215 after the approval of an amendment that would sharply restrict the availability of coverage for abortions, which many insurance plans now offer.

[You can read the whole of this article at The Washington Post online.]

November 7, 2009 News Items Regarding the Passing of the U.S. Health Care Reform Bill Preceded by
the Passing of an Amendment Prohibiting Coverage of Elective Abortion by a Government Program

US Congress Passes Health Care Reform Bill 220 to 215

By Steve Jalsevac

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 7, 2009 11:15 p.m. Eastern Time (LifeSiteNews.com) - The U.S. House passed the historic health care reform bill Saturday evening
by a very close 220 to 215 vote. The Democrats needed 218 votes to pass the bill. One Republican voted for the bill.

The bill includes the Stupak Amendment which basically contains the provisions of the long standing Hyde Amendment prohibiting any coverage of elective abortion by
a government program.

The bill still requires approval by the Senate.

BREAKING: Stupak Amendment to Health Care Bill Passes 240 - 194 Saturday Evening
Next this evening is vote on Health Care Bill

By Steve Jalsevac

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 7, 2009 10:45 p.m. (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Stupak-Pitts Amendment that would prohibit coverage of elective abortion in two big new federal programs created by the Democrat's health reform bill passed by a wide margin of 240 to 194 Saturday evening.

Debate in the House is now under way on another, much less likely to pass Republican amendment. After the vote on this last amendment, there is expected to be a final vote on the main health care bill later this evening.

CitizenLink, Nov. 4, 2009

Election Results Good for Conservatives [in the United States]

Two big governor's races and a win for marriage headlined the off-year election Tuesday.

Despite last-minute campaigning by President Barack Obama, Republican candidates won clear victories in New Jersey and Virginia.

In New Jersey, a predominantly blue state, Chris Christie was declared the winner over incumbent Jon Corzine. President Obama won the state by a 15-point margin in 2008.

Virginia Republican Bob McDonnell easily defeated Democrat Creigh Deeds, 59 percent – 41 percent.

[You can read the whole of the above article at CitizenLink.]

Sask. MP Trost launches petition against funding of planned parenthood group

Saskatoon-Humboldt MP Brad Trost
Photograph by: Gord Waldner, The StarPhoenix

The Star-Phoenikx (Saskatoon)
Wed Nov 4 2009
Page: B7

Byline: Jenn Sharp

A petition calling for a stop to federal funding of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) has been launched by Saskatoon-Humboldt MP Brad Trost.

Trost presented the petition to the House of Commons Monday. IPPF is funded through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and, according to Trost's petition, "promotes the establishment of abortion as an international human right and lobbies aggressively to impose permissive abortion laws on developing nations."

The petition says that the government pledged $18 million to the IPPF over four years and that "the IPPF does not support physician's freedom to practice according to their conscience and/or religious beliefs regarding abortion referral."

According to IPPF's website, the federation promotes sexual and reproductive health rights and provides health services for people in six world regions. Its work is focused in five priority areas: Access to services for marginalized groups, education services for adolescents, advocacy campaigns, HIV-AIDS and abortion services. . . . .

[You can read the rest of the above article on The Star-Phoenix online.]

Thursday October 29, 2009

Did Feminism Benefit Men more than Women? Prominent US Feminist Asks

By Hilary White

October 29, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In an Op Ed in the New York Times, leading US feminist Maureen Dowd has expressed her surprise that recent research continues to find that women, who may have been economically "emancipated" by the feminist revolution, are more unhappy now, forty years later, than men.

Calling it a "paradox" that women may have thrown off the aprons, Dowd wrote, "But the more women have achieved, the more they seem aggrieved. Did the feminist revolution end up benefiting men more than women?"

Dowd, a journalist and regular columnist for the New York Times, is known as one of the last of the old-school radical feminists, and is the author of the book "Are Men Necessary? When Sexes Collide".

Dowd's Op Ed follows a report by Time Magazine showing that despite increased economic opportunities, limit-free "reproductive choice" and easy divorce, men are more happy overall than women in the US. Women, Dowd said, are being "driven to distraction" by maintaining both their status as mothers and wives while at the same time maintaining high-powered careers. Citing several different researchers, Dowd said that a big part of the problem is children. "One area of extreme distraction is kids," she wrote.

But an even bigger threat to women's happiness, she said, is the natural instinct of women for forging strong emotional bonds and relationships. "They tend to attach to other people more strongly, beat themselves up more when they lose attachments, take things more personally at work and pop far more antidepressants."

In the Time piece, Nancy Gibbs says that the magazine's research showed that although women have "gained more freedom, more education and more economic power," the study found that "they have become less happy".

Since Time did a piece on feminist gains in the early 1970s, Gibbs wrote, "close to half of law and medical degrees go to women...half the Ivy League presidents are women, and two of the three network anchors soon will be; three of the four most recent Secretaries of State have been women. There are more than 145 foundations designed to empower women around the world."

But women are still saying they are not happy compared to men, according to the surveys, and are suffering more than men in the financial downturn. The mysterious "paradox" of modern, emancipated, contracepting and high-achieving women is not so mysterious to some.

Gibbs writes that among the "most confounding" changes is the evidence "that as women have gained more freedom, more education and more economic power, they have become less happy". "No tidy theory explains the trend."

Gibbs herself points to an answer, saying, "Among the most dramatic changes in the past generation is the detachment of marriage and motherhood" and that women "no longer view matrimony as a necessary station on the road to financial security or parenthood".

She notes the leap in the numbers of children born to single women (from 12 per cent to 39 per cent) and notes that while "a majority of children in the mid-1970s were raised by a stay-at-home parent, the portion is now less than a third".

But Albert Mohler, commenting in a column, followed the evidence, saying, "The big question raised by these studies is this: Has feminism produced unhappiness among women? That question is inescapable when seen in light of the historical context."

Mohler is the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, a board member of Focus on the Family and hosts a Christian radio talk show that discusses social issues. He quotes Gail Collins, who wrote in her book "When Everything Changed: The Amazing Journey of American Women from 1960 to the Present," that the achievements of women "did not resolve the tensions of trying to raise children and hold down a job at the same time".

"Sadly," Mohler writes, "most feminists seem incapable, given their ideological commitments, of asking the hardest questions.

"In reality, feminism was never only about opening doors for women. In order to make the case for the vast social transformation that feminism has produced, the feminist movement aspired to nothing short of a total social, moral, and cultural revolution. Along the way, feminism redefined womanhood, marriage, motherhood, and the roles for both men and women."

Obama's "Safe Schools Czar" Funds Pornographic Display at Harvard

By James Tillman

WASHINGTON, DC, October 21, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Obama's controversial and embattled "safe schools czar," Kevin Jennings, has helped fund a pornographic, anti-Catholic and sado-masochistic art display currently being shown at Harvard University, reports massresistance.org.

The Harvard exhibition, entitled, ACT UP New York: Activism, Art, and the AIDS Crisis, 1987-1993, chronicles the efforts of the homosexual civil disobedience group, Aids Coalition To Unleash Power (ACT UP), through the graphic stickers, posters, and other visual media used as propaganda in the early years of the homosexualist movement.

ACT UP describes itself as a "diverse, non-partisan group of individuals united in anger and committed to direct action to end the AIDS crisis." According to Jenning's homosexual partner, Jeff Davis, Jennings was once a member of the group.

Jenning's name is listed on the Harvard art display's website, beneath those who provided a gift or grant.

The posters on display, which were designed in the early days of the movement, were part of ACT UP's protest against a government that they saw as having failed to do its duty in the AIDS crisis.

One poster is comprised of an up-close photograph of a woman's genitals, with text objecting to the Supreme Court's ban on abortion. Another, ostensibly about sexism and AIDS, includes an up-close shot of male genitalia.

Other posters include a variety of offensive images and messages. One image calls President Ronald Reagan a murderer and President George H.W. Bush a serial killer, for their perceived negligence in not using tax dollars to help those with AIDS.

ACT UP also vented rage against another figure of authority: the Catholic Church. One image visually compares New York's late Cardinal O'Connor to a condom, stating that the condom, at least, helps prevent AIDS. Cardinal O'Connor was well known for maintaining the Church's teaching on contraception and homosexuality. The poster states in large letters: "Know your scumbags."

Similarly, another poster depicts two gay men kissing in front of New York's St. Patrick's Church. ACT UP is infamous for its involvement in a "protest" in St. Patrick's Church on December 10, 1989, wherein a Blessed Sacrament was desecrated.

Yet the displays of how ACT UP raged against all and any authority are perhaps less disturbing than those regarding the sexual desires of the homosexualist movement.

One image features a female toddler, with the word "Dyke" written beneath her in typeset. "Dyke" is a term used to designate a homosexual female, and often carries the connotation of a "butch" homosexual female.

In another part of the museum one finds text apparently describing an adult's violent sexual assault on a child.

ACT UP is described on their website as a group "united in anger" to help end the AIDS crisis. They are notorious for their disruptive protests; their website includes instructions regarding how to handle being arrested.

Kevin Jennings has increasingly come under fire in the last number of months, as more information about his radical views has come to light.

Jennings is a co-founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which targets children in public schools and classroom curricula to embrace homosexuality as a normative behavior.

In addition, during a speech in 2000, Jennings admitted failing to report the statutory rape of a fifteen-year old who was involved in a homosexual relationship with a much older man. Rather than reporting the situation, Jennings instead instructed the boy to wear a condom.

Jennings has also come under fire for his praise of Harry Hay, an ardent admirer of the North American Man/Boy Love Association and an advocate of lowering the age of consent laws. Additionally, it has recently come to light that Jenning's helped raise money for the Obama presidential campaign.

53 House Republicans have asked President Obama to fire Jennings, stating that he will push a homosexual agenda and that he clearly "lacks the appropriate qualifications and ethical standards to serve in this capacity."

[Can "Gay-Straight Alliance and Christian clubs can co-exist in public schools"?]

School club controversy raises more questions

. . . .

Naoibh O'Connor, Vancouver Courier

Published: Friday, October 02, 2009

A teacher-librarian's failed human rights complaint alleging religious discrimination at University Hill secondary raises questions about whether Gay-Straight Alliance and Christian clubs can co-exist in public schools.

The complaint by Po Chiang, sponsor of the Christian Fellowship Club at UHill, was dismissed by B.C. Human Rights Tribunal earlier this month, as reported in the Sept. 30 edition of the Courier.

It was filed against the Vancouver Board of Education, Megan Fergusson, sponsor of the Gay-Straight Alliance and Jill Philipchuk, former principal at University Hill.

Several incidents in 2007, outlined by the tribunal, suggest tension. They include Fergusson emailing teachers a video clip of an extremist American Christian group, which Chiang felt depicted all Christians as intolerant bigots. The tribunal reported that Chiang repeatedly asked Fergusson if she could attend an Alliance meeting to talk about the views of the Christian right and the "Protestant Christian's view towards homosexuality." The requests were refused.

Chiang also delayed cataloguing books donated by the Gay-Straight Alliance.

Philipchuk eventually wrote Chiang a letter of expectation, which reads, in part, "I do not expect all staff to actively engage in the work of the [Gay-Straight Alliance] club, but I do ask that all staff cooperate with the teacher sponsor's efforts in relation to activities planned by the club."

The tribunal wrote, "...[such] behaviour [by Chiang] could reasonably give rise to an impression of a lack of cooperation with or professional support for the activities of the GSA."

Chiang complained that days after attending a Christian Fellowship Club meeting, Philipchuk informed student leaders they couldn't have guest speakers because it violated the School Act's prohibition on teaching of religious doctrines and dogma.

The guest speaker was a youth pastor from a local church who had been invited by students. Chiang said students complained it was unfair since the CFC is extracurricular and other clubs are allowed guest speakers. She maintained Philipchuk singled out a religious group for special attention.

. . . .

Chiang argues staff and students with religious beliefs feel increasingly disenfranchised from the Vancouver school system. "I'm constantly wary of the fact that more of this is going to happen again," she said in a phone interview with the Courier earlier this week. "I really do think the attitude of the board and administration--I think there is a bias against Christians and religious people."

But school board chair Patti Bacchus supports the tribunal's decision, while saying she hopes students of all faiths feel welcome in public schools. "I think the question of any club that is extracurricular and based on religion is possibily an area that perhaps we have to maybe take a better look at. We have policies of inclusion. The School Act does state that schools must be conducted on a strictly secular, non-sectarian principle," she said Monday.

Glen Hansman of the Vancouver Elementary School Teachers' Association and a former anti-homophobia consultant for the district, said he's fine with religious clubs meeting after school hours on school property, but proselytizing can't be allowed at schools.

. . .Hansman , , , maintains school boards need to do more to support gay youth.

noconnor@vancourier.com

[See the article above at The Vancouver Courier online.]

A Family In Need Of Reunification

By Raphael Alexander 28 Dec 2009 Vancouver Sun Community of Interest

A Surrey family that had their three children seized by the government of British Columbia in October of 2007 is still desperately trying to get them back more than 26 months later. Their children were taken by the province after Child Services believed that the parents had shaken their then two-month-old baby girl, Bethany, even though those allegations now seem to be false, and government workers even advised their boys be returned as early as November of 2007.

The children have been in foster care ever since. The two boys who are aged five and four, respectively, and Bethany, now two, were taken by the Ministry of Child and Family Development when Paul and Zabeth Bayne were suspected of shaking their baby girl causing a head injury. The accusation is commonly known as “Shaken Baby Syndrome”. The Bayne’s insisted the injury occurred when their younger son tripped and fell on their daughter, but those pleas fell on deaf ears. . . .

. . . in April of this year a new and shocking revelation came to light that could explain the injuries of their daughter. Internal documents from the Ministry of Child Development revealed that the head injuries to the little girl were likely not caused by abuse, accident, or otherwise, but from a rare genetic disorder called glutaric aciduria.

Zabeth and Paul Bayne have had to find night jobs in the time since their children were abducted by the government, so that they can visit them during the days when they are granted access.

A court hearing on the alleged abuse will finally commence on January 10. Before then, the parents are holding a fund-raising concert entitled “For Love and for Justice” at Richmond Peace Mennonite Church on January 3 between 6:30-8pm. Those attending are encouraged to call the number 778-228-4717 to reserve a place. You can also visit several Facebook pages to learn more about their plight to get their children back.

For Love and for Justice: Facebook Event
The Bayne Campaign for Justice: Facebook Group
The Bayne Petition Site: Here

Bayne Family in British Columbia Still Without Their Three Children after Government Takes Them in Controversial Seizure
CASJAFVA Holds Eighth Rally in Support of the Parents

October 3, 2009

The Canadian Alliance for Social Justice and Family Values Association (CASJAFVA) , a group mainly based in the Chinese-Canadian ethnic commuinity in Vancouver, British Columbia, held anotbher rally October 3rd on behalf of the Baynes family. It was the eighth rally put on by the group on behalf ot the Baynes. The children of Paul and Zabeth Bayne have been separated from their parents for two years now as a result of a controvsial move by the Ministry of Children and Family Development.

The story of the Bayne family, can be seen on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj9Infbts30&feature=related . The video includes a clip from earlier CBC coverage of the issue.

The CBC print article below gives a summary of the case as it had developed up to April. of this year (2009):

Ministry disregarded legal advice to return seized children: document
Surrey parents insist they never harmed baby daughter

Friday, April 3, 2009

CBC News

Paul and Zabeth Bayne say they never abused their baby girl and are fighting for the return of their three children. (CBC)

A lawyer representing the B.C. government in a child seizure case in September 2007 had advised the return of two of three children to the Surrey parents, CBC News has learned.

The children — two boys, now aged four and three, and a 19-month-old baby girl — were taken by the Ministry of Children and Family Development because Paul and Zabeth Bayne were suspected of shaking the girl and causing a head injury.

The Baynes said their daughter's head was accidentally injured by their second son tripping and landing over her body. The couple have been fighting to get their children back ever since.

The lawyer representing the children's ministry had suggested the return of the two older boys to the parents because there was no evidence of harm done on the boys, according to documents obtained by CBC News on Friday.

Government lawyer Finn Jensen believed the case for holding the two boys would not hold up in court, and John Fitzsimmons, a community services manager, was aware of the lawyer's position, according to a ministry correspondence dated July 14, 2008.

"[A] medical report of November 2007, completed shortly after the two older children came into care, indicates that there was no evidence of harm of injury to the children," the correspondence said.

"No new evidence has come to light, which would indicate a risk to these children," it said.

. . .

The two boys and the baby girl have been placed in foster care.

"The boys have been in four foster homes now; that is not a secure, loving environment," Zabeth Bayne told CBC News Friday.

Kelly Gleeson, communications director of the Ministry of Children and Family Development, said Friday the matter is before the courts and "we will not be commenting."

. . . .

Campbell said Friday he is not aware of the Baynes' fight to get back their children.

"I understand these people, like most people, would like to have their children back," Campbell said when asked by CBC News at a public event.

"My constituency assistants are following it up with the Ministry of Children and Family Development. I don't have the details of the case. I'm glad to follow it up," he said.

CBC News reported on Thursday the Baynes obtained internal documents from the children's ministry that suggest their daughter likely suffers glutaric aciduria, which is often mistaken for child abuse.

Glutaric aciduria is a rare genetic disorder with varied symptoms, sometimes including bleeding and swelling of the brain.

The couple, who now work as night janitors, have begun a legal challenge against the ministry's decision. But they said they likely won't get their day in court until next year because of delays and backlogs in the court system.

[Click here to see the above article on the CBC site.]

Ron Unrah has written a series of blog entries on the plight of the Baynes. His narration of their story and comments on it is in five parts. Click here for "Part One." The links to the other five parts are in the column to the right of Part One in that blog.

The following summary by Paul and Zabeth gives their side of the case:

Statement

During these past sixteen months our family has endured one of the most traumatic experiences as a result of a medical misdiagnosis and the consequent involvement of the Ministry of Children and Family Development. I wish to outline some of the injustices and hardships that have resulted as well as the damage that has been inflicted on our children as a result of this.

Due to the removal process our children have been submitted to experiencing the emotional trauma associated with the invasive and violent manner in which removal occurs. They have had a negative first hand experience with the RCMP and its subjection to the wishes of the Ministry to remove children right in the middle of their birthday party. They have lived through the pain of being separated from their parents and placed in an unfamiliar environment with strangers at a young and vulnerable age. This removal was the first time that our children had witnessed violence and emotional abuse. It was the first time that they experienced their parents unable to protect and assist them as they reached out for help to us.

The RCMP interrogated us an entire day resulting in an ambulance being called to the station to take me to the emergency room for a body that had completely seized from the brutal interrogation that an innocent mother had to endure. The RCMP then informed us that one set of finger prints and photos had gone missing and therefore could not be destroyed.

The Ministry of Children and Family has denied our premature son the needed Infant Development Programs for many months when first in care. This delay will now affect his ability to adjust in school with his peers. The emotional damages also incurred with removal from a safe and loving environment has also caused delay in his development as well as in the development of our other children who were also premature infants.

The Ministry has sought to undermine the bond that we have developed with our children, has verbally admitted this in phone conversations, and now has evidenced this through limiting and cutting back our access times. Our children are suffering as a result from this.

This wrongful removal has resulted in damaging the trust relationship we have had with our children, their sense of security and stability and their ability to form meaningful attachments due to continued bouncing from one foster home to another and then to times of respite in relief homes. . . . .

Our family has also suffered financially from this injustice. I had taught piano to children for many years and had to auction off my grand piano to pay for lawyers fees, my husband was laid off one of his positions due to too many missed days for court, visitations and meetings with the Ministry. We had to place a second mortgage on our home to also pay for lawyers fees and medical experts and now have lost our home to bankruptcy because of this. Family and friends have also given much to cover the costs incurred. The expenses now are well over $80,000 to date and the Ministry wishes to draw this over a fifteen to twenty day trial and wish us to fly our experts in for the purpose of cross examination. We now have to self represent ourselves in court.

The emotional trauma of having your children removed is unspeakable. They have torn our very heart and soul out when they took our treasures. Enduring day after day wondering if they are being cared for properly and knowing they need you and miss you and do not understand. Knowing they think you don’t want them and you have placed them with strangers is another unbearable thought as we had wanted them to know they could rely on us for everything, that they could trust us and they were loved unconditionally. Coming home to empty beds at night brings tears as we go into their rooms and pray for them one by one and blow them a kiss to wherever they are. The pain is unbearable. Putting on a brave smile at the end of a visitation as you wave goodbye to your crying child that is begging you not to leave him is barbaric.

We have been robbed of our parenthood. We have had our children stolen on false allegations and have missed the whole first year and a half of our first little girl. We are enduring what no parent should ever have to.

September 17, 2009

European Parliament Raps Lithuania for “Protection of Minors” Law Curbing Homosexual Advocacy
[title altered]

By Piero A. Tozzi, J.D.

     (NEW YORK – C-FAM) The European Parliament voted 349 to 218 today to condemn Lithuania for its "law on the protection of minors" which prohibits promotion of "homosexual, bisexual or polygamous relations" among children under 18 in the Baltic nation. Conservative critics contend that the measure, crafted in reaction to the domestic legislation of a sovereign member state pertaining to the family, oversteps the Parliament's authority.

     The resolution directs tkhe Agency for Fundamental Rights to opine on whether the law contravenes European anti-discrimination standards. Any such opinion would be non-binding, though activists would likely use it to press for greater recognition of rights based on "sexual orientation."

     An earlier proposal by the Alliance of Liberal and Democrats for Europe (ALDE), the "liberal" parliamentary faction, would have initiated proceedings to suspend Lithuania pursuant to article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, the 1992 pact that created the European Union (EU). Parliamentarians principally affiliated with the Christian Democratic grouping, the European People's Party (EPP), worked behind the scenes to soften the resolution and remove the Article 7 reference.

     While "progressive" parliamentarians lined up to charge Lithuania with promoting "homophobia," several EPP and conservative members spoke in opposition to the measure and in support of the country's sovereign right to pass laws protecting families and children, including Lithuania's first post-Soviet head of state Vytautas Landsbergis and Slovakian parliamentarian Anna Záborksá.

     Nevertheless, the EPP remained divided on the measure, with virtually every EPP member from France voting to censure Lithuania. Surprisingly, Malta's delegation, including its two EPP representatives, voted as a bloc against Lithuania.

Lithuania's Parliament, or Seimas, passed the child protection legislation in June. The President vetoed it, in apparent reaction to criticism from Western European politicians and homosexual advocacy organizations. In July, Lithuania's parliament overrode the veto. The law is scheduled to take effect in March 2010.

     David Quinn, Director of Ireland's Iona Institute and a family rights advocate, called the resolution "a completely unwarranted intrusion in the domestic affairs of a member state." Critics such as Quinn see the non-discrimination principle, particularly with respect to sexual orientation, being used to trump long-enshrined values such as religious liberty and parental rights. Quinn called anti-discrimination "the skeleton key that opens every room of the house."

     Some observers expect the Parliamentary action to have repercussions in Ireland, where the nation will vote in a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty next month.

     While the EU has "guaranteed" that Ireland's constitutional protection of unborn life would be unaffected by a "yes" vote on Lisbon, the European Parliament's action on Lithuania has fueled concerns among Irish euroskeptics that European institutions would seek to override the Republic's domestic laws. Among other changes, the Lisbon Treaty would make the Charter of Fundamental Rights binding upon members. While silent on abortion, critics fear an activist European Court of Justice reading such a right into the charter.

     Forty-six parliamentarians abstained on the Lithuanian resolution, including three Irish EPP members. The four Irish ALDE members broke with their party and voted against the resolution, a move insiders see as tactical and intended to forestall criticism in advance of the Lisbon referendum.

Good News: Science Awards Go to Adult-Cell Researchers

[From CitizenLink.com, Septlember 16, 2009

Dr. John Gurdon, a developmental biologist from Oxford University, and Dr. Shinya Yamanaka, a physician and researcher at Kyoto University, have been chosen to receive the prestigious Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award. In 2007, Yamanaka discovered Induced Pluripotent Stem (iPS) cells.

iPS cells are embryonic-like cells that can become specialized cell types without destroying a human embryo.

In a promotional video from the Lasker Institute, Yamanaka said he's excited about the future of the research.

"I expect some diseases like heart disease, heart failure, and some retinal diseases," he said, "may be a good candidate" (for therapies using this research).

Gurdon and Yamanaka will split the $250,000 cash prize and receive their awards in New York on Oct. 2.

—Steve Jordahl

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Learn more about lifesaving treatments using adult stem-cell research.

Sex Ed Gone Wild: Canadian Mag Covers Trend toward "Pleasure-Based" Sex Ed in Schools
Countered with physician's warning that "There are life and death infections involved here"

By Patrick B. Craine

Warning: The nature of this article required the inclusion of sexually explicit language that some may find offensive.

TORONTO, Ontario, September 8, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Lianne George of Maclean's magazine has penned a piece published this week on a new trend in schools' sexual education offerings to focus on the pleasure of sex. Her article highlights the work of Toronto's Carlyle Jansen, the owner of a 'sex shop' for women, Good For Her, who has launched a new not-for-profit organization devoted to offering free, "pleasure-based" sex workshops to schools and other groups in the area.

Jansen has long offered pleasure-based workshops through her store, but, according to George, a year and a half ago Jansen started getting calls from local high school teachers who wanted her to come and offer sex-ed to their classes. Since then, Jansen guesses that she has spoken to about 12 or 15 classes.

"Kids are taught to death about all the bad things that can happen to them if they have sex," Jansen told George. "They've said, 'We've heard about sexually transmitted infections, we know you can get pregnant, but we want to know about pleasure and we want to know about healthy relationships.'"

In the classes, she talks to teens about whatever they would like to know, from masturbation to oral sex to sex toys (examples of which she brings to the classroom in case teens ask). She also teaches the kids about the sexual 'pleasure centres' using items depicting sexual organs.

Now, Jansen has helped launch the Sexual Health Education Pleasure Project (SHEPP) in the Greater Toronto Area, whose mission is "to provide free, pleasure-based sexual health education focused mainly on marginalized communities including youth, people of colour, women, queer and trans communities." Course topic titles include "Negotiating what you want - in and out of the bedroom," and "Cool, safe, and hot sex."

A topic entitled "Re-visioning 'pro-choice'" is also on the list, with the description: "Not just about abortion any more. Know your rights!" The group explains their vision of 'pro-choice' further on a page entitled 'What We Believe In'. While the phrase is certainly used to designate openness to abortion, the groups sees it as including a broader range of sexual choices, including the freedom to exercise sexual license and the freedom to marry whomever one chooses.

Gwen Landolt of REAL Women Canada criticized Jansen's narrow focus on pleasure in teaching about sexuality. "Obviously this woman is promoting her own business," she told LifeSiteNews.com, "but also it absolutely misconstrues the whole objective of sexuality.

"Obviously pleasure is a component," she said, "but not the component that matters. It's a part of a loving, truly bonding relationship, and they're missing the whole point in letting children think that sex is just an extracurricular activity, with anyone at anytime as long as it's pleasurable."

Landolt pointed to the moral dimension and to the purpose of sexuality, "which as we know is to bring forward children in a marital relationship," she said. "That's why we've been given this wonderful gift of sexuality," she explained. "It's missed the whole object of it. It's zeroed in on one component, but not the whole picture, and children should not be exposed to such a narrow perspective.". . . .

At meeting, NEA declines to remain neutral on abortion
[from the Baptist Press website]

Posted on Jul 6, 2009 | by Erin Roach

SAN DIEGO (BP)--The National Education Association, the nation's largest labor union, voted July 5 to reject a proposal officially to remain neutral on the issues of abortion and family planning.

Also during its annual meeting in San Diego July 1-6, the NEA went on record as supporting laws legalizing civil unions and "gay marriage" -- it said either are acceptable -- and it backed efforts to repeal federal legislation that "discriminates" against same-sex couples, which presumably could target the Defense of Marriage Amendment.

The proposed bylaw amendment regarding abortion would have invalidated NEA Resolution I-16 on family planning, which says NEA "supports family planning, including the right to reproductive freedom."

The defeated proposal said the NEA takes "no position" on the issues of abortion and family planning. It would have prohibited the NEA from filing a friend-of-the-court brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in litigation seeking to overturn Roe v. Wade, and it would have kept the NEA from "lobbying for or against legislation regarding the dissemination of birth control information, the funding of birth control procedures, or the sale of birth control products." [Click here to read the rest of this article on the Baptist Press website.]f

John Holdren: Not Even Born Babies Are Human Yet

John Holdren, President Obama's Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, has written two books outlining a host of options to deal with what he sees as a global crisis of "human overpopulation."

First Things quotes Holren as follows:

“The fetus, given the opportunity to develop properly before birth, and given the essential early socializing experiences and sufficient nourishing food during the crucial early years after birth, will ultimately develop into a human being,” John P. Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, wrote in “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions.”

["Obama Science Adviser: Trees Should be Allowed to Sue, Babies Not Yet “Human Beings," "Second-Hand Smoke," First Things online. July 30, 2009, Wesley J. Smith]

Catholics launch anti-euthanasia campaign

By ANDREW HANON, Sun Media

Last Updated: 4th September 2009

Local Catholics are inundating their MP’s with emails and letters opposing a proposal to legalize assisted suicide and euthanasia.

The campaign was launched by Archbishop Richard Smith, who warned parishioners that Bill C-384 is “morally unacceptable and unworthy of our country.”

He’s trying to meet with all Edmonton area federal politicians and is urging Catholics to lobby their MP.

The author of the private member’s bill is Bloc Quebecois MP Francine Lalonde. It’s her third attempt at legalizing euthanasia, but this time it’s made it to second reading, the furthest any such bill has ever gotten.

It’s expected to be debated in Parliament on Sept. 29 — assuming that the Tory minority government isn’t toppled by the Liberals, forcing an election.

But Archdiocese of Edmonton spokesman Lorraine Turchansky said Catholics aren’t taking any chances. . . .

In his letter to parishoners, Smith said, “the common good of any society depends upon the commitment of all citizens to uphold the dignity of every human life at each moment and circumstance. The legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide in Canada would be a major social failure.”

Edmonton St. Albert Tory MP Brent Rathgeber says he’s received hundreds of emails from constituents on the issue. Only one was in favour of the bill.

“I was opposed to Bill C-384 long before I met with His Grace or received the voluminous letters and emails from my constituents,” Rathgeber said. “He was preaching to the converted.”

The politician wrote in his blog, “I do not accept the argument that euthanasia or assisted suicide is a compassionate response to suffering. As life nears its natural end, the compassionate response to any pain and hardship is good palliative care, not the termination of the patient’s life.”

But Lalonde has argued that her bill is more compassionate than the status quo. A cancer patient, she says she understands intolerable pain and thinks individuals should have the right to ease their own suffering.

She has the full support of groups like the Right To Die Society of Canada. .. .

She said surveys show growing acceptance of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Polling data on the society’s website says that in 1968 45% of Canadians thought doctors should be allowed to end the life of terminally ill patients who’ve requested it in writing. By 2002, the number had climbed to 79%.

andrew.hanon@sunmedia.ca

[To read the whole article, go to the Edmonton Sun online]

Kelowna's Mayor's Office Proclaims "Protect Human Life Week"

September 26 — October 4, 2009

September 8, 2009

The City of Kelowna, BC, Canada, has once again proclaimed Sept 26 — Oct 4, 2009 as “Protect Human Life Week” in Kelowna. It is the second consecutive year that Mayor Sharon Shepherd has agreed to sign the proclamation, which promotes dignity and respect for all human beings from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death.

“Protect Human Life Week” makes the statement that all human life is sacred from beginning to end.” says Marlon Bartram, the Executive Director of The Kelowna Right to Life Society. “The abortion, euthanasia, and assisted suicide mentality purports that inflicting death is an acceptable way to deal with difficult life circumstances or to end suffering. We’re here to say 'no,' the taking of innocent human life is always a serious ethical wrong. Offering compassion, and not death, is the a

Evangelical Francis Collins Named to Head NIH

Tiffany Stanley

Religion News Service

July 10, 2009

WASHINGTON (RNS) -- Francis Collins, the researcher who mapped the human genome and navigated clashes between his Christian faith and science, has been chosen to lead the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Calling Collins "one of the top scientists in the world," President Obama announced his nomination on Wednesday (July 8), one day after the NIH released new stem cell research guidelines that angered many conservative Christians.

Though Collins, a self-described evangelical, will head the nation's primary scientific research agency, the avid supporter of stem cell research seems unlikely to allay the fears fellow evangelicals have over embryonic stem cell research.

"Francis is a great person, a good scientist, but we disagree with his positions on human embryonic stem cell research and on cloning human embryos for experimentation," said David Prentice, senior fellow at the conservative Family Research Council.

Prentice's office, along with the National Association of Evangelicals, Concerned Women for America and other Christian advocacy groups, favor adult stem cell research, but oppose embryonic research because they believe the process destroys nascent forms of human life.

[from Crosswalk.com ]

From citizenlink.com, June 24, 2009:

Gay-Activist Movement to be Honored at White House
by Steve Jordahl, CitizenLink senior staff writer

Event comes just months after the Obama administration failed to acknowledge the National Day of Prayer with East Room celebration.

The Obama administration, which refused to send a representative to a Capitol Hill commemoration of the National Day of Prayer, is hosting a White House celebration of what most gay activists regard as the birth of their movement.

President Barack Obama has invited key leaders in the gay community to the East Room on Monday to commemorate the Stonewall Riots of June 28, 1969, during which hundreds of homosexuals threw bottles and garbage at police and set a gay bar, the Stonewall Inn, on fire.

Tim Goeglein, Focus on the Family's vice president of external relations and a former special assistant to President George W. Bush, said the White House event is a boon to the gay lobby, which has been becoming impatient with Obama.

"The president of the United State has the largest bully pulpit in the country and clearly gets to pick and choose among the issues that he would want to highlight," Goeglein said. "There's an enormous amount of pressure (to advocate for pro-gay policies). The president has partially extended health benefits to homosexual partners. The president is of course now doing a commemoration, a very important commemoration.

[Read the whole article on citizenl.ink.com .]

Scarce Federal Dollars Fund Sex Parade

[The following action alert comes from Canada Family Action in an e-mail of June 22, 2009.]

Action Alert:

Some of you will not be aware yet that the federal Conservative government “proudly” announced a transfer of $400,000 of your tax dollars to the Toronto Pride s-x parade.

There are pictures and videos from the past parades of perverted sexual acts occurring during those parades. Public nudity and other indecent acts are common in this homosexual parade, although no convictions have ever occurred. One such image I sent to every Conservative MP to show them what they just approved of and paid for. Some MPs were offended. Well - look reality in the face, “lawmakers” – this is what you spent our tax dollars on, I said.

On June 4^th Prime Minister Harper announced a new program setting aside $100 million for “Marquis Tourism Events”. With record speed, on June 15^th, the Minister of State, Diane Ablonzcy, got a $400,000 cheque out the door to fund the sex parade in Toronto this week. The next giveaway, to who knows what city, for their sex parade remains to be seen. But all this is a clear indication that the Conservative party has abandoned conservative principles. This event combined with the $50 billion dollar (and rising) debt ridden position we have been put into may well be the end to the merged conservative – progressive party as government. This is beyond being acceptable.

Some will argue that government cannot legislate morality. If that was true, government surely should not pay to promote immorality and indecency.

The Con-servative party that exists now is a dirty muddied version of liberalism at its worst.

We are thankful for the raising of the age of consent, and the steps taken to toughen justice in Canada by the Conservatives. But all of that pales when other counter productive actions are taken.

Canada Family Action is suggesting four things you may want to consider doing:

1) call upon the government to right a wrong they have perpetrated upon tax paying Canadians. Ask them to STOP the funding of anti-family and indecent projects with our TAX dollars ( the movie fiasco was such an issue). Real Conservative ideology of smaller government does not take money from tax payers and give it to sex activists.

2) call the Prime Minister and ask him to cancel this kind of out of control and excessive spending. This is a muddied, weakened, progressive version of liberalism.

3) consider whether your membership and donations to the current version of the Conservative party are good political investment.

The Conservative Party number is (866) 808-8407.

4) Call your MP’s constituency office also to express your position on this issue now. Parliament has adjourned.

http://webinfo.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/MainMPsCompleteList.aspx?TimePeriod=Current&Language=E

Brian Rushfeldt

Executive Director

Canada Family Action

"What Would We Do with $400,000?"

[An excerpt from an article on the website of the Association for Reformed Political Action Canada, downloaded July 10, 2009]

When we read about these developments we can only shake our heads. So many things are wrong with this scenario. Why is our federal government spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a gay pride parade? How many other similar events or activities are being paid for that people aren't responding to? (Think of the millions of dollars that this same government has given to the infamous Canadian museum of human rights, or the ongoing tax-funded slaughter of the unborn). If it was a mistake, what does that tell us about how money is being managed on a bigger picture? Why is the Prime Minister's office giving such a different message to the mainstream media then Mr. Trost is giving to a small Christian media outlet? Christians get blamed for wanting to impose our morality on the general public by applying our faith to politics. How does this government-funded homosexual festival not impose a morality of its own? The question is not whether a government will impose a morality. The question is which morality will it be? Is it the morality that says do whatever you feel like whenever you feel like? Or is it the morality that built so many of the things that we value about Canada (such as the rule of law, equality, and basic human rights)?

What if $400,000 was spent promoting the morality that builds this country stronger? What if the recent March For Life in Ottawa was given a government grant of this size each year. There is little doubt it would draw bigger crowds and be a lot of fun. Think about how backwards this is! An event that praises unrestrained sexual activity is funded (some of the money apparently was used to hire "performers") even though there is no doubt that it hurts individuals and families. But an event that promotes the value of human life is sneered at. At the March for Life children, adults, and seniors unite to proclaim the the importance of upholding our responsibilities by caring for each other, especially the most vulnerable. Afterall, we need this as a basis for the human rights that we claim to value so highly. Even a high-profile think tank recently proclaimed that Canada needs more babies. In contrast, the "gay pride" parade is about selfishness, lust, and individual rights at the expense of responsibilities. Where we spend our money gives us a pretty clear picture of where our heart is at.

Of course the point is not that we want $400,000 for causes that we believe in. The federal government should stop pretending to be a giant philanthropist and allow citizens to pay less taxes so individuals can put more money towards the things that we believe are worth supporting.

Action Items: Let's not settle for cop-out answer from our government officials who give us one answer and the mainstream media a different answer. Phone, write, or email your MP to discuss what we as a nations should be valuing and funding. If you MP is a Christian, be sure to ask them what they are doing within their party to respond to decisions like this.

Second, send a note of support to Mr. Trost ( Trost.B@parl.gc.ca ) and CC Mr. Harper ( Harper.S@parl.gc.ca ) and Mr. Clement ( Clement.T@parl.gc.ca ) so they are aware of your support for those MP's who are brave enough to speak to these issues. We can't just speak up when we disagree with something. We should be commending those who do what is right as well.

Third, beneath all political debates is an underlying war between worldviews. As Christians, we understand this bigger battle that is going on. We have to always be careful to engage in this battle in a way that is consistent with all of God's Word. Regardless of how rediculous or immoral something might be, we have to show both grace and truth. Let us remember to speak to our fellow Canadians in a spirit of love, regardless of whether our comments are public or anonymous.

[Click here to read the whole of the article from which the excerpt above was taken.]

UK, American, Canadian Pro-Life Groups Condemn Tiller Murder

By Alex Bush

June 1, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In the wake of the murder of late-term abortionist George Tiller, pro-life groups from across North America and the UK have condemned the killing as “heinous,” “deplorable,” “cowardly,” “senseless,” and “unconscionable.”

Abortionist Tiller was renowned for performing late-term abortions in Kansas, many of them post-viability. The abortionist only recently found himself in court facing 19 counts of performing illegal late-term abortions, but was found “not guilty” by a jury last month. He had also survived a previous murder attempt in 1993.

Scott Roeder, a man with no affiliations with the mainstream pro-life movement, has been taken into custody and is expected to be charged with allegedly murdering Tiller.

LifeSiteNews.com has obtained statements from some 20 pro-life groups, all unanimously condemning the murder. The statements stress that while Tiller was involved in perpetrating a great evil, all life is sacred, including the lives of abortionists. They also stress that the pro-life movement wishes to change abortion laws by legal means and not by violence. (To read all the statements, click here)

“Pro-lifers do not answer violence with violence,” said Stephen Borden, a Pastor in a pro-life African-American coalition, in response to the news of the Tiller slaying.

Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and a colleague of Borden, said that she “wanted to share with [Tiller] the harm [she] experienced from abortion.” She continued, saying that she had a deep desire for Tiller to “join me in repentance.”

“I am deeply sorry that his life was taken before that could happen,” King said.

Dr. James Dobson from Focus on the Family issued a statement saying that members of the organization “categorically condemn the act of vigilantism and violence.” Dobson said that America was built on the rule of law, and despite the verdict in Tiller’s case “he was acquitted by the court and declared ‘not guilty’ in the eyes of the law. That is our system, and we honor it.”

Jim Hughes, National President of Campaign Life Coalition in Canada and Vice President of International Right to Life said that not only is the murder of abortionists “seriously damaging to the pro-life cause, it is also deeply contrary to everything that is meant by the phrase pro-life.”

The Family Research Council issued a statement saying that they “strongly condemn the actions taken today by this vigilante killer and we pray for the Tiller family and for the nation that we might once again be a nation that values all human, both born and unborn.”

The UK group Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) director John Smeaton said on his blog, “SPUC has always condemned violence, whether against abortionists or unborn babies.”

“Those responsible [for violence against abortionists] have on each occasion acted as individuals, and not members of any pro-life group,” he continued.

The American Life League’s executive director Shaun Kenney said that “Leaders within the pro-life movement often discuss justice in connection with our mission to end the tragedy of abortion. Today, Dr. George Tiller's life ended in an act defying those principles.”

“We firmly hope the perpetrators of this act are apprehended, that the facts be made known, and that justice according to the law is preserved and dispensed.”

Brian Burch, president of CatholicVote.org, said in a statement that “We cannot create a Civilization of Love with such violence. We call upon all people of good will to pray this week for the soul of Mr. Tiller and to pray that our society will abandon every form of hatred and violence.”

Burch quoted Cardinal John O’Connor, who said that killing abortionists “discredits the right-to-life movement. Murder is murder. It’s madness. You cannot prevent killing by killing.”

The National Right to Life Executive Director David O’Steen said that the “pro-life movement works to protect the right to life and increase respect for human life. The unlawful use of violence is directly contrary to that goal.”

List of pro-life groups condemning the murder (To read all the statements, click here):

Society for the Protection of Unborn Children

40 Days For Life

Operation Rescue

Center for Bio Ethical Reform

American Life League

Focus on the Family

Women Influencing the Nation

Campaign Life Coalition

Kansas Coalition for Life

Family Research Council

The Christian Anti-Defamation League

Kansas Family Policy Council

Susan B. Anthony List

Priests For Life

Kansans For Life

Stand True

National Right to Life

CatholicVote.org

Kelowna Right to Life

Real Women of BC

[British Columbia Parents and Teachers for Life would also add its condemnation of this slaying. I heard the news while travelling on holiday and we have not had time to write a formal statement. --President of BCPTL.]

Canadian Evangelical Leadership Looking to Increase March For Life Attendance

By Alex Bush

TORONTO, Ontario, May 26, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Bruce Clemenger, president of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC), said in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com that the EFC "will be exploring ways in which we can encourage more participation" for the annual March for Life in the future.

In a recent EFC weekly update Clemenger strongly encouraged Evangelicals to make the trip to Ottawa for this year's March for Life.

Clemenger also said that he was impressed with "the number of youth attending from Catholic schools" and with the "positive and upbeat" attitude of those in attendance "despite the weather."

"We are gaining momentum, evidenced by the size of the rally, the number of young people, the number of MPs and the encouraging reports about the energy in the pro-life caucus," Clemenger said.

Clemenger told LSN that his participation "with the leaders of the Catholic Church" struck him personally. This was the first year in the history of the pro-life event that the Canadian bishops put the full weight of their official support behind the march. Nearly a dozen bishops joined the marchers earlier this May.

Clemenger led the opening prayer at the March, saying, "We stand and bear witness to the truth of life. We ask that You would bring us a government that will honour life. God, our Father, we ask that these killings stop and that together we can foster a Canadian identity built on relationships of healing."

He continued, "Give us words of wisdom as we choose life, as we affirm the dignity of all human life, and give us strength as we plea for the protection of unborn children."

Transcript of Bruce Clemenger's opening prayer at the March For Life 2009, here.

Related LifeSiteNews.com Coverage

Life Chain: a public pro-life witness
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/sep/06092002.html

12,000: Canadian 2009 March for Life Smashes Previous Attendance Records
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/may/09051409.html

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada
http://www.evangelicalfellowship.ca/

From: "The Caucus," The New York Times, May 26, 2009, 8:15 am

Obama Chooses Sotomayor for Supreme Court Nominee

By Jeff Zeleny

Ron Jordan Natoli Studio/U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, via Associated Press U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

President Obama will nominate Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as his first appointment to the court, officials said Tuesday, and has scheduled an announcement for 10:15 a.m. at the White House.

If confirmed by the Democratic-controlled Senate, Judge Sotomayor, 54, would replace Justice David H. Souter to become the second woman on the court and only the third female justice in the history of the Supreme Court. She also would be the first Hispanic justice to serve on the Supreme Court.
[Read the whole article in The New York Times online.]

Links to Christianity Today "Politics Blog" Comments on the Sotomayor Choice

· Hope

[Note: Steven Ertelt ison LifeNews, not LifeSite as stated in error on the Christianity Today site.

· The Offhand Comment Pro-Life Groups Don't Like

· The Sotomayor Decision Pro-Life Groups Aren't Sure About

The Sotomayor Decision Pro-Life Groups Like

CBC "Engaged in Blatant Media Censorship" Says CLC about Lack of National Coverage for March for Life
CLC lodges formal complaint to the CRTC

By Alex Bush

May 25, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), the Canadian pro-life organization that every year organizes the National March for Life, is accusing the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) of engaging in "blatant media censorship." According to the pro-life group, "for a broadcaster who is funded by the taxpaying Canadian public" CBC's failure to give national coverage to this year's March for Life "certainly constitutes unethical journalism and professional misconduct."

A letter signed by CLC president Jim Hughes was sent to the CBC Ombudsman today, suggesting that CBC willfully "ignored" the 12,300 people who convened on Parliament Hill two weeks ago to protest the 40th anniversary of the legalization of abortion. This despite the fact that CLC provided CBC with information about the massive pro-life event well in advance, and the fact the station has reported on much smaller protests on the Hill in the past.

"How is it that CBC's national news desk has in the recent past given lengthy coverage to a paltry 200 individuals at a pro-marijuana rally on the Hill," asks the letter, "but fails to notice 12,000+ prolife citizens overflowing the grounds of Parliament Hill?"

"Is this not proof of a double standard which favours 'socially liberal' causes?"

The letter points out that even the local coverage of the March by the CBC was limited to a mere "25 seconds on a local affiliate which misrepresented the numbers attending as 'hundreds'," rather than the more than 12,000 who attended.

According to CLC, the national blackout regarding the March for Life was to all appearances initiated by the CBC "for no other reason than the CBC disagrees with our opinions on abortion."

CLC suggests out that the omission by the CBC is even more egregious given the unprecedented level of support given to the march by the Canadian bishops, 11 of whom were present on Parliament Hill, and the "explosive 50% growth in attendance" at the march over last year's event.

Jim Hughes concludes the CLC letter, saying, "On behalf of millions of Canadians who have been deprived of unbiased journalism by its public broadcaster and the hundreds of thousands who are disgusted by the CBC's annual blacklisting of the National March For Life, I request a thorough investigation into CBC's programming practices. The results and remedies ought to receive the national publicity and exposure which CBC routinely denies to opinions with which it disagrees."

CLC also sent the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) a letter of formal complaint, which accuses the CBC of discrimination against the March for Life.

"We believe the evidence is overwhelming to support our claim that the CBC has discriminated unfairly against our massive National March For Life in that it gave no national television coverage whatsoever to this historic event," says CLC in that letter.

To read the CLC letter to the CBC: www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009_docs/CBC_letter_May2509.pdf

To read the CLC letter to the CRTC:
www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009_docs/CRTC_letter_May2509.pdf

Contact information for the CRTC and the CBC Ombudsman:

CRTC:
Toll-free: 1-877-249-CRTC (2782)
Outside Canada: 819-997-0313
Media inquiries: 819-997-9403

CBC Ombudsman Vince Carlin
E-mail: ombudsman@cbc.ca
Telephone: 416/205-2978

Thursday May 14, 2009

12,000: Canadian 2009 March for Life Smashes Previous Attendance Records

By John Jalsevac

May 14, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Under the threat of dark clouds and sometimes through pouring rain, a record-smashing crowd of 12,000 Canadians today gathered on Parliament Hill for a rally and then marched through the streets of Ottawa in protest against 40 years of legalized abortion in Canada.

The number of participants significantly exceeded last year's record-breaking crowd of 8,000, making it by far the largest crowd in the 12 years that the march has taken place.

Those in attendance included 18 Members of Parliament.

Jim Hughes, the president of Campaign Life Coalition, the pro-life group which organizes the annual event, told LifeSiteNews that he was thrilled with the turnout. "It's a real blessing," he said, "especially the growing number of young people that are here."

"This is going to make a difference," said Hughes, who pointed out that pro-life Canadians are beginning to mark the date of the march on their calendars, and are going out of their way to make it every year. "We're having a real impact here," he said.

Today's events began in the morning with interdenominational prayer services at the Canadian Reformed Church and St. George's Anglican Church, and two Catholic masses at Notre Dame Basilica and St. Patrick's Basilica.

Eyewitnesses at the Catholic masses said that both churches were filled to, and beyond, capacity. Approximately 900 people squeezed into St. Patrick's Basilica, while over 1,100 overflowed Notre Dame. As well, an additional 200 or so at each location had to watch the mass on a screen in the basement of each church, due to the lack of space.

Hughes said he was especially pleased by the unprecedented show of support from the Canadian Catholic bishops, with 11 bishops celebrating at the masses. This was the first year in the history of the march that the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops has thrown its official support behind the event.

At 3 p.m., after the rally on Parliament Hill and the march, representatives of Silent No More Awareness Campaign began delivering powerful testimonies about their personal experiences with abortion, repeatedly moving their listeners to tears. Just as the clock on the Hill was striking 3:00, many in the crowd marvelled that the sun suddenly broke through the clouds for the first time that day and soon afterwards the sky cleared with hardly a cloud in sight. Also, some pointed out that as each of the Silent No More Awareness speakers was introduced, as if on cue a strong wind would blow, with the strongest occuring when the Canadian leader of the group, Angelina Steenstra, was introduced.

[From: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/may/09051409.html ]

Alberta's culture minister not backing down on parents' rights bill

By Trish Audette, Edmonton JournalMay 14, 2009

EDMONTON — Alberta's culture minister says he has no intention of backing away from a controversial plan to guarantee parents the right to pull kids from classes that clash
with their moral beliefs.

Lindsay Blackett, a rookie minister and first-time MLA, says that despite the barbs sent his way from teachers, human rights groups, school boards, parents and opposition
politicians, he's convinced he's doing the right thing by enshrining 'parents' rights' in the provincial Human Rights Act.

"One of the things that this bill and the parental rights piece has brought to light is a discussion about our rights as parents," Blackett said.

Last month, the minister introduced a package of proposed changes to the act which would, for the first time in provincial history, enshrine in law the right to protection from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

But it was the parental rights clause, which would allow parents to withdraw their children from classroom lessons on sexuality, sexual orientation and religion, that made headlines. . . . .

[Click here to read the whole article in the Calgary Herald online.]

Good News - Human Trafficking Bill Easily Passes First Vote in Parliament
[from the ARPA website at http://www.arpacanada.ca/index.php/mn/563-human-trafficking-bill-easily-passes-first-vote-in-parliament]

ARPA Note: Thanks to all those who urged their MP to support this private member's bill. We will continue to watch it as it makes its way through the necessary stages on its way to becoming law. Continue to urge your MP to pass this legislation.

News Release from Joy Smith:

VOTE REVEALS STRONG SUPPORT FOR C-268 - Ottawa, ON: Joy Smith, Member of Parliament for Kildonan – St. Paul, was delighted with the results of a vote today on Bill C-268 at Second Reading. Bill C-268, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (minimum sentence for offences involving trafficking of persons under the age of eighteen years), passed at Second Reading by a vote of 232 in favour to 47 opposed.

“The resounding support for Bill C-268 is a clear indication that Members of Parliament understand the importance of enacting enhanced penalties for the trafficking of children,” said MP Joy Smith. “Victims of human trafficking, especially children, experience catastrophic lifelong physical and psychological harm. Mandatory minimum sentences would reflect the both gravity of this crime and Canada’s international obligations to protect children.”

MP Joy Smith also tabled petitions containing over 5000 signatures from Canadians who are demanding that the penalties to child traffickers fully reflect the gravity of the crime.

“It is clear that the lenient sentences handed out to for child traffickers in Canada are not acceptable to Canadians,” said MP Smith. “I would encourage Canadians to continue voicing their support for mandatory sentences for the trafficking of children.”

Bill C-268 will now be reviewed by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, before being reported back to the House of Commons for Third Reading.

A Look Back at Obama's First 100 Days

[ From: CitizenLink April 29, 2009 at http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000009905.cfm ]

staff reports

'I would hope he would do more to protect families in this country.'

On Wednesday, President Barack Obama will mark his 100th day in office. Focus on the Family Action has analyzed his decisions and policies thus far, as they relate to the family.

In his first 100 days, Obama has:

Signed an executive order allowing taxpayer funding to go to international groups that promote or provide abortions. The “Mexico City Policy,” as it’s known, also was rescinded by President Bill Clinton and then reinstated by President George W. Bush.

Opened the door for more human embryos to be destroyed for unethical stem-cell research despite science showing that adult stem cells provide cures; to date, embryonic stem cells have not.

Begun the process of rescinding the Bush health care provider conscience regulations. This move comes at a time when the U.S. is experiencing a shortage of practicing physicians, a drop one senator described as reaching "crisis proportions." Making it easier for hospitals and medical schools to discriminate against physicians based on their moral or religious beliefs will only drive more of them out of the profession.

Lifted a seven-year ban on taxpayer funding of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which is linked to forced abortion programs.

Nominated Hillary Clinton as secretary of State. Clinton is an ardent pro-abortion politician who recently accepted Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger award. During her acceptance speech, Clinton praised the eugenicist Sanger as a great Americans.

Nominated Kathleen Sebelius as secretary of Health and Human Services. She has accepted campaign contributions from notorious late-term abortionist George Tiller and welcomed him into the governor’s mansion. Sebelius is one of the most pro-abortion governors in the country.

Nominated Dawn Johnsen, former legal director of NARAL Pro-Choice America, to head the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice. Johnsen has called motherhood “involuntary servitude” and has said that restrictions on abortion make women nothing more than “fetal containers.”

Attacked charitable giving by proposing a reduced tax deduction for gifts to nonprofits. If it becomes law, it will have a major impact on faith-based ministry giving and other nonprofits.

Signed a bill that kills the District of Columbia’s successful school-choice program. The program benefits low-income families by providing private-school scholarships. Approximately 3,500 students have benefited from this program.

. . .

Appointed Ellen Moran to a major communications post at the White House. Moran is the former executive director of the pro-abortion EMILY’s List.

. . . .

Expressed support for hate-crimes legislation and will sign if it reaches his desk. The House will vote on the measure April 29. The legislation creates a special class of crime based on the victim’s sexual orientation. Those accused of “inducing” a federal hate crime could be held responsible for the actions of another person. For example, pastors preaching against homosexuality could be charged with a crime if someone listening committed a “hate crime” against a gay individual.

Ordered a legal review of hiring-and-firing standards instituted by faith-based groups that receive federal funding.

Released a Department of Homeland Security “watch list” that included pro-life Americans.

. . . .
[To read the whole of the article, go to http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000009905.cfm .]

German Parents Convicted after Withdrawing Daughter from Explicit Sex-Ed Program: Appeal Filed

April 22, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Alliance Defense Fund attorneys are representing two German parents in an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights filed Tuesday. The two parents were convicted under German law when they chose to educate their child at home on the subject of sexuality rather than allow her to participate in a four-day "sexual education" course and related stage production at her school, both of which taught views of sexuality in conflict with the family's Christian faith.

"Parents, not the government, are the ones ultimately responsible for making educational choices for their children," said ADF Legal Counsel Roger Kiska.

The parents, Eduard and Elisabeth Elscheidt, and their three children are active in the Christian Baptist Church. The Elscheidts were concerned about allowing their 11-year-old daughter Franziska to attend four school days of "sexual education" and a mandatory, interactive stage play titled, "Mein Körper gehört mir" ("My Body Is Mine") in February 2007. They regarded the play and lessons as morally harmful.

The parents, being convinced that they were within their legal and moral rights to protect their daughter, removed her from the offending play and accompanying lessons, instead opting to educate her according to their own views on sexuality during those days. They did not withdraw their daughter from any other school programs or classes. The parents believe that the play and lessons were not only opposed to their faith, but also obliterated their rights under Protocol 1, Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

The Elscheidts argued to a German court that no scientific proof existed that the programs prevented child abuse (the play's stated purpose) but, to the contrary, taught the children to become sexually active by ultimately teaching the principle that if something feels good sexually, then it is acceptable to do it. The court nonetheless convicted and fined the Elscheidts in June 2008.

Two subsequent appeals were rejected, resulting in the appeal to the European Court of Human Rights filed Tuesday. The application objects to the punitive measures applied by the German court in convicting the applicants and seeks to establish that such opt-outs of "sexual education" programs are in line with ECHR Protocol 1, Article 2.

ADF Counsel Kiska said, "These parents were well within their rights under the European Convention of Human Rights to opt to teach their children a view of sexuality that is in accord with their own religious beliefs instead of sending them to a class and stageplay they found objectionable. These types of cases are crucial battles in the effort to keep bad decisions overseas from being relied upon by activists who attack parental rights in America."

URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/apr/09042203.html

Miss California USA Loses Crown after Defending Marriage

[From CitizenLink, April 21, 2009]

by Jennifer Mesko, [CitizenLink] editor

'It's not about being politically correct. For me, it was being biblically correct.'

Miss California USA Carrie Prejean said she knew she'd lost the Miss USA crown as soon as she spoke in favor of one-man, one-woman marriage.

During Sunday night's Miss USA telecast, Prejean was asked whether other states should follow Vermont's lead in legislating same-sex "marriage."

"In my family, I … believe marriage should be between a man and a woman," she said. "No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."

Prejean later told NBC: "I knew at that moment, after I'd answered the question, I knew that I was not going to win because of my answer — because I had spoken from my heart, from my beliefs, and for my God."

Even Donald Trump, who co-owns the pageant, said her answer "probably did cost her the crown." Prejean finished as first runner-up to Miss North Carolina.

Perez Hilton, a gay-activist blogger, was the judge who posed the question to Prejean. He called it the "worst answer in pageant history" and called Miss California profane names.

"That is not the kind of woman I want to be Miss USA," he told MSNBC. "Miss USA should represent all Americans. And with her answer, she instantly was divisive and alienated millions."

Interestingly, tens of millions of Americans in 30 states — including California — have passed constitutional amendments to protect the definition of marriage.

"The majority of California’s voters — more than 7 million people — voted to protect traditional marriage," Ron Prentice, chairman of California's ProtectMarriage.com, told Fox News. "And we congratulate Miss California for her conviction to speak her beliefs."
Hilton apologized Monday for his comments, but today said he stands by what he said. . . . .

[To read the whole of this CitizenLink article, click here.]

"Mr. Bean" Star Urges House of Lords to Protect Free Speech Clause in "Anti-Homophobia" Law

By Kathleen Gilbert

LONDON, March 20, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Comedian Rowan Atkinson, best known for his role as "Mr. Bean," has urged the British House of Lords to ignore a bid to remove a clause protecting free speech in the UK's "anti-homophobia" law.

The Blackadder and Mr. Bean actor told the Lords meeting Tuesday: "Do I think that I would risk prosecution because of jokes or drama about sexual orientation with which I might be involved if we don't have the free speech clause?

"Not really - but I dread something almost as bad - a culture of censoriousness, a questioning, negative and leaden attitude that is encouraged by legislation of this nature but is considerably and meaningfully alleviated by the free speech clause."

The Government is expected to delete a free speech protection added last year to rein in the law against "incitement to homophobic hatred," which carries a maximum seven-year jail sentence. The protection reads: "For the avoidance of doubt, the discussion or criticism of sexual conduct or practices or the urging of persons to refrain from or modify such conduct or practices shall not be taken of itself to be threatening or intended to stir up hatred."

If the Government succeeds, it would fall to the House of Lords to possibly recuperate the amendment. A similar scenario was played out last May, when the same words were deleted by MPs in Parliament, then reinstated by Peers in the House of Lords.

Atkinson, who has led criticism of "hate speech" laws in previous years, criticized such laws in general: "The last thing that any academic, or cleric, or practitioner in creative writing wants to hear, is of police officers walking round with a tool box bulging with sanctions against speech and expression that 'could be useful one day'," he said.

"I do not believe that legislation of such a censorious nature as that of Hate Speech, carrying as it does the risk of a seven year jail sentence for saying the wrong thing in the wrong way, can ever by justified merely by the desire to 'send the right message'."

Lord David Waddington, who inserted the amendment last year, said after Tuesday's meeting: "Last year the House of Lords voted not once but twice to force the Government to accept a free speech clause in its controversial new 'homophobic hatred' offence.

"Many of my colleagues are shocked that the Government should be trying to repeal such a modest protection so soon after it was passed into law," he continued. "However, I think the Government has got a fight on its hands."

Waddington noted that "Christian groups are particularly concerned that the homophobic hatred law will be unfairly used against them" as "there have been plenty of examples of heavy-handed police intervention even before the new law."

"In recent months there has been a growing sense that devout Christians are being marginalised in British society. Repealing the free speech clause will only make things worse," he said.

Staring into the Abyss

Why Peter Singer makes the New Atheists nervous.

Dinesh D'Souza | posted on Christianity Today online on Mar, 17, 2009

I write this fresh from debating bioethicist Peter Singer on "Can we be moral without God?" at Singer's home campus, Princeton University. Singer is a mild-mannered fellow who speaks calmly and lucidly. Yet you wouldn't have to read his work too long to find his extreme positions. He cheerfully advocates infanticide and euthanasia and, in almost the same breath, favors animal rights. Even most liberals would have qualms about third-trimester abortions; Singer does not hesitate to advocate what may be termed fourth-trimester abortions, i.e., the killing of infants after they are born.

Singer writes, "My colleague Helga Kuhse and I suggest that a period of 28 days after birth might be allowed before an infant is accepted as having the same right to life as others." Singer argues that even pigs, chickens, and fish have more signs of consciousness and rationality—and, consequently, a greater claim to rights—than do fetuses, newborn infants, and people with mental disabilities. "Rats are indisputably more aware of their surroundings, and more able to respond in purposeful and complex ways to things they like or dislike, than a fetus at 10- or even 32-weeks gestation. … The calf, the pig, and the much-derided chicken come out well ahead of the fetus at any stage of pregnancy."

Some people consider Singer a provocateur who says outrageous things just to get attention. But Singer is deadly serious about his views and—as emerged in our debate—has a consistent rational basis for his controversial positions.

To understand Singer, it's helpful to contrast him with "New Atheists" like Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and Richard Dawkins. The New Atheists say we can get rid of God but preserve morality. They insist that no one needs God in order to be good; atheists can act no less virtuously than Christians. (And indeed, some atheists do put Christians to shame.) Even while repudiating the Christian God, Dawkins has publicly called himself a "cultural Christian."

But this position creates a problem outlined more than a century ago by the atheist philosopher Nietzsche. The death of God, Nietzsche argued, means that all the Christian values that have shaped the West rest on a mythical foundation. One may, out of habit, continue to live according to these values for a while. Over time, however, the values will decay, and if they are not replaced by new values, man will truly have to face the prospect of nihilism, what Nietzsche termed "the abyss."

Nietzsche's argument is illustrated in considering two of the central principles of Western civilization: "All men are created equal" and "Human life is precious." Nietzsche attributes both ideas to Christianity. It is because we are created equal and in the image of God that our lives have moral worth and that we share the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Nietzsche's warning was that none of these values make sense without the background moral framework against which they were formulated. A post-Christian West, he argued, must go back to the ethical drawing board and reconsider its most cherished values, which include its traditional belief in the equal dignity of every human life.

Singer resolutely takes up a Nietzschean call for a "transvaluation of values," with a full awareness of the radical implications. He argues that we are not creations of God but rather mere Darwinian primates. We exist on an unbroken continuum with animals. Christianity, he says, arbitrarily separated man and animal, placing human life on a pedestal and consigning the animals to the status of tools for human well-being. Now, Singer says, we must remove Homo sapiens from this privileged position and restore the natural order. This translates into more rights for animals and less special treatment for human beings. There is a grim consistency in Singer's call to extend rights to the apes while removing traditional protections for unwanted children, people with mental disabilities, and the noncontributing elderly.

[Read the rest of the above article on Christianity Today online.]

Obama to lift stem-cell restrictions

Medical ethics at issue

Jon Ward THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Saturday, March 7, 2009

President Obama on Monday will overturn President Bush's limits on federal funding of embryonic stem-cell research, negotiating an ethical minefield to fulfill a campaign promise that some think could lead to cures for a variety of diseases.

The president will sign an executive order at the White House on Monday, an Obama spokesman confirmed to The Washington Times.

The Bush administration, citing moral objections to the destruction of embryonic human life, banned federal funding of the research for all but a few lines of embryonic stem cells, those already in existence in 2001, about which President Bush said at the time, "The life-and-death decision has already been made."

"It's very exciting. It means many new opportunities for embryonic stem-cell science," said George Q. Daley, a leading researcher on the subject at Harvard Medical School.

"I'm looking forward to the [National Institutes of Health] being able to make really credible decisions based on science and not on politics," Mr. Daley said.

But opponents of embryonic research said the president is, in fact, defying scientific evidence with his decision to promote research that requires eggs to be fertilized and human embryos created in order to harvest the stem-cell lines.

David Prentice, a former Indiana University researcher now at the Family Research Council, said, "All of the scientific success is taking place with adult stem cells for patients, and the IPS cells for basic research."

IPS, which stands for induced pluripotent stem cells, is the technique that has produced a wave of excitement within the scientific community over the past few years, as researchers have discovered the ability to manipulate adult stem cells to make them similar to embryonic stem cells.

"They look and act exactly like embryonic stem cells, but they're cheaper and easier to make. You can make them from any patient to treat the disease, and you bypass the ethical problems," Mr. Prentice said. "When we talk about science, the results have bypassed using human embryos for these experiments. It really is the poorest and obsolete science."

[Read the whole article in The Washington Times online.]

_________

The obsession with stem cells obtained by destroying embryos has little to do with any real evidence of therapeutic benefit, and a great deal to do with researchers’ ultimate goal of being able to manipulate human life at will.

--Richard M. Doerflinger is deputy director of the Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, quoted on Focus on a the Fanuly website ``Citizen Link``

___________

Local study sheds light on HIV

More than a quarter of female sex trade workers in city infected with virus

By Pamela Fayerman, Vancouver SunMarch 5, 2009

Twenty-six per cent of Vancouver's female sex trade workers are infected with HIV, as are 17 per cent of the city's injection-drug users, a new B.C. study shows.

The study, by researchers at the B.C. Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS and published in the Harm Reduction Journal, is the first in Canada to estimate the per-capita prevalence ranges for high risk groups, using United Nations/World Health Organization software, 2006 Statistics Canada data and other sources such as population surveys.

Gay men, the local population of which is said to be 20,000, including male sex trade workers, have an estimated HIV prevalence rate of 15 per cent.

The overall prevalence of HIV in Vancouver is about 1.21 per cent, six times higher than the national rate.

"Drugs and sex are the preferred routes for transmission. Female sex trade workers get paid more money for having unprotected sex with johns," explained co-author Dr. Julio Montaner, who is president of the International AIDS Society and head of the division of HIV/AIDS at the University of B.C.

There are up to 520 female sex trade workers in Vancouver.

[Read the whole article in The Vancouver Sun online.]

California's Temper Tantrum

How the gay rights movement lost more than Proposition 8.

Mollie Ziegler Hemingway | posted 3/05/2009 on Christianity Today online

Obnoxious mobs that won't tolerate disagreement don't usually win supporters.

A manager at a Los Angeles Mexican restaurant was targeted for her $100 contribution in support of traditional marriage. Protesters hounded her out of her job, and did the same to a Sacramento theater director and the director of the Los Angeles Film Festival. Churches and Mormon temples were vandalized. The mainstream media ran an all-out public relations campaign in support of same-sex marriage. Hollywood quickly put together "Prop. 8: The Musical," an Internet video that mocked Jesus, the Bible, and Christians.

"Want to cause a nice long backlash to gay rights? That's the way to do it," said lesbian social critic Camille Paglia.

Obnoxious, bigoted mobs that won't tolerate any disagreement don't usually win supporters. Or, as the usually insufferable Objectivist Ayn Rand said, "Argument from intimidation is a confession of intellectual impotence." Of course, if the media are to be believed, same-sex marriage is a done deal. "Same-sex marriage is inevitable. It just takes time," a Seattle Post-Intelligencer columnist wrote.

The conventional wisdom is that traditional marriage is a demographically lost cause. Younger voters are more likely to support same-sex marriage than older voters, we're repeatedly reminded. Indeed, 61 percent of voters over 65 supported Prop. 8, while 61 percent of people under 30 voted against it.

But if history and demographics are on the side of same-sex marriage, one wonders why journalists, Hollywood executives, and gay activists didn't just sit tight and wait. Why voluntarily sabotage their cause with a coordinated campaign of bigoted, violent, and hateful reactions to recent public votes on the matter?

Despite the story pushed by the mainstream media, the only statistics that really matter are at the ballot box. And marriage supporters have been victorious in each of the 33 states that have put the issue up for vote. The only significant success the same-sex marriage crowd has had has been achieved by judicial fiat. In California, a never-before-assembled coalition of evangelicals, Catholics, and Mormons raised $40 million and generated hundreds of thousands of volunteers.

"In spite of repeated efforts by gay activists and mainstream media types to portray this as an issue nobody but the gay-rights people really care about, the Prop. 8 victory itself demonstrates the marriage issue is drawing new attention," said Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage.

And just because younger voters support same-sex marriage now doesn't mean their attitudes won't change. As people age, they tend to get married, have children, and worship more regularly—all of which weigh heavily in voting decisions.

The violent mobs and sneering media confirm one of the arguments made by traditional marriage proponents: Same-sex marriage and religious freedom are on a collision course.

Chai Feldblum, a Georgetown University law professor and gay activist who drafts federal legislation related to sexual orientation, has publicly said that when religious liberty conflicts with gay rights, "I'm having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win."

Indeed, religious liberty almost always loses. A lesbian couple in Albuquerque successfully sued a Christian photographer because she declined to shoot their commitment ceremony. When Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage, Catholic organizations had no option but to shut down their adoption services.

The California Supreme Court ruled that doctors must provide reproductive services to lesbians despite religious objections. A Methodist camp in New Jersey lost its tax exemption after it told a lesbian couple they could have their commitment ceremony anywhere except in buildings that are used for religious services. The list goes on.

But the response to California's democratic vote publicized this clash between religious freedom and gay rights like never before.

[Read the rest of the article on Christianity Today online.]

One small victory for freedom of speech

The Gazette, March 5, 2009

McGill University's student government has bucked an unfortunate national trend by granting full club status to a student anti-abortion group.

The Student Society's decision to grant recognition to Choose Life is not so much a victory for pro-life forces as it is a victory for free speech and freedom of association, values that seem to be under attack, and poorly defended, on many Canadian campuses - where they should be safest.

Students at the University of British Columbia's Okanagan campus, for example, have denied status to an anti-abortion group, and Carleton University's student leaders are considering a motion to refuse support or space to any group that doesn't support "a woman's right to choose."

[Read the whole of the article in The Gazette online.]

Abbotsford Approves Social Justice 12

By Janet Steffenhagen Feb. 10, 2009

Abbotsford trustees have decided that schools may teach Social Justice 12 starting in September 2009 to students who have permission from parents or guardians.

The decision was announced in a news release today. It says:

"While there has been a perception that the Abbotsford board prohibited access to the Social Justice 12 elective course, in fact no such decision was made. The board has now reviewed the course, which the Minister of Education approved for elective use in British Columbia schools in late August 2008.

"As part of the process, the board's education committee conducted an in-depth review of the draft version of the course, the board's submission and reply to the ministry, and approved the Integrated Resource Package (IRP).

"The board has approved a recommendation authorizing the course for use in the Abbotsford school district, provided that parents/guardians given their consent." That stipulation - which is unusual in Abbotsford - is due to the "sensitive nature" of some of the course content, it adds. . . . .
[Click here for the whole of Janet Steffenhagen'a article on her online blog, plus comments.]

Obama and evangelicals: Form over substance

Posted: January 24,,on WorldNet Daily
By Gary Bauer

President Barack Obama's choice of Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his inauguration was suffused with political overtones. While the selection of Warren (who, like most Americans, opposes same-sex marriage) attracted fierce attacks from homosexual-rights groups, it also was seen as a way for the president to increase his political capital with evangelical voters.

A few days later, Obama's decision to wait until after the anniversary of Roe v. Wade before issuing an order restoring U.S. funding for international abortion groups was seen as proof that our new president is willing to reach out to both sides in the abortion debate. Even though waiting just one day had no substantive effect on abortion policy, many in the media saw it, as one newspaper put it, as proof of the president's "sensitivity to foes of Roe. v. Wade."

But, barring divine intervention, Warren's inauguration prayer and Obama's one-day abortion delay won't help the new president's standing among religious conservatives. To understand why, Obama should study Jimmy Carter, whose presidency taught evangelicals a generation ago that Christian policies, not symbolic gestures, matter most. . . . .

Jimmy Carter attracted religious voters in 1976 because he was an ardent "believer." He lost them four years later in part because of his support for policies most religious voters abhorred, including liberal abortion policies, the Equal Rights Amendment, special rights for homosexuals and ending public school prayer.

Evangelicals also discovered that, though not a regular churchgoer, Reagan understood that America's liberty comes from God and that it was wrong to destroy innocent human life. Religious voters learned a generation ago that strong religious sentiment is not by itself a reliable predictor of policy.

The 1980 presidential election foreshadowed Obama's difficulties with evangelical voters. Ever since bursting onto the national political scene at the 2004 Democratic National Convention announcing, "We worship an awesome God in the blue states," Barack Obama has made attracting religious voters a cornerstone of his presidential aspirations. As David Paul Kuhn of Politico wrote a few days before Election Day, "No Democratic nominee in the modern day has made more of an effort to court religious voters than Obama."

But, according to exit polls, white evangelicals chose John McCain over Barack Obama by 50 percentage points, 74 percent to 24 percent. Obama improved on 2004 Democratic nominee John Kerry's white evangelical vote by only 3 percentage points. This despite that Kerry made almost no effort to court religious voters and faced a much more overtly religious opponent whose campaign focused on turning out religious voters.

What happened?

During the campaign, Obama made several mistakes that disenchanted religious voters. First came the revelation of incendiary remarks by Obama's long-time pastor and spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright. Then, during a religious forum at Warren's Saddleback Church, Obama's glib remark that the question of when a child gets human rights is "above my pay grade" stunned those in attendance, including me.

That incident led to increased scrutiny of Obama's abortion position, which evangelicals soon discovered is uniformly anti-life and includes positions even the abortion group NARAL has refused to endorse.

Added to this were Republican nominee John McCain's firmly pro-life answers at the Saddleback forum (When does life begin? "At conception.") and the selection of pro-life heroine Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. Like Reagan, McCain is a divorcee who was reluctant to use overtly religious language on the campaign trail. But, again like Reagan, McCain held the right positions on what religious voters call the "nonnegotiable issues."

It's hard to downplay these developments. Last spring, after a giant opinion poll by Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life showed that abortion and marriage continue to be crucial for evangelical voters, Pew's John C. Green told the New York Times that the survey "suggests that the efforts of Democrats to peel away Republican and conservative voters based on economic issues face a real limit because of the role these cultural issues play."

In the days before the election, as polls continued to predict that few evangelicals would turnout for Obama, Green told Politico, "What we could be seeing is that comfort and campaigning only go so far [with religious voters], and that ultimately it's substance that matters to these voters."

Obama should ponder an important lesson of Jimmy Carter's failed presidency, which is that "faith without works is dead." If Obama wants to send a real message of inclusion and build a bridge to the faith community, he must do more than invite evangelicals to offer prayers and wait a day before implementing an extreme policy that forces Americans to pay for overseas abortions in a time of recession. He must affirm basic Christian values in his policies while distancing himself from the extreme social positions that alienate most Americans. It will be by Obama's deeds, not his words, that the evangelical community can be won.

[Clickl here to read the whole article on WorldNet Daily.]

Sexually transmitted disease rates soar: CDC

From the National Post online:

Will Dunham, Reuters Published: Tuesday, January 13, 2009

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. syphilis rates rose for a seventh year in 2007, driven by gay and bisexual men, while chlamydia reached record numbers and gonorrhea remained at alarming levels -- especially among blacks, health officials said on Tuesday.

Blacks make up 12 percent of the U.S. population, but account for about 70 percent of gonorrhea cases and almost half of chlamydia and syphilis cases, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said. . . . .

Chlamydia and gonorrhea are easily diagnosed and treated, but frequently have no symptoms and remain undetected.

Untreated, chlamydia and gonorrhea -- both bacterial infections -- can cause pelvic inflammatory disease and infertility in women. The two infections also can cause ectopic pregnancy, chronic pelvic pain and other health problems.

"Of all the causes of infertility, this is probably the most preventable -- since these infections can be prevented, diagnosed and treated," Douglas said in a telephone interview.

In men, gonorrhea can cause a painful condition of the ducts attached to the testicles that cause infertility. Gonorrhea also can spread to the blood or joints and can be life threatening. Chlamydia complications among men are rare.

Douglas said to avoid STDs, teens can delay the beginning of sexual activity, people can limit the number of sexual partners and use condoms. "Condoms have risk-reduction value for every sexually transmitted condition," Douglas said.

Syphilis is less common than the others, with 11,466 cases reported in 2007. Rates rose 15 percent from 2006. Syphilis rates dropped by 90 percent in the 1990s to a record low level in 2000, and officials thought it might disappear as a public health threat before its resurgence this decade.

Syphilis has increased each year since 2000 -- its rate is up 81 percent -- with gay and bisexual men representing 65 percent of cases, the CDC said.

Douglas said many cases are occurring in HIV-positive men who are choosing other HIV-positive men as sexual partners.

"Within that relationship, they are less concerned about the transmission of other conditions. They're not using condoms. They believe that their partner already has got the worst they can get -- they've got an HIV infection," he said.

When all STDs are considered, including human papillomavirus (HPV or genital wart virus) and herpes simplex viruses, almost 19 million new infections occur each year, with nearly half among those ages 15 to 24, the CDC said.

[Click here to read the whole Natonal Post article online.]

Pepsi Gives $1,000,000 to Advance Homosexualist Agenda

By Thaddeus M. Baklinski

January 2, 2009 (LifeSIteNews.com) - Soft drink giant PepsiCo, which also owns Frito Lay chips, Tropicana orange juice, Gatorade and Quaker oatmeal, has given a million dollars in the past two years to organizations which promote homosexuality, and forces its employees to attend sexual orientation and gender identity/expression classes.

$500,000 went to the Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays' (PFLAG) "Straight for Equality" program which, according to PFLAG's website (http://community.pflag.org/Document.Doc?id=160), "will be used to expand workplace training."

Jacqueline Millan, director of PepsioCo Corporate Contributions, said in a PepsiCo bulletin, "We are delighted to continue our partnership with PFLAG. The Straight for Equality in the Workplace training program is unique in that it is promoting the necessary message of inclusion to untapped groups within the local community, and that is a crucial step towards building a healthy work environment."

Pepsi also gave $500,000 to the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), a group that describes itself as "America's largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality," according to an American Family Association (AFA) report.

The AFA indicated that both HRC and PFLAG supported efforts in California to defeat Proposition 8, which defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. HRC, the homosexual group financially supported by Pepsi, gave $2.3 million to defeat Prop 8.

The AFA has launched a petition and boycott campaign focused on demanding that Pepsi "remain neutral in the culture war."

"PepsiCo has refused a request by AFA to remain neutral in the culture war," said AFA Chairman Donald Wildmon in an Action Alert. "The company indicated that it will continue major financial support of homosexual organizations," adding that "Pepsi refuses to give money to any pro-family organization that opposes the homosexual agenda."

Wildmon explained that the AFA wrote Pepsi two times (on October 14 and October 29) requesting a meeting to discuss Pepsi's support of homosexual groups, subsequently receiving a "condescending letter" from Paul Boykas, director of public policy, in which Boykas refused to address Pepsi's support of the homosexual agenda.

Link to the AFA Action Alert: http://www.afa.net/boycottpepsico/pepsionemillion.htm

Link to the AFA petition: https://secure.afa.net/afa/activism/signpetition.asp?id=1800

Contact PepsiCo with your concern:

PepsiCo, Inc.
700 Anderson Hill Road
Purchase, NY 10577
Phone: (914) 253-2000
Toll-free: 1-800-433-2652

Richard Neuhaus, Editor of First Things, Mourned by Pro-Life Leaders

The death of Richard Neuhaus on January 8th, 2008, will be felt as a great loss by many in the United States, in Canada (where he was born0, and in many other regions. The following may be taken as representative reactions:

The following is from the media release of the American Life League:

REV. RICHARD NEUHAUS, EDITOR OF FIRST THINGS, DIES AT 72

Washington, D.C. (8 January 2008) – The following is a statement by Judie Brown, president of American Life League, on the passing of the Rev. Richard John Neuhaus, Catholic priest and editor in chief of First Things magazine. Neuhaus died at 9:30 a.m. today.

"Father Richard John Neuhaus, a wise and holy priest, has gone from this earth on this day to his eternal reward. Those of us who admired him, dialogued with him and always respected him will miss him greatly.

As his dear friend and First Things editor Joseph Bottum wrote of his passing, "My tears are not for him – for he knew, all his life, that his Redeemer lives, and he has now been gathered by the Lord in whom he trusted. I weep, rather for all the rest of us. As a priest, as a writer, as a public leader in so many struggles and as a friend, no one can take his place. The fabric of life has been torn by his death, and it will not be repaired, for those of us who knew him, until that time when everything is mended and all our tears are wiped away."

May his soul and the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen.

American Life League was co-founded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death. For more information or press inquiries, please contact Michael Hichborn at 540.659.7900.

# # #

The following article is from Focus on the Family's CitizenLink of January 8th, 2008 (website URL: http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000009026.cfm )

Richard Neuhaus Brought 'Gentle Spirit to Great Debates about Truth'

The Rev. Richard John Neuhaus, a leading voice of Catholic conservatism and editor of the journal First Things, died this morning after a battle with cancer. He was 72.

Neuhaus advised President George W. Bush on a range of religious and ethical matters. He spent the latter part of his life seeking to strengthen the bonds among Catholics, evangelicals and Jews. In 2005, Neuhaus was named, along with Focus on the Family founder Dr. James Dobson, one of the "25 Most Influential Evangelicals in America" by Time magazine.

"Richard Neuhaus was to moral principle what William Buckley was to conservative politics: a leader who brought intellectual heft, urbane wit and a gentle spirit to the great debates about truth," said Tom Minnery, senior vice president of government and public policy at Focus on the Family Action. "While we differed with Rev. Neuhaus on some aspects of his theology, we appreciate his tremendous contributions."

Like a Virgin: The Press Take On Teenage Sex

Yes, attitudes do make a difference in behavior.

By WILLIAM MCGURN

The chain reaction was something out of central casting. A medical journal starts it off by announcing a study comparing teens who take a pledge of virginity until marriage with those who don't. Lo and behold, when they crunch the numbers, they find not much difference between pledgers and nonpledgers: most do not make it to the marriage bed as virgins.

Like a pack of randy 15-year-old boys, the press dives right in.

"Virginity Pledges Don't Stop Teen Sex," screams CBS News. "Virginity pledges don't mean much," adds CNN. "Study questions virginity pledges," says the Chicago Tribune. "Premarital Abstinence Pledges Ineffective, Study Finds," heralds the Washington Post. "Virginity Pledges Fail to Trump Teen Lust in Look at Older Data," reports Bloomberg. And on it goes.

In other words, teens will be teens, and moms or dads who believe that concepts such as restraint or morality have any application today are living in a dream world. Typical was the lead for the CBS News story: "Teenagers who take virginity pledges are no less sexually active than other teens, according to a new study."

Here's the rub: It just isn't true.

In fact, the only way the study's author, Janet Elise Rosenbaum of Johns Hopkins University, could reach such results was by comparing teens who take a virginity pledge with a very small subset of other teens: those who are just as religious and conservative as the pledge-takers. The study is called "Patient Teenagers? A Comparison of the Sexual Behavior of Virginity Pledgers and Matched Nonpledgers," and it was published in the Jan. 1 edition of Pediatrics.

The first to notice something lost in the translation was Dr. Bernadine Healy, the former head of both the Red Cross and the National Institutes of Health. Today she serves as health editor for U.S. News & World Report. And in her dispatch on this study, Dr. Healy pointed out that "virginity pledging teens were considerably more conservative in their overall sexual behaviors than teens in general -- a fact that many media reports have missed cold."

What Dr. Healy was getting at is that the pledge itself is not what distinguishes these kids from most other teenagers. The real difference is their more conservative and religious home and social environment. As she notes, when you compare both groups in this study with teens at large, the behavioral differences are striking. . . . .

[Click here to read the whole article in the Wall Street Journal online.]

Christian ministry suffers web attack

Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 12/30/2008 4:00:00 AM

The chairman of the Christian Film & Television Commission says homosexual activists have launched a criminal attack on his ministry.

Recently, Dr. Ted Baehr says he learned about the distribution of a number of emails and blog posts that were supposedly from him or his organization. However, the emails were links to pornography, including homosexual content.

Baehr says he heard of the email attack against the CFTC and MovieGuide through a longtime supporter.

"I went to the link; it was not our site on YouTube. We do have a MovieGuide site on YouTube, and we have MovieGuide.org," he explains. "It was a phony site, but it had my picture that somebody had taken and had...very salacious material, occult material, scientology, a lot of hardcore S&M-type stuff."

Baehr said authorities have been contacted and the computer address of the source has been found.

He believes the web campaign is in response to his public statements favoring California's Proposition 8. Baehr says the attacks demonstrate that for homosexual activists, tolerance is a one-way street. "In the last couple of days, the L.A. Times has published some...editorials saying the 'religious right' is the worst thing that has ever happened to this country...[and] another one saying Christians are dumb," he relates.

Criminal charges are being considered, adds Baehr.

[Click here to go to Internet source.]

We recognize that the following excerpt immediately following represents only one angle on the proposed coalition in Canada. It is, however, one that we think our readers will be interested in.
"Queers uniting around Liberal-NDP coalition" *

POLITICS / Best hope for progress, activists say; rallies planned across Canada

Dale Smith / National / Tuesday, December 02, 2008

[From Xtra.ca]

With a signed agreement between the Liberals and the NDP to form a coalition government under the leadership of Stéphane Dion, with the support of the Bloc Quebecois, progressives across the country are moving to show their support for the union.

Ottawa activist Ariel Troster is rallying support for the coalition.

"In terms of any possibility of making gains for our community, a coalition government is the best way to go," says Troster.

Toronto activist and Spa Excess owner Peter Bochove is moving to organize his network to get involved online.

"I'm delighted," Bochove says of the coalition. "I want to see as many people as possible speaking out in light of the massive public relations campaign the other side is financing."

The Conservatives began their public relations assault almost immediately, inviting their supporters to not only offer up "emergency donations" to the party, but also to call into radio talk shows and to write letters to the editor, complete with scripted talking points.

The party has also set up a number of rallies around the country to take place on Dec 6, which they have called "Rally for Canada," seems largely aimed at both discrediting Bloc support for the coalition, while proclaiming itself as a voice for Canadian democracy.

To counter this sentiment, progressives are rallying around MakeParliamentWork.com, which highlights the need for a coalition because of the Conservatives' failed economic performance. The site also references the Conservatives' plan to curtail the right of public servants to strike, and their proposal to claw back women's right to pay equity.

' ' ' '

Aside from Harper's lack of responsiveness to queer issues, grassroots organizers are hoping that other areas of social justice will be restored under a coalition government, including the Court Challenges Program, the Kelowna Accord, funding for the Status of Women, and action on the environment.

. . . .

* The word "queers" in the title is the word used in the title of this Xtra/ca article, and is not the word of choice for the editor of this BCPTL website.

Massachusets Department of Public Health "groundbreaking" report says homosexuality linked with health problems, destructive behavior.

December 3, 2008

On November 21 the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) released what it calls a "Groundbreaking Report on Health Disparities Based on Sexual Orientation".

As the DPH press release describes:

"The report revealed significant disparities among people who identified as homosexual or bisexual in the areas of access to care, self-reported health status, anxiety, depression, suicide ideation, smoking, binge drinking, illicit drug use, sexual assault victimization, intimate partner violence, disability, obesity, asthma and heart disease . . . Lesbians were 2.2 times more likely than heterosexual women to be obese."

Read entire DPH press release.

Read the Department of Public Health report HERE

In other words, the DPH is forced to admit what everyone has known for a long time. Unfortunately, the extremely destructive nature of homosexual behavior - both medical and psychological - is usually not only suppressed, but is considered completely off-limits for discussion. But ultimately, some of the truth gets out, even in Massachusetts.

[Click here to read the whole article on MassResistance website]

Tolerance? Not when some activists Do't Get Their Way

Pro-homosexuality activists have reacted vociferously, in some cases in a violent or threatening manner, to the recent passage in California of Proposition 8, which added these words to the state constitution: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

The following report was passed on to us by Mission America:

Angry homosexual mob surrounds Christians in San Francisco; police escort to safety

On Friday night, before the day of protest we saw across the nation, a conflict erupted in San Francisco's Castro District between a group of residents and a group of Christians who reportedly meet every Friday on the same corner to preach to gays and lesbians about 'converting' into heterosexuals. This time, they were met by an angry mob and the conflict grew so large riot police were called to the area as the Christians were basically chased out of the neighborhood.

KTVU reports: "'Their rights were respected,' said Joe Schmitz, an opponent of Prop 8. 'They got a chance to go ahead and pray on the sidewalk and I had the opportunity to express my freedom of speech which is telling them to get out of my neighborhood.' San Francisco Police officers in riot gear formed a line and escorted the religious group into a van to safely get them out of the area. Members of the gay community insisted that their reaction to the Christian group was spontaneous. 'It was not an organized thing. We're tired of it. It's not religious. It's not a racial thing. It's about hate. We're trying to send a message across the world that we're standing up and we don't want this to go on anymore,' said Adam Quintero."
[Highlighted section in the above article boldfaced by editor of this BCPTL websitge. Note the interesting take on the rights.of free speech..]
See the video of the incident at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrRxFoBSPng [Warning: bad language from protestors]
[The above article and video link is also posted on our "News and Views" page. of this website.]

'Jesus is a homo' Homosexuals Disrupt Church Service

By Deacon Keith Fournier
11/12/2008

Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

Using megaphones for amplification they shouted epithets at those entering the service such as “Jesus is a homo”. They also mockingly carried an upside down pink cross.

In a news release, Bash Back referred to Mt. Hope Church as “a deplorable anti-queer mega church.” They further elaborated their disdain for the Christian community at Mt. Hope on their web site.

LANSING, Michigan (Catholic Online) - Dr. Dave Williams is the Pastor of a large evangelical Protestant Church in Lansing, Michigan called the Mount Hope Church. The Church web site informs the visitor of Pastor Williams that “He has served for 25 years, leading the church in Lansing from 226 to over 4000 today.” The Pastor is respected in the broader Christian, religious and civic community and the Church has extensive outreaches.

This past Sunday, during a Worship Service at the Church, a group of loud and intentionally disruptive homosexual activists stood outside of the sanctuary of Mount Hope dressed in strange pink attire. Using megaphones for amplification, they shouted epithets at those entering the service such as “Jesus is a homo”.They also mockingly carried an upside down pink cross.

Reports filed with the Eaton County Sheriff’s office indicate that other demonstrators had staged a further action intended to disrupt the Sunday Worship at Mount Hope. Dressed in clothing which would not have indicated their intention, they entered into the sanctuary and were seated with the community. Then, in an orchestrated manner, they left their seats, pulled fire alarms, distributed anti-Christian literature and stormed the Pastor’s pulpit waving a rainbow colored flag and shouting “It’s Okay To Be Gay! Bash Back”.

The organization behind this action is called “Bash Back”. They describe themselves as “a radical trans/queer/anarcha-feminist group” committed to “fight for liberation while rejecting all forms of state power.” In a news release, Bash Back referred to Mt. Hope Church as “a deplorable anti-queer mega church.” They further elaborated their disdain for the Christian community at Mt. Hope on their web site in these words: “The Mount Hope Church is a deplorable, anti-queer mega-church in Lansing, Michigan. The church works to institutionalize transphobia and homophobia through several repulsive projects including organized “ex-gay” conferences and so-called “hell houses”, which depict queers, trannies and womyn who seek abortions as the horrors. Mt. Hope is complicit in the repression of queers in Michigan and beyond.”

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, the nation's largest Catholic civil rights organization led by Bill Donohue, Ph.D., has called on the Attorney General of State of Michigan to institute an investigation. :

[Click here to read the rest of this article on Catholic Online.]

Protests Over Gay-Marriage Ban Escalate in California

Friday, November 07, 2008

Fox News online

Angry gay rights activists in California continue to protest the Election Day passage of Proposition 8, which amended the state constitution to restrict marriage to between a man and a woman.

A diverse coalition of social and religious conservatives campaigned to overrule a state Supreme Court judgment six months ago that legalized same-sex marriage and saw 18,000 gay and lesbian couples marry in the Golden State.

Ballot initiatives to illegalize gay marriage also passed in Florida and Arizona on Tuesday.

Supporters of same-sex marriage are aiming their wrath at the Mormon church, which raised $20 million of the overall $75 million that was spent to promote the California initiative.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also encouraged its members to volunteer their time for the campaign.

"The vote's been passed and we're happy with that result, obviously," said Kui Gomez, a member of the Mormon church. "And you gotta remember it wasn't just the Mormon church that donated money. Evangelicals, the Jewish synagogues, Catholic churches" also contributed, Gomez said.

A group of protestors plans to rally Friday in front of the headquarters of the Mormon church in Salt Lake City. Protestors demonstrated Thursday outside a Mormon temple in Los Angeles. About 1,000 gay-marriage supporters waved signs and brought afternoon trafficto a halt.

"This is a very disruptive, small group of fanatics protesting because they were unable to persuade Californians of their position," said Frank Schubert, the campaign manager for Protect Marriage, the leading group being Proposition 8.

Gay rights activists produced a commercial that portrayed Mormom missionaries rifling through the home of a lesbian couple and marching off with their rings and their marriage licenses.

Schubert called the commercial a "blatant show of religious bigotry" because the protestors feel comfortable attacking a group that makes up a small percentage of the population.

"They think they can get away with it," he said, adding that other religious denominations are condemning the commercial.

. . . .

More protests are expected to take place in Los Angeles and San Francisco. But gay rights activists acknowledge that their only hope of getting Prop 8 repealed lies with the California Supreme Court, which will consider at least three lawsuits seeking to keep gay marriage legal in the state.

FOX News' Anita Vogel and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Click here for the complete article online.

Pro-gay marriage protests staged in California

By Thomas Watkins
The Associated Press

Article Last Updated: 11/09/2008

People protest outside the Saddleback Church today in Lake Forest, Calif. (The Orange County Register)

LOS ANGELES — On the first Sunday after a gay marriage ban passed in California, activists rallied in defiance, including hundreds of protesters outside an Orange County megachurch whose pastor brought Barack Obama and John McCain together last summer for a "faith forum."

About 300 gay-rights advocates fanned out along sidewalks leading to Saddleback Church in Lake Forest to voice their anger of the church's support of Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment approved by voters Tuesday that overturns a state Supreme Court decision in May legalizing same-sex unions.

[Click here to read the whole article online.]

Watch church lady meet same-sex 'marriage' protesters
Cross-carrying senior, reporter face screams, threats

Posted: November 10, 2008
8:45 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
2008 WorldNetDaily [November 10, 2008]

An angry mob of homosexual activists in Southern California attacked an elderly bespectacled woman carrying a cross then shouted her down during a live TV interview as she tried to explain to a reporter her defense of the state's new marriage amendment.

"WE SHOULD FIGHT! WE SHOULD FIGHT!" screams one protester as the woman, identified as Phyllis Burgess, stands calmly with a reporter waiting to be interviewed.

In the live interview by KPSP-TV in Palm Springs, another protester yells, "GET OUT OF HERE," and the reporter tells her anchor team back at the station, "As you can see we are being attacked."

The confrontation developed when homosexual activists gathered at the Palm Springs City Hall for a protest following voters' approve by a margin of nearly 53 percent to 47 percent a state constitutional amendment that recognizes only a marriage between a man and a woman. The amendment specified that it is effective immediately. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, however, is encouraging an effort led by the ACLU to overturn the measure in court.

Prior to the aborted interview, KPSP captured footage of Burgess carrying a cross to portray her objection to homosexual marriage on biblical grounds.

Burgess barely had arrived when the cross was knocked from her hand then stomped on the ground.

About 10 minutes later, the on-scene reporter, Kimberly Cheng, tried repeatedly to complete her interview.

"She just wants to express her viewpoint, sir," she tells a protester who was waving his arms in her face.

[Click here to read the complete article on WorldNetDaily online.]

[Watch a video of the incident at http://gatorgop.blogspot.com/2008/11/crazy-lefties-attack-old-lady-at-no-on.html .]

In Canada:
Conservative Convention Delegates Adopt Policy Protecting Pregnant Women from Violent Crime
Also voted to curtail the power of the Human Rights Commissions to prosecute "hate speech"

By Tim Waggoner

WINNIPEG, November 17, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – While the 2000 delegates at this weekend’s Conservative Convention in Winnipeg voted on numerous resolutions relating to the party's future, commentators say that the passing of Resolutions P-207 and P-203 in particular indicate that social conservatism is still alive among many delegates of the in-power party.

P-203, which was passed by well over 90% of the delegates, is a resolution to remove authority from the Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal to regulate, receive, investigate or adjudicate complaints related to Section 13 (hate messages) of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Critics of this section of the Act have long said that the clause creates the precise equivalent of a "thought crime." Under this section of the Act, Christian ministers have been prosecuted simply for defending traditional Christian teaching on marriage.

Prominent Human Rights Commission critic Ezra Levant said he was “delighted” with the vote. The message is clear, said Levant: “the party's grass-tops activists … support freedom of speech and thought, and now see the Canadian Human Rights Commission for what it is: a violator of rights, not a protector of them.”

Resolution P-207 is similar to former Conservative MP Ken Epp’s Unborn Victims of Crime Bill in that it seeks additional charges for anyone who harms or kills an unborn baby while attacking a pregnant mother. While P-207 is not binding, it is now official Conservative Party policy to recognize the rights of pregnant women by bringing to justice those who harm an unborn baby against their mother's will.

According to Canada.com, a delegate from the riding in Saskatchewan that proposed the resolution said, "Families who have lost their daughters, wives, sisters ... know there are two victims. They want the law to recognize that."

Although the resolution does indicate a pro-life sentiment among Canadian Conservatives, in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com, John Hof, President of Campaign Life Coalition B.C., reminded pro-life activists to take this resolution for what it really is – one seeking to protect pregnant women and not unborn babies.

"As the President of Campaign Life Coalition of B.C., P-207 is not a resolution I would propose to protect unborn children. As much as I stand up for the lives of pregnant women, this resolution doesn't do anything for unborn children," said Hoff.

Hof said the resolution is one which he wholeheartedly supports and that it is a great step forward in protecting pregnant women. However, he indicated that pro-life supporters should keep their feet on the ground.

"I don't want pro-lifers to get excited about this because this simple resolution doesn't make the Conservative party pro-life. It recognizes that women who are pregnant and are harmed or killed will receive more justice," he said. "If this resolution becomes a bill in the House of Commons I would expect every party to support this, it is common sense."

"Who could possible be in favor of violence against pregnant women?"

Behind resolution P-207 is a lengthy history, largely surrounding Epp’s Unborn Victims of Crime Bill, which sought to make it a separate crime to kill or injure an unborn child in an attack on its mother. Epp’s bill, which had passed first and second reading in the House of Commons, was effectively scuppered by the Conservative Party this fall, largely in response to criticism from pro-abortion activists that the bill would “reopen the abortion debate” by giving rights to unborn children.

The Conservative Party in August pulled the rug out from under Epp’s feet when it introduced its own, watered-down version of the bill. Critics of the Conservative bill say that it adds little to current criminal law and fails to recognize the unborn child as a separate victim of violent crime.

Following the vote on P-207 Justice Minister Rob Nicholson reaffirmed Prime-Minister Stephen Harpers' commitment not to re-open the abortion debate.

"The prime minister has indicated on a number of occasions that he will not reopen the (abortion) issue. But in terms of protecting pregnant women against violence, we are prepared to make changes to the Criminal Code," said Nicholson.

Nicholson indicated that the Conservative government would continue to move forward with its own version of Epp’s bill.

[In the United States:]
Scalia Warns Judges against Relying on Foreign Law
. . . .
[Nov. 19. 2008]

by Jennifer Mesko, editor of CitizenLink

He says the Founders of this country did not want us to emulate Europe.

The U.S. Constitution is not a "living document" and should not be filtered through foreign law.

That's the message U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia had for a group of judges and lawyers in Houston this week.

"I fear the courts' use of foreign law in interpreting the Constitution will continue at an accelerated pace," the 72-year-old jurist told the local chapter of the Federal Bar Association.

Scalia called on judges to adhere to the constitutional authors' intent. He said the Founders of this country did not want us to emulate Europe.

[Click here to read the whole article on CitizenLink.]

Parents, Teachers, and Leaders Meet to Respond to the Corren Agreement

[an account of a meeting held August 26, 2008; article republished, with permission, from the website of the Association for Reformed Political Action]

On a dark and gloomy August evening, a group of concerned citizens met together in Surrey, BC to discuss what could be done now that the BC government's agreement with a homosexual activist couple to change the education curriculum is considered binding. Although serious, the atmosphere in the room was far from dark and gloomy. After talks from Len Remple (Parents for Democracy in Education Society, which organized the meeting), Ron Gray (leader of the CHP), Bill Vanderzalm (former Premier of BC), Dan O'Hara (State Deputy of the Knights of Columbus for BC and the Yukon), and Ted Hewlett (BC Parents and Teachers for Life), the audience took part in a lively discussion about where to go from here. The consensus was unanimous: action is needed and we all have a role to play.

The Corren Agreement was made in April of 2006 in response to a complaint that two activists brought to the BC human rights tribunal. They demanded that more content be put in the curriculum that was favourable towards homosexuals and other forms of "gender diversity." Instead of allowing the tribunal to decide the case, the BC government made a secret deal with this couple, without any consultation with parents or the public, that gave them unprecedented access to change BC's education curriculum, from Kindergarten to Grade 12. Parts of the agreement are already in effect and other parts will soon be

citizenlink.comre
9-11-2008

Florida Judge Rejects State Law, Allows Gay Man to Adopt

A Florida circuit court judge has decided the state's 31-year-old gay-adoption ban is unconstitutional, allowing a homosexual man to adopt a teen boy.

The Florida adoption statute has been upheld as constitutional by the state Supreme Court, as well as a federal appeals court. Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said the trial judge is bound by those higher court precedents.

"This decision has no legal impact on the adoption statute itself," he said, "but it does demonstrate the arrogance of activist judges who believe they can and should legislate from the bench."

No one to vote for

Margaret Somerville

The Ottawa Citizen

Politicians have failed to realize that Canadians' value systems are far more complex than the old left-right dichotomy

Friday, September 12, 2008

Values always matter in politics. In representative democracies such as Canada, we vote for people who we believe share our values. But what if, when the rubber hits the road, our MPs act contrary to our -- and what we thought were their -- values on an issue we think is of primary importance? And what if they do that in order to get an "embarrassing issue" off the political agenda and placate a vocal minority prior to an election call?

To name just two recent examples: the legalization of same-sex marriage prior to a federal election when a Liberal minority government was in power; and the "attempted murder" of Conservative MP Ken Epp's Unborn Victims of Crime bill (Bill C-484) by the minority Conservative government to get abortion off the agenda prior to the election call.

So, who do we vote for when no one represents our values? Should we just not vote? What do these situations tell us about the "democratic deficit?" What if a majority of Canadians can't find an MP who shares and will reliably uphold their values?

First, we need to understand the changes in our societies and values that have caused these situations to arise.

One is the increasing political influence of identity-based social movements, which seem to have convinced politicians that to act contrary to their movements' values is certain to cause them to lose votes and possibly the election. It's important to understand the strategies these movements use to have their values prevail in the political public square.

In the case of same-sex marriage, gay rights advocates convinced politicians that there were only two choices: one was either for same-sex marriage and against discrimination against homosexuals; or one was against same-sex marriage and for discrimination against gay people. Given that choice, the majority of politicians chose same-sex marriage. The possibility of being against discrimination against gay people and against same-sex marriage was eliminated.

The same strategy has now been used by pro-choice advocates in relation to abortion and Bill C-484: They argued that one is either for respect for women and their rights and against Bill C-484; or one is for Bill C-484 and against respect for women and their rights. Even Conservative politicians -- such as justice minister Rob Nicholson, who torpedoed Bill C-484 by proposing alternative legislation approved by pro-choice advocates -- seem to have bought their argument. The possibility of being for respect for women and their rights and for Bill C-484 (which in fact would have enshrined the right of a woman who wanted to give birth to the baby she was carrying and would not have affected access to abortion) was eliminated.

Many scholars and public thinkers are speaking of movements which are affecting the political process, such as the pro-choice and gay lobbies, as "third spaces." They include the NGOs, and grass-roots advocacy and civil society groups, created outside established national and international institutions, that are emerging as a result of the changes wrought by an interconnected, interdependent world. As we are seeing in Canada, these will affect our values; who the "we" who share those values are; and what kinds of political processes we need.

We can no longer assume, as we could in the past when we lived in small, largely homogenous societies, that all our politicians, no matter to which political party they belonged, largely shared our most fundamental values. We now belong in different socio-ethical-values camps that create borders and manifest deep divides between us. These divides are sometimes referred to as "culture wars" -- battles as to which values will prevail as the societal norms.

[Click here to see the rest of the article immediately above.]

The Ottawa Sun - Sept. 12, 2008:

Christian doctor puts faith into practice
By KEVIN CONNOR, SUN MEDIA

A Christian doctor setting up a practice in Perth is advertising for

patients and says he will pray with them - just don't ask him for a Viagra

or birth control prescription unless you're married. "God says that sex is

excellent and belongs only in marriage," Dr. Bob vanNoppen wrote recently in

an open letter to prospective patients. "Therefore, I will only be providing

sex-promoting medical prescriptions - such as erectile dysfunctional

medications for men and contraception/birth control for women - for those

who are willing to indicate they are married." VanNoppen, who expects to

open his practice in October, said yesterday from his Ottawa home that the

letter was fair notice to new prospective patients. "I don't want anyone to

be surprised. I want my patients to have their eyes wide open when picking a

doctor," vanNoppen said.

He also opposes abortions. "I cannot recommend a woman obtain an abortion,

either by prescribing medications or referring her for a surgical procedure,

unless her physical life is at stake," he wrote. "I cannot deliberately kill

anyone. I cannot euthanize any patient no matter how much they might request

it, even if it were to become legal.

I will never subscribe to the deliberate intention to end life."

VanNoppen said he isn't trying to convert anyone. "I am very willing to

discuss these beliefs, even debate them, but I think they are unlikely to

change and patients that find them truly upsetting may need to find a more

suitable physician," vanNoppen wrote. "I am willing to pray with patients,

if they request it. I think it is also natural to assume that much of my

ordinary advice on such things as health living, child rearing,

relationships, work, life, death will be informed by my religious belief."

The Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons wouldn't comment on

vanNoppen's introduction letter to new patients. "I can't speak to the

specifics, because there is an investigation process to do that," said

Kathryn Clarke, spokeswoman for the College, which is establishing a policy

for doctors on human rights issues. "There will be guidelines for doctors if

they refuse to provide services for religious reasons. It is indicated in

the draft doctors are expected to communicate clearly what services they

won't provide because of their religious beliefs," Clarke said.

Dejavu - Advertising group says ads are "deceptive"

Media Release from Edmonton Pro-life

August 25th, 2008
In a bizarre – yet anticipated- ruling last week, Advertising Standards Canada (ASC), rejected fact based evidence 1/ from Stats Canada confirming abortions do occur throughout all nine months of pregnancy, and 2/ from a ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada showing there are no laws against abortion in Canada.

Corry Morcos, president of Edmonton Prolife, the group behind the billboards, said the decision was “unbelievable, but expected” given the previous ruling regarding the Life Canada ads. “Governments have failed to enact any legislation as requested by the Supreme Court in the 1988 Morgentaler decision, and that is why today we have no protection for the unborn in Canada. Abortions are totally unrestricted by any laws. But apparently educating, through advertising, about this truth is not allowed.”

The ad “9 Months! , that is the amount of time the government say it is legal to have an abortion. Abortion. Have we gone too far?" has been running for two years and one complaint has been received. The ad is speaking solely to the legal status of abortion in Canada, yet ASC wanted the ads to include various medical guidelines. Women will be interested to note that according to ASC women may not be assured an abortion simply upon request particularly after the first trimester.

In the appeal ruling, Ad standards was silent on many of the grounds for appeal issues raised by Edmonton Prolife. In particular the issue of competing interests. “Council did not do its due diligence in looking for “competing interest”. The complainant in the case is an activist in the “pro choice” movement and clearly has a “competing interest”.

The ASC, a self-regulating body of Canada’s advertising industry, wants to appear to be the gatekeepe! r for consumers, to make sure we are receiving the truth. Their website states

“ASC is the industry body committed to creating and maintaining community confidence in advertising.”

Confidence? The very media organizations that the Ad Standard represents have written numerous articles deriding the Ad standard council’s prior decisions against similar ads. When your own membership questions your integrity, the confidence that the general public has in the ASC is compromised. When ASC calls facts deceptions, the authority of the ASC to be keeper of all that is “truthful, fair and accurate” in advertising rings hollow to many.

It is completely mind boggling for Edmonton Prolife to be held to the ruling of a self-regulating, unnamed complaints panel of anonymous people who can claim anything they want, without providing a shred of documentation. Yet when Edmonton Prolife, provides documentation, including government statistics, and legal rulings, those facts are dismissed as false, misleading and inaccurate.

Prolife groups and their messages of facts and t! ruth are being censored, that is the bottom line.

For more information, contact Corry Morcos at 780-455-5249 or
Edmonton Prolife at 780-425-1637

Articles in Prominent Medical Journal Doubt Worth and Benefit of HPV Vaccine

Source: www.LifeSiteNews.com

By Tim Waggoner

WASHINGTON, August 21, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The New England Journal of Medicine posted two articles this week that asked why two human papillomavirus vaccines have been so widely distributed given their unproven effectiveness and high costs.

Gardasil by Merck Sharp & Dohme, which has already received tremendous criticism for the severe and fatal side-effects experienced by users, and Cervarix by GlaxoSmithKline were the two drugs called to question.

As reported by the New York Times, Dr. Charlotte J. Haug, editor of The Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association, whose editorial appeared in Thursday's issue of The New England Journal, said, "Despite great expectations and promising results of clinical trials, we still lack sufficient evidence of an effective vaccine against cervical cancer. With so many essential questions still unanswered, there is good reason to be cautious."

Both vaccines were tested for relatively short periods of time, revealed Dr. Haug, and researchers are yet to prove whether or not the vaccines offer lasting immunity and if a user's natural immunity to other strains not eliminated by the vaccines will be compromised. Dr. Haug said it is not certain if the protection offered by the vaccines will even lead to reduced rates of cervical cancer.

Jane J. Kim and Dr. Sue Goldie of Harvard, who likewise had a study published in this week's issue of the medical journal, also brought up the fact that the vaccines have not been proven to offer life-long protection. They said that until this is certain, the cost of the vaccines cannot be justified.

Furthermore, the costs of the vaccines cannot be offset by eliminating Pap smear screening because the test is still needed to identify HPV strands that the vaccines do not protect against.

These studies criticizing the effectiveness and cost of the HPV vaccines could not come at worse time for Merck – the drug giant is under fire because of a reported 9,749 cases of severe side-effects and 21 deaths associated with Gardasil.

See Related Coverage:

HPV Vaccine Causes 21 Deaths and Counting - CDC Study Launched
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08081405.html

URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08082104.html

Opinion:
Conservative Party of Canada Kills Unborn Victims of Crime Act with Gutless Alternative
Government legislation to mirror proposals on the issue by pro-abortionists

By John-Henry Westen

OTTAWA, August 25, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In news which came as a shock within and without the Conservative Party of Canada this afternoon, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson has announced that the Conservative Government will introduce legislation to bolster penalties for those who assault pregnant women. The legislation will in effect kill the Unborn Victims of Crime Act, a private members bill with wide public and legislative support that would have recognized in law the separate life of unborn children - at least those who are 'wanted' or intended by the mother for birth.

Conservative MP Ken Epp's private member's bill would ensure that a criminal would receive separate punishment for killing an unborn child in a violent attack on a pregnant mother. Even though the bill explicitly excluded consensual abortion and acts or omissions by the pregnant woman, the Conservative Government fell prey to the arguments of abortion activists who saw any fetal rights, even of 'wanted' children, as an assault on abortion.

According to Nicholson, the upcoming Conservative bill would add the fact of a woman's pregnancy to the list of 'aggravating factors' which must be considered when sentencing criminals. The proposal is in fact nearly identical to a Liberal private member's bill which was proposed in May by by pro-abortion Liberal MP Brent St. Denis.

In his announcement of the measure, Nicholson noted that the Conservatives accepted the arguments of abortion activists. "We've heard criticisms from across the country, including representative from the medical community, that Ken Epp's bill could be interpreted that Mr. Epp's bill as presently drafted could be interpreted as instilling fetal rights," he said.

"Let me be clear, our government will not reopen the debate on abortion," added Nicholson who in the past was recognized as one of the more heroic and reliably pro-life Conservative MPs. "For this reason, and in the context of the government's tackling crime agenda, I'm announcing that the government will introduce legislation that will punish criminals who commit violence against pregnant women but do so in a way that leaves no room for the introduction of fetal rights."

This is the second time this year that Nicholson has betrayed and shocked Canada's social conservatives. In May he presented the Conservative government Justice Department's 50-page defense of the notorious subsection 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act that has permitted major assaults on freedom of expression and freedom of religion by the Human Rights commission kangaroo courts.

When asked if Epp was even told of the new legislation, Nicholson indicated Epp was not informed, or consulted on the matter, saying only that he would find out with everyone else.

While Ken Epp did not immediately respond to the announcement, his remarks on the Liberal private member's bill proposed in May would apply equally to the Conservative proposal.

"I am very disappointed he has fallen victim to the scare tactics of special interests groups who refuse to stand by pregnant women who want their unborn babies protected in law," said Ken Epp responding to St. Denis' proposal. "Why have increased penalties for attacks on pregnant women if the baby doesn't matter?" Mr. Epp asked. "Either the unborn child matters so that attacks on pregnant women are more heinous, in which case Bill C-484 is a direct recognition of that reality; or the child doesn't matter, in which case we don't need any new law - the current provisions in the Criminal Code cover the violence to the woman."

Epp's further comments on St. Denis' bill suggested it was little more than political posturing. A criticism that, it seems, would apply equally to the Conservative Government proposal. "Besides, my legal advisors and the Justice Department have assured me that pregnancy is already deemed an aggravating factor for sentencing purposes, as part of our case law," Mr. Epp said. "And I have also been assured that C-484 will not change that. But if all we do is increase the penalty for attacking a pregnant woman without creating a separate offence for harming or k   illing her child, then we reinforce the offensive notion that the child's fate is irrelevant. But the child's death is very relevant to the mother (and other family members) who want her baby to live. As Mary Talbot, mother of Olivia Talbot and grandmother of Lane Jr. told the media, 'It's two people who died that day…I certainly put two people in a coffin.'"

Mr. Epp concluded, "What right does anyone have to deny a pregnant woman the right to have the child she has chosen to bring to term protected in law? I can't imagine any pregnant woman feeling that justice has been served if the person who brutally and intentionally killed the baby in her womb simply gets a stiffer sentence for assaulting her. What he did was wrong, not because she was pregnant, but because he killed her baby! The "alternative" Mr. St. Denis is proposing does not recognize her baby's death. It does not address the horrible loss and grieving that mother feels. It's not good enough for a caring society like Canada. Victims' families and Canadians in general are crying out for justice! Let us not delay in doing the right thing and pass C-484 into law."

Epp Statement in Response to Government's
'Alternative' Proposal to C-484

Ken Epp, MP
Edmonton - Sherwood Park
Epp Statement in Response to Government's 'Alternative' Proposal to C-484

For Immediate Release

August 26, 2008

(Ottawa) - "An orchestrated campaign against my Private Members Bill C-484, the Unborn Victims of Crime Act, has now been followed by the government's announcement that they will unveil new legislation that will include a victim's pregnancy as an aggravating factor when judges consider sentencing offenders. The government is proposing this as an alternative to Bill C-484.

"In my view, it is unfortunate that they have made this decision. My Bill was carefully worded to ensure women's freedom to choose abortion would be completely respected and physicians who perform abortions would be completely protected. What is disappointing is that the government appears to have bowed to pressure from a number of interest groups including abortion rights groups and some medical organizations.

"Abortion supporters welcomed the introduction in May of Liberal MP Brent St. Denis' Private Members Bill, C-543, which appears to be very similar to what the government is now proposing. Indeed, such a law was actually suggested by the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada last November. What I said when C-543 was introduced, I will say again: why have increased penalties for attacks on pregnant women if the not-yet-born baby doesn't matter? Either that child matters so that attacks on pregnant women are more heinous, in which case Bill C-484 is a direct recognition of that reality; or that child doesn't matter, in which case we don't need any new law - the current provisions in the Criminal Code already cover the violence against the woman.

"The saddest thing of all is that the government Bill likely adds nothing that doesn't already exist in law. My own legal advisors - and the Justice Department - have assured me that pregnancy is already deemed an aggravating factor for sentencing purposes, as part of our case law.

"By simply treating pregnancy as an aggravating factor without recognizing a second victim in the crime, we reinforce the offensive notion that the unborn child's fate is irrelevant. But the child's death is very relevant to the mother (and other family members) who want her baby to live. As Mary Talbot, mother of Olivia Talbot and grandmother of Lane Jr. told the media, 'It's two people who died that day.I certainly put two people in a coffin.'

"Does the Minister now tell Mary that, during the violent attack on Olivia and Lane Jr., her grandson was just an 'aggravating factor'? That the brutal attack didn't really lead to the death of Olivia's not-yet-born but very much wanted baby boy? Lane Jr. was deliberately killed that day. At the trial, Olivia's murderer told the court he shot Olivia in the abdomen 'to get the baby.'

"I can't imagine any pregnant woman feeling that justice has been served if the person who brutally and intentionally killed the baby in her womb simply gets a stiffer sentence for assaulting her, without being charged with a separate offence specifically for intentionally killing her child. What he did was wrong, not simply because she was pregnant, but because he intentionally killed her baby. The 'alternative' which the government is now proposing does not even recognize her baby's death. It does not address the horrible loss and grieving that mother and her family feels. It's just not good enough for a caring society like Canada.

"I know the critics of C-484 will continue to spread misinformation. But I continue to hope that thoughtful, everyday Canadians, not influenced by political agendas or strident ideology, will continue to support

C-484 - and about 70% of Canadians do, including the vast majority of women across the country. I hope they will continue to contact their MPs, now more than ever, and encourage them to continue to support a compassionate and just response to the horrible loss experienced by pregnant women who lose their not-yet-born babies in a violent attack.

And I hope, as a result, MPs, regardless of party affiliation, will have the courage to vote in favour of Bill C-484 at Third Reading."

- 30 -

For More Information, contact
Ken Epp, MP (780) 467-4944;

www.kenepp.com <http://www.kenepp.com/>

MPs take sides on unborn victims bill

Today’s Family News
June 11, 2008

The political battle lines are being drawn over Bill C-484, which seeks to give legal protection to an unborn child who is injured or killed as a result of violence committed against the baby’s mother.

As the Toronto Star reported, critics of the proposed Unborn Victims of Crime Act claim it is merely “a back door method to give the fetus rights and make abortions more difficult to obtain in Canada.” Conservative MP Ken Epp, who introduced the bill, adamantly denies that.

As Epp explained on his website, C-484 “is not about restricting elective abortions – it is about protecting children whose mothers have not chosen abortion – whose mothers have chosen life for their children.” For example, if police believed a woman was murdered by someone who knew she was pregnant, his bill would ensure that her assailant was charged in the deaths of two people.

Last week, Liberal leader Stéphane Dion entered the debate, vowing that his caucus would do all it could to defeat Epp’s bill, Canadian Press reported.

“I want to give my word to all the women of Canada that the Liberal Party of Canada is against to reopen women’s right to decide. . . . We will not allow that to happen,” Dion said.

That prompted a swift rebuke from Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Rona Ambrose, who supports C-484. She said if anyone was trying to reopen Canada’s abortion debate, it was Dion himself.

“I think he’s taking a very partisan tack on what could be a very non-partisan issue that we could address together,” Ambrose told the Star. “I think he’s fear-mongering women on this issue.”

Ambrose, who worked in women’s shelters before entering politics, also told Canadian Press that studies show pregnant women are much more prone to becoming victims of violence, and that C-484 is simply trying to provide some added deterrence to would-be attackers.

“The irony,” Epp wrote last month in the Ottawa Citizen, “is that for years pro-lifers have been accused of trying to impose their views on others. The opponents of C-484 are now attempting to impose on women who want to be pregnant and want to love and protect their babies the view that the child in her womb is unworthy of protection in criminal law, unworthy of any amount of respect at all to the extent that a criminal can brutally attack that mother’s child with a fist or a boot or a gun or a knife or a sword and face no consequences for killing what is so dear to her. . . . ”

“Let us not abandon those pregnant women who choose life for their babies.”

With almost every New Democrat and Bloc Québécois MP opposed to the bill, its fate rests with the Liberals. When it came up for second reading in March, 26 Liberal MPs voted in favour of it. Dion would not say if he will require his MPs to vote against it when the bill comes back to the Commons for the third and final reading sometime this fall.

Most Canadians seem to support the bill. An online poll last March by Angus Reid Strategies found 70 per cent of respondents endorsed C-484, whereas only 19 per cent were opposed to it. And only 19 per cent of women and 29 per cent of men said they saw it as an attempt to re-criminalize abortion in Canada.

Pro-Life Hero Wins Olympic Medal in Beijing

By Tim Waggoner

LONDON, August 25, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In 2004, U.K. Olympian Tasha Danvers-Smith sacrificed her spot at the Summer Olympics in Athens so she could bring her then-unborn baby to term. Four years later, her little boy inspired her all the way to the podium in the women's 400-metre hurdle event at the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing.

After discovering she was pregnant in 2004, Danvers-Smith made a joint decision with her husband and coach, Darrell, to put her baby's life ahead of her dream of competing in the summer games in Athens. At the time some in the track and field community urged Tasha, touted as one of the U.K.'s best chances for a gold medal, to abort her baby, and the media chastised her when she did not.

Danvers-Smith was, however, given tremendous support by those who believe in the intrinsic right to life of all human beings. One such organization, which was greatly moved by Tasha's bravery, was the Life Issues Institute. Executive Director Bradley Mattes presented the athlete and then-soon-to-be mother with the Hero At Heart award, which is given to those individuals who "demonstrate outstanding courage or compassion on behalf of innocent human life."

Four years down the road, after balancing her schedule between the newest member of her family and training for the 400-metre hurdle, Tasha ran a personal best in Beijing, good enough for the bronze medal. Matte says Tasha has scored a "tremendous victory" for women and has proved her critics wrong.

"Tasha has demonstrated to women all over the world that they don't have to sacrifice their unborn children to fulfill their dreams. Tasha's three-year-old son, Jaden, was an inspiration to her Olympic goals. The very thing critics said would destroy and derail her hopes was central to helping her fulfill them," said Mattes.

"Tasha stood strong for life, even when it meant temporarily giving up her dreams for an Olympic medal. Now she has become a member of the exclusive club of Olympic champions, and she has her beautiful son, Jaden. I couldn't be happier for her," he concluded.

Mattes has made it known that he will forward any emails to Tasha regarding her remarkable story:

Human Rights Tribunal* to pastor: Renounce your faith!
Now banned from expressing moral opposition to homosexuality

* Note: --Title changed from original.

. . . .

In a decision handed down just days ago in the penalty phase of the quasi-judicial proceedings run by the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal, evangelical pastor Stephen Boisson was banned from expressing his biblical perspective of homosexuality and ordered to pay $5,000 for "damages for pain and suffering" as well as apologize to the activist who complained of being hurt.

According to a report from Pete Vere at the Catholic Exchange, the penalty could foreshadow the possible fate of Father Alphonse de Valk, who also has cited the biblical perspective on homosexuality in the nation's debate over same-sex "marriage" and now faces HRC charges.

Boisson had written a letter to the editor of his local Red Deer newspaper in 2002 denouncing the advance of homosexual activism as "wicked" and stating: "Children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights."

The activist, local teacher Darren Lund, filed a complaint and the guilty verdict from Lori G. Andreachuk, a lawyer, was handed down some weeks ago. The latest decision involved the penalty phase of the trial.

"While agreeing that Boisson's letter was not a criminal act, the government tribunal nevertheless ordered the Christian pastor to [stop expressing his opinion]," Vere reported.

Andreachuk noted that Lund, who brought the complaint, wasn't, in fact, injured.

"In this case there is no specific individual who can be compensated as there is no direct victim who has come forward…," she wrote.

However, that did not stop her from ordering the payment anyway.

And as for the future, she wrote:

"Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc. shall cease publishing in newspapers, by e-mail, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the Internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals. Further, they shall not and are prohibited from making disparaging remarks in the future about … Lund or … Lund's witnesses relating to their involvement in this complaint. Further, all disparaging remarks versus homosexuals are directed to be removed from current Web sites and publications of Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc," the lawyer opined.

Andreachuk also ordered Boissoin to apologize for the original letter in the Red Deer Advocate and told the two "offenders" to pay $5,000.

The apology letter, Vere said, "threatens civil liberties in Canada, according to Ezra Levant, an author and lawyer who himself was targeted by an HRC attack."

"[The] government now believes that if it can't convince a Christian pastor that he's wrong, it will just order him to condemn himself?" Levant wrote on his blog. "Other than tribunals in Stalin's Soviet Union and Mao's China, where is this Orwellian 'order' considered to be justice?"

"This is like a Third World jail-house confession – where accused criminals are forced to sign false statements of guilt," Levant wrote. "We don’t even 'order' murderers to apologize to their victims' families. Because we know that a forced apology is meaningless. But not if your point is to degrade Christian pastors."

"In essence, the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal is ordering to the minister to renounce his Christian faith, since his opposition to homosexuality is based upon the Judeo-Christian Bible," Vere wrote.

WND reported recently about de Valk, the target of a Human Rights Commission case over his biblical references regarding homosexuality.

"Father [de Valk] defended the [Catholic] Church's teaching on marriage during Canada's same-sex 'marriage' debate, quoting extensively from the Bible, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and Pope John Paul II's encyclicals. Each of these documents contains official Catholic teaching. And like millions of other people throughout the world and the ages – many of whom are non-Catholics and non-Christians — Father believes that marriage is an exclusive union between a man and a woman," Vere wrote.

Vere raised the question that Canada now considers morality a "hate crime."

"If one, because of one's sincerely held moral beliefs, whether it be Jew, Muslim, Christian, Catholic, opposes the idea of same-sex marriage in Canada, is that considered 'hate'?" he asked.

Vere wrote that the response he got from Mark van Dusen, a spokesman for the federal human rights prosecution office, shocked him.

The government agent confirmed the agency investigates complaints but doesn't set public policy or moral standards. He said the agency job is to look at the circumstances and decide whether to advance it or dismiss it.

What is shocking about that, Vere wrote, is the admission that unjustified complaints can be dismissed, yet the case against de Valk has continued now for more than six months.

An extended audio recording between Vere and van Dusen is posted on YouTube:

A second part of the interview also is posted.

Obama's Abortion Bombshell: Unrestricted Abortion Over Wishes of Individual States a Priority for Presidency

By Peter J. Smith

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 10, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Barack Obama, the presumptive pro-abortion nominee of the Democratic Party, has plans to reward the allies that helped him topple Hillary Clinton from her throne by making total unrestricted abortion in the United States his number one priority as president.

In light of Obama's recently achieved status as the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Focus on the Family's CitizenLink has decided to remind its supporters that almost one year has passed since Obama made his vows to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund that abortion would be the first priority of his administration.

"The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act," Obama said in his July speech to abortion advocates worried about the increase of pro-life legislation at the state level.

The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) is legislation Obama has co-sponsored along with 18 other senators that would annihilate every single state law limiting or regulating abortion, including the federal ban on partial birth abortion.

The 2007 version of FOCA proposed: "It is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child, to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, or to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect the life or health of the woman."

Obama made his remarks in a question-and-answer session after delivering a speech crystallizing for abortion advocates his deep-seated abortion philosophy and his belief that federal legislation will break pro-life resistance and end the national debate on abortion. (see transcript: http://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackobamabeforeplannedparenthoodaction)

"I am absolutely convinced that culture wars are so nineties; their days are growing dark, it is time to turn the page," Obama said in July. "We want a new day here in America. We're tired about arguing about the same ole' stuff. And I am convinced we can win that argument."

Besides making abortion on demand a "fundamental right" throughout the United States, FOCA would effectively nullify informed consent laws, waiting periods, health safety regulations for abortion clinics, etc.

Furthermore, medical professionals and institutions that refused abortions also would lose legal protections. FOCA would expose individuals, organizations, and governments - including federal, state, and local government agencies - to costly civil actions for purported violations of the act.

"Thirty-five years after Roe, abortion supporters, like Senator Obama, are dismayed that abortion remains a divisive issue and that their radical agenda has not been submissively accepted by the American public," states Denise M. Burke, vice president of Americans United for Life.

"Rather than confronting legitimate issues concerning the availability and safety of abortion, they choose to blatantly ignore the concerns and interests of everyday Americans, as well as the growing evidence that abortion hurts women."

Hillary Clinton, once the longtime Democratic front-runner and anticipated abortion president, conceded defeat last Saturday to Obama, who captured the nomination from her after a long and bitter campaign.

Obama has won the crucial endorsement of abortion activist Frances Kissling, who broke from the ranks of other radical feminist leaders earlier this year to endorse Obama, saying Obama, not Clinton, would better use the bully pulpit of the presidency to accomplish their aims and end the culture wars over abortion.

See related links:

Sen. Barack Obama's July 17, 2007 Speech to Planned Parenthood (transcript): http://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackobamabeforeplannedparenthoodaction

Video footage of Obama's speech can be obtained here: http://www.imoneinamillion.com/

Senate version of FOCA: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:3:./temp/~c110IoOGpT::

House version of FOCA: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:4:./temp/~c110IoOGpT::

Canada Finally Moves Age of Consent for Sex from 14 to 16

By Thaddeus M. Baklinski

OTTAWA, March 5, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Canada's new age of sexual consent, raised to 16 from 14, was signed into law on Feb. 28 after passing in the Senate by a narrow 3 votes.

As reported last December by LifeSiteNews.com, the Conservative Government's Bill C-2, the 'Tackling Violent Crime Act', passed the House of Commons on November 28, 2007. This bill included a provision to raise the age of consent for sexual activity from 14 to 16. At 14, Canada's age of consent was among the lowest of Western nations, where it typically varies between 16 and 18.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper had threatened to call an election if Bill C-2 wasn't passed in the Senate by March 1, 2008. Even though the Liberal dominated senate complained there was not enough time to meet this deadline, the possibility of giving Harper an opportunity to launch an election over the issue pushed them into action.

Nineteen senators voted for the bill, sixteen voted against, while thirty-one senators - all Liberals but one - abstained from the vote, and another twenty-seven didn't show up at all.

In an interview with the Winnipeg Free Press, senior cabinet minister Vic Toews said it was satisfying to see Bill C-2 become law, and that his government's decision to pressure the Liberals to pass the bill or go to the electorate was the right one.

"Most of the measures in the legislation had Liberal support during the last election campaign, and it should never have taken this long to get them into law," Mr. Toews said.

Roz Prober, co-founder of the Winnipeg-based children's rights group Beyond Borders, told the Free Press, "Common sense has prevailed. Raising the age of sexual consent from 14 to 16 is a huge protection for children. People were stunned to see Canada was so far behind the eight ball on the age of consent."

Rainbow Sash Movement Plots Papal Protest
Gay advocacy group to throw ashes and blow whistles at pope during April US visit

By Michael Baggot

March 11, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Rainbow Sash Movement, a homosexual activist group, announced their plans to protest Pope Benedict XVI's opposition to homosexual behavior during his April visit to the United States.

The RSM plans to throw ashes at the Pope, because "ashes are an ancient and appropriate greeting for a sinner who has caused the Church so much division and pain," stated the movement.

"We will also be greeting him with whistles; these were used by the Polish People to show shame for the violation of human rights by the Communist Government prior to the end of the cold war," added a RSM statement.

"We are a community of Catholic GLBT along with our allies who work for change in the Church. To continue to hide our identity only enables shame and homophobia. We are committed to working from within the Church," says the movement.

The RSM is best known for its large Pentecost Sunday protests, in which openly practicing homosexual, bisexual, and "transgendered" individuals identify themselves as such with multicolor sashes and demand Holy Communion during Mass.

The Pope has been a vocal opponent of homosexual "marriage". In January 2007, after praising traditional families, the Pope said, "projects that aim to attribute to other forms of union inappropriate legal recognition appear dangerous and counterproductive."

The RSM contrasts with ministries in the Church that support Catholics in their efforts to live a life of chastity and to overcome homosexual inclinations when possible. The Courage apostolate, founded by Fr. John Harvey, OSFS in 1980, has five main goals: Chastity, Prayer and Dedication, Fellowship, Support, and Good Example.

Courage professes complete fidelity to the teachings of the Catholic Church, including those regarding homosexuality.

"Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered,'" states the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The Catechism adds that those with homosexual tendencies "must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided."

"It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law," stated a 1986 Vatican document on the pastoral care of homosexual persons, issued by the then Cardinal Ratzinger.

"But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered," added the document.

New 'Bully' video game raises teachers' concern

Jennifer Moreau, Burnaby Now

Published: Saturday, March 08, 2008

The B.C. Teachers' Federation is calling for parents to boycott a new video game that it says makes light of bullying and promotes violence.

Bully: the Scholarship Edition is just one more reason the provincial government needs to regulate the gaming industry, said Irene Lanzinger, president of the provincewide teachers' union.

"We try to teach kids how to treat each other with respect," Lanzinger said.

"These games give kids the counter-message."

Lanzinger said while academics debate whether violent games lead to violent actions, teachers see children acting out violent behaviour at school.

"It is of no comfort to me that some experts say this doesn't have an impact on children. It is not a healthy psychological experience for a child to play a game that glorifies bullying and violence," she said.

Released March 4, Bully: the Scholarship Edition shows scenes of violence, crude humour, sexual themes, tobacco and alcohol use and "animated blood."

In the trailer, the game's hero is seen smacking another student.

As part of the call for regulation, the teachers' federation pointed to comments that Burnaby-Willingdon MLA John Nuraney made a couple weeks ago in the Victoria legislature.

"It may be of interest to this house to know that one of the top video games for boys in grades 3 to 6 is Grand Theft Auto.

"While it is admirable that our children of today adapt very quickly to this technology, it is also alarming that without proper guidance and supervision, they can fall victims to the unscrupulous predators," Nuraney said.

In an interview with the NOW, Nuraney said he "totally agrees" with the BCTF's position on Bully: The Scholarship Edition, but the issue of regulating the industry is still under discussion.

"The dangers are known to all. I think it's a question of jurisdiction," he said, adding it's not clear if regulations would fall under provincial or federal government mandates.

"The only thing it seems right now is to bring more awareness," he said, adding parents need to supervise the children's activities, including those on the Internet.

Bully: The Scholarship Edition was released by Rockstar, which also produces Grand Theft Auto.

Calls to Rockstar's Vancouver office were redirected to New York, and not returned by NOW deadlines.

From Burnabynow

From citizenlink.com Feb. 11, 2008

[U.S.] CDC: 1 in 4 Teen Girls Has Sexually Transmitted Infection

staff reports

'We’re missing a tremendous opportunity to talk to them about the benefits of being abstinent until marriage.'

One in four teen girls in the U.S. has a sexually transmitted infection (STI), according to a study by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). That adds up to more than 3 million girls.

Among girls who admitted having had sex, the rate was 40 percent, The Associated Press reported. Human papilloma virus (HPV), which causes cervical cancer, is the most common STI in teen girls ages 14 to 19, the CDC found.

But the CDC conference in Chicago , where the study was released, ignored a key component, said Linda Klepacki, sexual health analyst for Focus on the Family Action.

“With such high disease rates in teenagers, we’re just missing a tremendous opportunity to talk to them about the benefits of being abstinent until marriage," she told Family News in Focus. "This is the time to teach kids about personal accountability and abstinence education. As it looks from this conference, the CDC is not grabbing that opportunity and taking it."

Klepacki said not only is the abstinence-until-marriage message left out of the discussion at these conferences, the topic is often mocked by experts at the CDC.

[Click here to read the whole article on citizenlink.com .]

Abortionist Morgentaler Not on Order of Canada List for 2008

By Hilary White

OTTAWA, February 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Earlier this month, LifeSiteNews.com reported that some Canadian abortion activists were stepping up efforts to have Dr. Morgentaler awarded Canada's highest civilian honour, the Order of Canada, for his years of advocacy for legalizing abortion and for the thousands of abortions that he personally has performed.

In a piece appearing in the Globe and Mail, several of Canada's most prominent abortion advocates proposed a public campaign to have Dr. Morgentaler awarded the Order of Canada. They said that the matter was especially urgent now that he is ill and not expected to live much longer. The prestigious award is not granted posthumously.

Cathie Colombo, Dr. Morgentaler's assistant, went so far as to say it is "blasphemy" that he has not yet received the award.

But today, a media release from the office of the Governor General, who is responsible for granting the award, showed that Dr. Morgentaler is not included on the list for this year.

More than any other single person, Dr. Henry Morgentaler is responsible for the current Canadian legal situation, in which there is no law restricting or regulating abortion. Morgentaler's decades of campaigning for abortion resulted in the criminal code statute prohibiting abortion being struck down by the Supreme Court in 1988. Since then Canada has been left in a state of lawlessness, in which abortion is effectively legal throughout all nine months of pregnancy.

Jakki Jeffs, the head of Guelph Area Right to Life Association, told LifeSiteNews.com today that she contacted the Governor General's office and was told that the office that oversees the Order of Canada "had a file" about Dr. Morgentaler and that he had been nominated several times. Jeffs pointed out that although this does not mean that Dr. Morgentaler will be granted the award next year, it is nevertheless important for pro-life Canadians to let their opinions be heard.

Pro-life organizations are not the only groups in Canada to have qualms about Dr. Morgentaler's work. In his testimony before the Professional Corporation of Physicians of Quebec, Morgentaler admitted to having committed at least 7,000 abortions himself. However, in a 1976 investigation into his work, that organization suspended Morgentaler's medical licence for a year, stressing that the reason was not only that abortion was illegal but that he had conducted the abortions.

Morgentaler was cited "for not holding a valid interview before the abortion, for failing almost completely to gather a case history of his client, for failing to perform the necessary pregnancy test or blood test, for not obtaining pathological examination of the 'tissues' removed and for failing to follow up the state of health of his patients afterward."

The panel also declared that Morgentaler's behaviour reflected "an attitude which is primarily directed to protecting his fees." Morgentaler currently operates six private for-profit facilities across Canada. In 2002 the paper Le Droit revealed his gross annual revenue to be $11 million from his abortion practices.

The 1976 ruling from the disciplinary medical board said his practice was one which "confers a mercenary character on the doctor-patient relationship," and said it was "incapable of reconciling [Morgentaler's] behaviour with the humanitarian concern that [he] invoked throughout his defence."

The Order of Canada, given on behalf of the Crown by the Queen's representative, the Governor General, is intended to recognize Canadians who have made lifelong commitments to bettering Canadian society. This year, the new members include Al Davidson, who worked promoting nature conservation, Flora Dell, who worked to improve the health of older Canadians, and Terrence Gillespie, who dedicated his career to improving the health and well-being of children suffering from cystic fibrosis.

In June, 2005 the University of Western Ontario conferred an honorary Doctor of Laws degree upon Morgentaler in the midst of protests by students and others. 12,000 signatures were acquired on a petition asking the UWO to reverse its decision.

To Contact the offices overseeing the Order of Canada:
The Governor General of Canada
Attention: The Chancellery of Honours
Rideau Hall
1 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A1
info@gg.ca

Phone: (613) 993-8200
or toll-free in Canada and the United States at:
1 800 465-6890
Fax: (613) 998-8760

Jean Chretien to Receive Order of Canada for His "Legacy" - "Same-Sex Unions"

By John-Henry Westen

OTTAWA, February 20, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - It seems playing a key role in legalizing homosexual 'marriage,' over the objections of a majority of Canadians, is one way to get named to the Order of Canada, Canada's most prestigious award.

Governor General Michaëlle Jean will give the nation's highest honor for 'lifetime achievement' to former Prime Minister Jean Chretien, making him a Companion of the Order, on Friday February 22. The notice that was sent out by the Governor General's office, noting the award recipients and their major contributions to Canada, cited Chretien's "legacy" of homosexual unions.

"His government's legacy includes a number of social reform and humanitarian initiatives, such as recognition of same-sex unions and the abolition of landmines," said the citation. Chretien supported same-sex 'marriage.' However, he was replaced as Prime Minister by Paul Martin prior to the issue coming to a final vote in the House of Commons.

That the honor is being given to Chretien, and that his support for homosexuality has been singled out as one of the prime reasons for his receiving the award, should not come as a surprise to Canadians. Governor General Jean, who made her first affront to family values when, during her induction in 2005, refused to swear on the Bible, awarded same-sex 'marriage' pioneer Rev. Brent Hawkes with the Order of Canada last year.

Hawkes' claim to national fame is also his homosexual 'marriage' activism. In 2001 Hawkes illegally "married" a lesbian couple in his Toronto church, and when the Canadian government would not recognize the "marriage" as valid, he took the government to court. Subsequently, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice recognized the "marriage" as legal, beginning a process of judicial activism that eventually culminated in the legalization of homosexual "marriage" by Canada's Parliament.

In an affidavit before the Supreme Court of Canada, Hawkes bashed a Vatican document on homosexual unions, and statements by Catholic bishops on the same, as "expressions of hatred that should not be tolerated in our society."

At the time the courts forced various provinces to permit homosexual 'marriage', and even later when Parliament voted to legalize it, polls regularly showed that a majority of Canadians were opposed to the redefinition of marriage. One such Canadian, who was personally affected by homosexual parenting, has spoken before numerous legislators about her experiences, warning of the dangers to children.

Dawn Stefanowicz, author of "Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting," told LifeSiteNews.com that Chretien does not deserve the Order of Canada, precisely because of his pushing of homosexual 'marriage' on the nation.

"Regrettably, Chretien will be known as the prime minister who socially deconstructed and redefined the family unit through the recognition of same-sex unions," she said. "Against the better expressed judgment of many Canadians, Chretien chose to pander to some special interest groups in the name of equality. As an adult survivor who grew up with a father who had numerous homosexual liaisons and involvements in the subcultures in North American cities, I know the incredible pain and longsuffering I endured. As well, there are many adult survivors who have contacted me sharing similar concerns and challenges."

Stefanowicz concluded, "Unequivocally, children will always have their best outcomes and opportunities when they are raised in married father-mother-headed families where gender is defined as male and female."

Dawn can be contacted at: dawnstefano@sympatico.ca
Or you can order her book at: http://www.dawnstefanowicz.com
Or call 1-877-421-READ (7323)

To express concerns:

Conservative Leader
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
pm@pm.gc.ca

From: Canoe.ca February 14, 2008

Private member's bill would protect unborn crime victims

By THE CANADIAN PRESS

OTTAWA - Conservative MP Ken Epp is seeking support for a private member's bill that would recognize the unborn as separate victims when their mothers are killed or harmed in an attack.

Epp says the Unborn Victims of Crime Act has nothing to do with abortion but is meant to fill a major gap in the law.

But critics say that's a backdoor effort to reopen the abortion debate by sneaking a recognition of fetal rights into Canadian law.

Epp cited several cases where the killers of pregnant women were charged for the mother's murder - but not for the death of her fetus.

That's because the law does not recognize the unborn as human beings until they are born alive.

Epp says his proposed act is supported by people of all political stripes because it narrowly focuses on cases where a third party harms or kills a fetus in a criminal attack.

He said the bill is constitutional and would not change the Criminal Code in any way that might undermine a woman's legal access to abortion.

A spokeswoman for the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada vehemently disagrees. Spokeswoman Joyce Arthur says the bill has been promoted by right-to-life groups, and that it would create redundant protections. Judges and parole boards can already take into account whether a convict has injured or killed an unborn child, she said.

The bill is to be voted on March 5, but would be derailed if an early election is called

Fire the censors

As ‘human rights’ tribunals act like thought police, there is a simple solution:
Change our human rights statutes

TERRY O’NEILL
National Post oneills@telus.net

The free-speech controversies currently swirling around Maclean’s magazine and Alberta journalist Ezra Levant ultimately can be attributed to one thing: the legislation that allows Canada’s human rights commissions to act as censors. Amend the various human rights acts blanketing the country and the problem vanishes.

Disturbingly, however, the issue does not seem to be on any government’s radar, either in provincial capitals or on Parliament Hill.

The background to the cases in question is fairly well known by now. Maclean’s and its writer, Mark Steyn, are the subjects of complaints filed at the Canadian, Ontario and B.C. human rights commissions by the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC). The CIC is claiming that Steyn’s writings about Muslims’ high birth rate “subjects Canadian Muslims to hatred and contempt.” Levant, my former employer at the now-defunct Western Standard, was taken to the Alberta Human Rights Commission by complainants upset with the magazine’s publishing of the notorious Danish cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad.

What is legally significant here is that each commission is governed by its own unique human rights act, and that those acts appear to give the commissions varying degrees of power to censor journalists who might have offended some of their readers. Of the above-named jurisdictions, B.C.’s legislation appears to pose the greatest threat to free speech; Ontario’s the least.

Section 7 of B.C.’s human rights act makes it an offence for any person to publish “any statement, publication, notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation” that so much as “indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate” against a protected group, or “is likely to expose a person or group or class of persons to hatred or contempt.” No actual discrimination or hatred has to occur for an offence to occur. And, as pointed out on these pages over the past few weeks, truth is not a defence.

Alberta’s law is similar to B.C.’s, but adds an important caveat: “Nothing in this section shall be deemed to interfere with the free expression of opinion on any subject.” This would seem to give Levant, for example, the ability to trump his critics. But the fact is that last November, in a case involving a Christian pastor who was critical of homosexuality, human rights panel chair Lori Andreachuk ignored this protection and went so far as to rule that even the right of free speech enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms “does not trump the protection afforded [homosexuals] under the Alberta human rights legislation.”

The human rights act of the last of the three provinces in question, Ontario, contains no provisions similar to B.C. and Alberta’s limitations of speech rights.

Section 12 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, on the other hand, makes it unlawful to publish or display “any notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other representation that (a) expresses or implies discrimination or an intention to discriminate, or (b) incites or is calculated to incite others to discriminate.”

Furthermore, Section 13 makes it an offence for anyone “to communicate telephonically [a definition that includes the internet] … any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt.”

Human rights proponents have argued that such restrictions are necessary to protect minorities from language that will lead to their being discriminated against or subjected to hatred and violence. But, as Alan Borovoy, general counsel of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, famously observed last year, censoring otherwise free speech was never the intention of activists, like himself, who helped bring human rights laws into being in the first place.

This may be true in most cases, but in my home province, for example, the B.C. act’s infamous Section 7 was specifically enacted in 1993 by the NDP government of the day to gag cantankerous right-wing columnist Doug Collins (since deceased). In 1998, the NDP considered broadening the act even further at the urging of the pro-choice lobby, which tried to persuade then-attorney-general Ujjal Dosanjh to criminalize criticism of abortionists.

Although the episode was virtually ignored by the mainstream media of the day, I remember it quite well because of the growing threat it posed to free speech. I especially recall that, in writing about the prochoicers’ demands, I interviewed an erudite and eloquent public-policy expert who spoke passionately about this threat.

“Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society,” the man said. “It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this very scary stuff.”

That person was the president of the National Citizens Coalition, a politically astute fellow by the name of Stephen Harper, a man who, of course, has now gone on to much bigger and better things.

I don’t think it would be too much to ask of Mr. Harper now that he put his words into action, and move to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to eliminate the commission’s censorious powers. Perhaps such a move would inspire Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach and B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell to act similarly.

All three leaders should realize that their governments’ human rights laws are badly flawed, and that the longer they remain unamended, they are, in effect, acting as a barrier separating all citizens from their fundamental right to free speech.

In this light then, we should all exclaim: “Mr. Harper, Mr. Stelmach and Mr. Campbell: Tear down this wall!”

Terry O’Neill is a Vancouver editor and writer.

Drug-resistant staph passed in gay sex -US study

Reuters online, Mon Jan 14, 2008

By Amanda Beck

SAN FRANCISCO, Jan 14 (Reuters) - A drug-resistant strain of potentially deadly bacteria has moved beyond the borders of U.S. hospitals and is being transmitted among gay men during sex, researchers said on Monday.

They said methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA, is beginning to appear outside hospitals in San Francisco, Boston, New York and Los Angeles.

Sexually active gay men in San Francisco are 13 times more likely to be infected than their heterosexual neighbors, the researchers reported in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

[Click here to read the whole article at Reuters online.]

Senior at centre of life-support battle improving

But Grace still seeking the right to pull plug

Sat Jan 12 2008

By Kevin Rollason

TWO weeks after Samuel Golubchuk's family went to court to stop doctors from pulling him off life support last month because he had minimal brain activity, he showed signs he was improving neurologically.

A week later, while doctors still argued to disconnect his ventilator and pull out his feeding tube, the 84-year-old Golubchuk was seen by medical staff to be "awake".

But on Friday in court, more than a month after the battle to keep him alive began, lawyers for the family and doctors were continuing to argue because the physicians say they still need to have control over deciding when to pull the plug.

After court, the family's lawyer, Neil Kravetsky, said Golubchuk is alive today only because of the court's intervention.

"He would be dead if the injunction had been off," Kravetsky said.

"What does awake mean to you?"

But lawyer Bill Olson, who represents Grace hospital, said even if Golubchuk has improved, he still isn't as well as he was when he entered the hospital's intensive care unit and his prognosis continues to be dim.

Olson said even if the judge gives the doctors the green light to pull the plug, it might not happen because the doctors would re-evaluate Golubchuk's medical status to see if the action is still warranted.

"All the court is ruling on is who has the right to make the judgment," he said.

Olson said the medical system would bog down if final life decisions were taken from the hands of doctors and given to the courts.

At the end of the hearing on Friday, Justice Perry Schulman of Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench said he would either render a decision on the matter or give the lawyers "directions" sometime next week.

Golubchuk suffered a brain injury in June 2003 when he fell, but he could still communicate and understand.

He was living at Deer Lodge Centre, but was admitted to Grace in October for pneumonia and pulmonary hypertension.

But after Golubchuk's health continued to go downhill and doctors believed his situation to be hopeless, they told the family they were going to take him off life support on Nov. 30 of last year.

Schulman, who began hearing the precedent-setting civil case last month, is being asked to rule on whether Grace doctors have the right to take Golubchuk off life support against the wishes of his family.

Golubchuk's family has been arguing the doctors would be violating his Orthodox Jewish religious beliefs and committing a sin if they hasten his death.

A News Release Regarding a New Website:

[We are happy to pass on this news release.]

ProWomanProLife.org

Canada without abortion. By choice.

——————————————————————————————
For immediate release

January 14, 2008 (Ottawa)— Today marks the launch of Canada’s first pro-woman pro-life group, ProWomanProLife, which can be found online at www.prowomanprolife.org

ProWomanProLife celebrates women, life and freedom and is being launched to mark the Morgentaler decision of January 28, 1988, which removed all restrictions on abortion in Canada at any stage of a pregnancy.

The founding director of ProWomanProLife, Andrea Mrozek, says it is time women took a non-partisan, non-religious stand against the idea that abortion is good for women and furthermore, not just a choice, but a “right.” “We have no hidden agenda here but a very open one: To eradicate abortion in Canada, not by legislation or force, but because that is what women choose. Women should band together to remove abortion from our cultural landscape,” she says. Mrozek is joined by a board of five professional women: Brigitte Pellerin in Ottawa, Raji Shankar in Toronto, Rebecca Walberg in Winnipeg and Dr. Sheryl Alger and psychologist Teresa Fraser in Calgary.

Mrozek notes that abortion has become a pressing issue of freedom of speech. “Pro-lifers are told what they can and can’t say in politics, and pro-life clubs are currently being banned on our university campuses. No Canadian should be comfortable with this suppression of dialogue, irrespective of how they feel about abortion,” Mrozek said.

To address the freedom of speech issue as well as the harm that abortion does to women, children and families, ProWomanProLife will blog with abandon. Our long-term goal is to become a charity that offers women better choices. But the first step is to raise our voices against the conventional, harmful wisdom that a willingness to kill her unborn child liberates a woman.

-30-

For further information please contact founding director Andrea Mrozek at

613-875-5888 or at andrea@prowomanprolife.org

ProWomanProLife.org is the grassroots endeavor of the founding board, is not affiliated with any other organization and depends entirely on donations of time and money from individuals.

From CatholicInsight.com :

Features
Catholic Insight under 'human rights' attack
By Staff

Hardcopy Issue Date: January 2008
Online Publication Date: Dec 18, 2007, 12:24

Catholic Insight has joined a range of Canadian publications, groups and individuals who have become targets of human rights-based legal attacks recently.

In February 2007, Rob Wells, a member of the Pride Centre of Edmonton, filed a nine-point complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, alleging that C.I. has targeted homosexuals as being a powerful menace, made negative generalizations about them, portrayed them as preying upon children, blamed them for problems in society and the world, portrayed them as dangerous or violent by nature, conveyed the idea that they are devoid of any redeeming qualities and are innately evil, used inflammatory and derogatory language to create a tone of “extreme hatred and contempt,” trivialized or celebrated past persecution or tragedy involving them and called for action to be taken against them.

Wells’s complaint consists of three pages of isolated and fragmentary extracts from articles dating back as far as 1994, without any context. C.I. counters that these isolated quotes are not meaningful without the contexts of the articles themselves from which they were culled; in fact, most of them are even out of context from the sentences from which they were taken.

C.I. regards all of these charges as unfounded and made with the intent to harass. It intends to defend itself vigorously should the CHRC proceed. The magazine has continually emphasized that, with the respect to homosexual activity, it follows the guidance of the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church has made clear that persons with same-sex attraction must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity and that every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.

At the same time, however, the magazine notes the Catechism declares homosexual acts are ones of grave depravity and intrinsically disordered. They are contrary to the natural law, close the sexual act to the gift of life, do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity and cannot be approved under any circumstances.

From its beginning in 1993, the magazine has traced and exposed homosexual activists for their attacks against Christians defending the traditional order in law and society and their use of derogatory language against all who stand in their way. Many of C.I.’s articles have quoted homosexual activists, such as the former Burnaby, B.C. MP Svend Robinson, who was known to denounce opponents as “bigots,” “homophobes” and “hatemongers.” The magazine has never replied in kind, but rather has adhered to the maxim, “Hate the sin, but love the sinner.”
[Click here to read the rest of the ariticle on the Catholic Insite website.]

Biased Abstinence Ed Report Draws Criticism

[From CitizenLink Nov. 9, 2007

from staff reports

Author works for company that produced condom-based sex ed curricula.

Abstinence educators are crying foul over a report that claims their programs do not delay the initiation of sex, hasten the return to abstinence or reduce the number of sexual partners among teens.

Douglas Kirby, author of the study, is a staff member of ETR, a company that specializes in condom-based sex education curricula.

Linda Klepacki, sexual health analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said that alone should cast doubt on the validity of the research.

. . . .

Klepacki [also] said that the biased study used a small sample of abstinence programs to make broad conclusions. And she added that it's certainly no accident the report was released just as Congress considered how much funding it will give to abstinence education.

“And then these reports are reported as fact in our liberal media.”

[Click here to read the whole of the above article on the CitizenLink web page.]

__________

Bella
(an excerpt from a "Plugged In" Online review)

The name Bella means beautiful. And it's a word that does not in any way apply to Jose or his life when we first meet him. Scruffy and forlorn, Jose hasn't been the same since a tragic accident ended his promising soccer career. Now he's the head chef at his brother's fancy restaurant.

People worry about Jose.

Working at that same restaurant is a young, unmarried woman named Nina who does not want to be pregnant. But she is. And her morning sickness and late arrivals get her fired.

No one worries about Nina—except Jose.

Jose is drawn to the troubled woman and offers his help. She's suspicious of his intentions at first, but her situation and his quiet persistence motivate her to accept the proffered friendship. Still, she brushes off his gentle encouragement to let her baby live. Nina has come to the conclusion that if her life is ever going to be normal again she must abort her little girl.

This artistically low-key yet emotionally complex and compelling story focuses on two friends—one damaged by the past and the other afraid of the future—who help each other make a pair of life-changing choices.

[To read the whole "Plugged In" review, click here.]

Social conservatives move on to next marriage debate
By Jennifer Ditchburn, THE CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA -

Nearly a year after Parliament shelved the same-sex marriage debate, Canada's socially conservative thinkers are shifting gears and pushing government to promote and support the traditional family unit. There was nary a mention of same-sex marriage at a policy conference Thursday of the Institute for Marriage and Family Canada. Instead, speakers that included economists and writers emphasized the benefits of marriage to the social fabric and the economy. With Prime Minister Stephen Harper announcing a $13.5-billion surplus would ultimately translate into tax reductions, the notion of income-splitting was a popular topic.

Right now married Canadians are taxed as individuals, but allowing them to split the total family income would be especially advantageous in situations where one spouse stays at home. "If we have high taxation, people also appear to have fewer children," said David Quist, executive director of the institute. "The two go hand in glove and that's a large part of what today is, to talk about strong family and strong society. If we have a weak family, we will in turn have a weak society as well." Said Douglas Cryer of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada: "There's things to consider, such as income splitting and other measures the government can do to strengthen marriage. Ultimately, it's a cultural as well as a government issue. We can't ask government to solve the problem of marriage. All of us need to work on it together."

Most alarming to many participants was a Statistics Canada study released earlier this month that suggested fewer Canadians are getting married and more are in common-law relationships. Still, a married couple remained at the centre of 70% of families.

American economist Jennifer Roback Morse, a research fellow at the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty, said her own research has shown that marriage is a much healthier proposition than co-habitation. She said women and their children who lived with boyfriends were more likely to face violence. She too suggested legislators should be encouraging marriage through their policies and regulations. "They should be looking at not treating cohabitation as equivalent to marriage," said Roback Morse. "Living together for one year is not equivalent to marriage, and it's not good policy to say it is. Taxing people as individuals is a mistake, it's better to treat marriage as a real functioning unit."

All speakers emphasized the welfare of children as central to supporting traditional marriages. Fellow economist Doug Allen, of Simon Fraser University, suggested the government could help by revising its position on child support. He argued the guidelines for payments result in some custodial parents - mostly women - getting too much money. He said the system acted as an incentive to divorce for some. "For me the main goal is to have a greater proportion of children living with two married parents,"

said Allen.

But is the Conservative government listening? Income splitting is still being actively discussed in Harper's circles, and modest steps were taken in the last budget to remove any unequal treatment between singles and married couples. His government did away with the concept of a national child-care program, but introduced a $100 per month taxable payment for every child a family has under the age of 6. Jason Kenney, one of the party's leading social conservatives and secretary of state for multiculturalism, attended most of Thursday's conference. Quist is optimistic the message is getting through. "The family advocates are having the best hearing that they've had with this government for many, many years...," Quist said. "I find that encouraging. There are people who are willing to listen to some of the discussions that are going on today or similar discussions in the public sphere.

CitizenLink, September 27, 2007:

[U.S.] Senate Passes Dangerous Hate-Crimes Amendment

Democrats don't have enough votes to override a promised veto.

Democrats passed a hate-crimes measure today, but failed to collect enough votes to override a pledged presidential veto.
The amendment, which would create a new federal class of crime based on "actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity," is attached to a Defense spending bill.

Five Republican senators who voted in favor of hate-crimes legislation in 2004 switched their votes today and opposed the measure. They are: Sens. Lamar Alexander, Tenn.; Robert Bennett, Utah; John Ensign, Nev.; and Lisa Murkowski and Ted Stevens, both of Alaska.
[Read the rest of this article on CitizenLink.]

Not So Miraculous

TV commercials plug it, the FDA approved it, news highlights tout it, but there are serious concerns about the new vaccine Gardasil® from Merck. Medical Accountability Network Executive Director Dr. Moira Dolan has reviewed the information made generally available to physicians and outlines here the essential components of informed consent for what is being billed as a miracle anti-cancer vaccine. [The following are some quotations from her article.]

"Gardasil® vaccine is Merck's first big drug development since the Vioxx® disaster. The basis for many Vioxx® lawsuits is that Merck withheld information that clearly showed the dangers of the drug. The company's record does not inspire trust.

"The Vioxx® situation revealed a more treacherous problem existing within the FDA itself. FDA insiders exposed how the agency deliberately ignored abundant test information showing that Vioxx® was dangerous to cardiac patients. The systemic failure of the FDA to weigh the risks and protect the public without undue influence of the manufacturers was brought to light by Vioxx® but it has not yet led to any meaningful changes at the agency. In spite of thousands of Vioxx® product liability suits still unresolved, Gardasil® has gotten fast track FDA approval, soon to be followed by Glaxo's Cervarix®."

"Does the vaccine work?
Who studied the vaccine in humans?
It is a crucial part of full informed consent to let patients know that all human studies submitted to the FDA were done by or financed by the drug manufacturers. It cannot be brushed aside that these studies have limited to no independent scientific review. In fact, it takes a formal Freedom Of Information Act request to obtain the exact study reports and statistical analyses that the drug manufacturer gave to the FDA.

"What is the effect of the vaccine on HPV infection?

In the general population the Merck vaccine prevented genital warts that were due to vaccine-type strains.
The vaccine prevented human papillomavirus infection with four HPV subtypes in people who weren't already infected with these types.
The vaccine did not prevent infection with the HPV types that are not contained in the vaccine.
HPV disease due to one of the many subtypes NOT included in the vaccine still occurred. Vaccinated subjects got infected with non-vaccine HPV types at the same rate as non-vaccinated subjects.
In subjects who were already infected with a particular vaccine virus type, the vaccine did not prevent disease due to that type, but it did prevent new disease caused by the other vaccine subtypes.
The studies that the drug maker gave to the FDA did not tell if condom use was tracked; this is very important missing data, since condoms alone are responsible for a 70% reduction in all types of HPV. The vaccine gives 100% protection against four HPV types and no protection against other HPV types, whereas condoms give 70% protection against all HPV types.

"What is the effect of the vaccine on cervical cancer?
Since HPV is found in connection with most cervical cancers, the theory was that a vaccine against HPV would prevent cervical cancer. However the vaccine studies couldn't demonstrate this, simply because there were no cases of cervical cancer in the vaccinated group or in the group that got dummy shots. So they used a substitute measure (a 'surrogate marker') for cancer. They compared abnormal pre-cancerous Pap results in people who were vaccinated versus not vaccinated.

"The vaccine is nearly 100% effective in preventing four types of HPV infection. Two of the four subtypes included in the vaccine are currently responsible for 70% of cervical cancer. So we would expect a 70% reduction in precancerous Pap results, right? However pre-cancerous Paps only went down by 12% to 45%, depending on which population was studied."

"Is the HPV vaccine safe?
Can the HPV vaccine actually make infection worse?
The study showed an increase in pre-cancer related to the vaccine types in the people who already had these infections before they got the vaccine. It is possible that when infected girls whose immune systems have not cleared the virus from their bodies are vaccinated, the vaccine may lead to an increased number of cases of a pre-"you get the vaccine.

"How does the HPV vaccine affect fertility? Birth defects? Risk of cancers? Breast milk?
Five subjects who got the Merck vaccine around the time of conception had babies with birth defects, whereas no birth defects occurred in this time period in the subjects who got dummy shots. The manufacturer also specifies that the vaccine has not been tested to see whether it could cause cancer. It is not known if the vaccine virus-like proteins or the antibodies pass into the breast milk. Merck says that it should not be given to pregnant women.

"The longest portion of the study only lasted just under four years. Thus there is no long term data on how it affects the ability to become pregnant (fertility)."

"Who would benefit from the vaccine?
If you have risk factors for HPV infection such as multiple sex partners and no condom use, and you are not already infected by one or more of the subtypes targeted by the vaccine, this vaccine protects you from HPV infection by the four subtypes, but not non-vaccine HPV types.
If you have cervical cancer risk factors such as nutritional deficiencies, multiple sex partners or smoking, the vaccine prevents some episodes of growth of pre-cancerous cells and it may prevent cancer. The vaccine is 12.2% to 16.5% effective in the general population in reducing pre-cancer Pap results. The vaccine is 45% effective over the short term in girls who have never had any of the vaccine-type HPV infections.
The long term safety and effectiveness of Gardasil® is unknown. Effects on causing cancer, infertility, gene mutations, birth defects and effects in breast milk have not been adequately studied in humans."

Click here to access the whole article on the "Medical Accountability Network."

GSAs: not as innocent as they may seem

Gay Straight Alliance promotes sex-toy workshop for youth.

untabi[From the California Catholic Daily online, June 25, 2007]

The Gay Straight Alliance, which has clubs for homosexual and lesbian students on college, high school, and, now middle school campuses, this month promoted a “Pleasure Physiology and Sex Toys” workshop in its internet publication, GSA Network News.

The workshop, hosted by the San Francisco-based Center for Sex and Culture, was scheduled for June 14 at the Pacific Center in Berkeley. The Center, said the News, “will encourage your personal sexual exploration in this fun, informative workshop. Join us for a discussion on pleasure physiology and sexual response, and learn how to choose and use sex toys safely.”

The workshop, the News, “is for youth 14 and over,” but those “under 18 need permission from a parent/guardian to attend.” Further, “this event is also free free free @ the Pacific Center,” said the News, “so come on down and invite a friend won't cha.”

The Center for Sex and Culture says its mission is “to provide non-judgmental, sex-positive sexuality education and support to diverse populations.” The Center says it is “not the only organization trying to effect sex-positive cultural change,” but, unlike other organizations that do “sexuality education,” the Center wants “to make ourselves available to the widest range of people we can, with classes that run the gamut from informational to experiential.” . . . .
[Click here to read the whole article in the California Catholic Daily online.]

"Thousands cheer gay pride parade"
[But see Michael Corren's article immediately below.]

Jun 24, 2007 07:01 PM

Canadian Press
[Note the enthusiasm expressed by the writer in this article.]

Thousands of people lined downtown Toronto's streets Sunday afternoon to enjoy the city's Pride Parade, Canada's largest gay pride celebration.

. . . .
Mexican tourist Nancy Figueroa, on a visit to Canada with her husband and daughter, said there were no parades like this where she is from and praised Canada's open-mindedness.

"It's good for the people to express themselves, what their preferences are," Figueroa said of the parade.

Figueroa had brought her daughter to the event in order to expose her to gay culture.

"(She) won't see something like this as something forbidden, or as something that is not right," she said. "Hopefully in the future, (she) will see this like something normal."

Several politicians also joined in the march, including Toronto Mayor David Miller, Ontario Progressive Conservative leader John Tory and Liberal MP Michael Ignatieff. [boldface by editor of BCPTL website]

The event brings in an estimated $80 million to the local economy.

Toronto Sun online

June 30, 2007

Playing fast, loose

By MICHAEL COREN

Now that the downmarket bacchanalia of the Gay Pride parade in Canada's largest city has ended we really should pose some of the serious questions that mainstream media seemed terrified to ask last week. Questions that apply to any such event in Canada or elsewhere in the world.

First is the basic issue of truth. The media constantly claimed that at least a million people attended the Toronto event. Which would indicate enormous approval of and support for homosexuality. The million myth was given again and again until it became, as it were, a self-evident truth.

Problem is, it's almost impossible to accept. The average person takes up two square feet of space, meaning that the parade last weekend would have extended for at least 20 km. This is only if both sides of the street were packed solid.

In fact there was plenty of space between the onlookers and the event took up perhaps two km. There may have been 250,000 people present, maybe more or maybe less. But anyone who has seen a photograph of a million strong crowd knows that such a mass of humanity could never fit into the core of a city.

. . . .

The police have a sophisticated grid system that indicates the size of a crowd. Odd, then, that they have said nothing when we hear of the magic million. Just as odd as their failure to arrest people over the years who take off their clothes during the Pride march.

There is ample photographic evidence of the nudity and of officers standing by, grinning and doing nothing. For a community that claims only to want equality, one wonders why the law does not apply to all when it is broken.

Which bring us to question of whether it is abusive to take a small child to a parade where a significant minority of people are semi-naked, simulate sexual activity, bump and grind and even whip each other for some bizarre form of titillation.

There were many parents who took their small children to Gay Pride. Yet if, for example, a parent sat a five or six-year-old down in front of a television and showed a DVD of people pretending to have sex and taking their clothes off, would we regard them as loving and responsible moms and dads or would we call the Children's Aid Society?

Taking vulnerable and powerless little children to Pride, however, has become a badge for those who boast how progressive they are. Proving that broad-minded often means empty-headed.

Gay men and women deserve respect and dignity and have the same right to march as any other group. Difficult to see what was dignified about what went on a few days ago and hard to understand why so many people are so reluctant to state the obvious.

[Click here to read the whole article in the Toronto Sun online.]

[U.S.] Senate passes stem-cell funding bill

CNN, April 11, 2007

Story Highlights

• 63 votes in favor will not be enough to override promised veto
• Bush resists funding research that destroys living human embryos
• Stem cells hold promise for treatment of variety of conditions

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Senate approved a measure that would roll back President Bush's 2001 limits on embryonic stem-cell research Wednesday afternoon, but the margin was short of the two-thirds needed to override a promised veto.

Bush used the only veto of his presidency to date to kill a 2006 effort to loosen his policy on stem-cell research, which bars the use of federal funding for work that would destroy human embryos.

In a statement issued after Wednesday's 63-34 vote, he said he would veto the new bill as well, saying it "crosses a moral line that I and many others find troubling."

"I believe this will encourage taxpayer money to be spent on the destruction or endangerment of living human embryos -- raising serious moral concerns for millions of Americans," he said.

But the president said he would sign a Republican alternative that would encourage other forms of stem-cell research without changing his 2001 policy. That measure passed by a 70-28 vote.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the Republican bill was aimed at providing "cover" for lawmakers who wanted to vote against a popular issue.

"Americans, by a huge majority, favor stem-cell research because they see the suffering of their own friends and relatives and neighbors. ... They put their faith in science," said Reid, D-Nevada.

The measure passed Wednesday would allow researchers to obtain stem cells from embryos created for in vitro fertilization that would otherwise be discarded by fertility clinics. The House of Representatives passed a similar bill in January, but it also fell short of the two-thirds majority needed to override a veto.

One of the Senate bill's principal sponsors, Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin, said the bill had the support of three senators who did not vote Wednesday, meaning supporters were just one vote shy of the 67 needed to override a veto.

[Click here to read the whole story on CNN online.]

Telus Drops Porn Service After Complaints Onslaught

By Gudrun Schultz

VANCOUVER, B.C., February 21, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Telus announced yesterday the company would cancel pornography sales through its cellular phone service, CanWest News Service reported earlier today, after losing contracts and receiving hundreds of customer complaints.

Jim Johannsson, director of media relations for Telus, said the volume of individual complaints played a significant role in the company's decision to withdraw the service.

Beginning in January, adult customers were offered a porn delivery service that allowed them to download images or video clips for $3 or $4 dollars each. Several thousand users had registered for the service, according to Johannsson.

Numerous LifeSiteNews.com readers issued complaints to Telus via the contact information provided by this news service.

Archbishop Raymond Roussin, of the Vancouver Catholic archdiocese, actively opposed the Telus program by directing nearly 130 Catholic parishes and schools to cancel their contracts with Telus Mobility. The B.C. Catholic newspaper, published weekly by the archdiocese, included a 12-page special section covering the issue in this week's edition. A front page editorial criticizes Telus for "hitching its financial future to the abuse-ridden and pain-filled pornography industry."

In a statement issued Tuesday, Archbishop Raymond Roussin said he was "pleased and grateful that Telus is amending its decision. This is for the greater good of the community as a whole and I'm glad Telus is recognizing it," the Archbishop said.

Telus officials had defended the company decision to offer what it referred to as "adult content" by pointing out that most cell phones are capable of accessing the Internet, allowing users to download hard-core pornographic material at will. The Telus service limited images to full or partial nudity and avoided more explicit content.

Archbishop Roussin said last week that Telus' defense was "inadequate."

"So pervasive is the problem of pornography in our society today and so lucrative are the profits from this segment of the industry, that mobile phone providers are willing to take substantial risks in terms of their image."

"They do so by turning a blind eye to the enormous and widespread problems resulting from pornography: the abuse of countless vulnerable persons - including children, women, and men - who view pornographic material, those who are portrayed in sexually explicit material, and those who suffer from the behavior of their loved ones."

Johannsson told CanWest the company had "taken to heart" the concerns expressed by customers. "(Providing adult content) is not a business our customers want us to be in."

"Some of our corporate customers, too, have called to try and understand the direction we were going," Johannsson said.

Gordon Keast, who runs a communications company in Surrey, B.C., is suing Telus over the company's refusal to cancel his three-year cellphone contract, after he objected to the new pornography service, CanWest reported.

"At the time I renewed my contract with Telus in November they didn't market and sell pornography. Now they do, and as a subscriber I don't want my fees to underwrite their pornography business," said Keast. He filed suit yesterday in small claims court, seeking $3,000 for alleged breach of contract.

"Consumers have the power to shape the marketplace," Archbishop Roussin said, in his directive to churches and schools. "I strongly urge you to use your influence to protect our society from the destructive effects of the proliferation of pornography."

See coverage by The B.C. Catholic:
http://www.rcav.org/media/

http://bcc.rcav.org/07-02-19/Pornography_and_Sex_Addiction.pdf

CitizenLink.com April 5, 2007
[in the U.S.A.]

Appeals Court Rebuffs ACLU; Boy Scout Jamboree Will Go On

by Jennifer Mesko, associate editor

Challengers claimed military aid for event was unconstitutional.

The 2010 National Scout Jamboree is moving "full-speed ahead."

A three-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that plaintiff taxpayers from Chicago — represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) — had no standing in a case that accuses the military of violating the U.S. Constitution by allowing the Boy Scouts of America to use its facilities.

The ACLU sued the Department of Defense in 1999 over its support of the National Scout Jamboree, because Scouting has a "duty to God" requirement.

"We are very gratified that the 7th Circuit found as it did that the ACLU had no standing to bring this lawsuit in the first place," said Bob Bork, spokesman for the Scouts. "This is very exciting news. It's full-speed ahead."

The Boy Scouts have held the National Scout Jamboree every four years at Fort A.P. Hill near Fredericksburg, Va. Seven presidents have attended the Jamboree, and an estimated 300,000 visitors attended in 2005, along with 43,000 Scouts and their leaders. The 2010 Jamboree will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Boy Scouts of America.

In another case — this one in San Diego — the 9th Circuit has ruled the ACLU and its plaintiffs have standing to sue the Scouts over use of a public park. The Scouts have asked the court to rehear their appeal. That case and the Jamboree case could reach the Supreme Court at the same time.

Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said the 7th Circuit correctly rejected the notion that any taxpayer with a generalized grievance over the federal government's support of Scouting can use the federal courts as a personal veto tool.

"This national obsession by atheists, secularists and homosexual activists with the Boy Scouts over the years has been disgraceful," he said, "in light of the contributions that organization has made to our national life since its inception here in 1910."

Renfrew County Family Action Council

2006 Ontario Report

If nothing else, 2006 was the beginning of awareness, that parents, could no longer ‘sit on the fence’ with social issues in Ontario . As much as the provincial government and the media tried to make all social issues grey matter, the homosexual aggressiveness forced many parents to stand up and pay attention to issues like abortion, same sex marriage, secular evolution and their effect on our school children.

In Ontario we are especially burdened with a gay/abortion secular government and an ‘opposition’ PC party who shares the same platform. In addition we have a gay activist deputy premier who said he wants to remove any religion in schools, an openly lesbian education minister, a gay attorney general and a teachers union that is using homosexuals to further their cause against organized religion in the school system. It should be noted that less than 1% of the 52,754 full-time and 16,137 part-time elementary teachers in the Ont. Teachers Federation reported having a disability, was gay or lesbian or Aboriginal. Where is the voice of the other 99%?

In July/06, the BC Parents and Teachers for Life asked 3 simple questions;

1. Is parental consent required, except in case of emergency, for health care for minors?

2. Specifically, are minors subjected to abortions without any requirement for parental consent?

3. To what extent are students subjected to pro-homosexuality propaganda in the schools, and if they are subjected to such propaganda, is this with
the permission or connivance of the government? [*]

In August/06 the Renfrew County Family Action Council sent the questions to the public school administration and subsequently to our local MPP. Neither has given a definitive answer but we can be . . . sure they all know their salary and benefits to the penny.

We really don’t know the education system until we test it. We do know that these 3 matters leave our education system open to health risks, large litigation settlements and abuse by people who clearly have no mandate from the parents.

The Ontario public and separate school system is corrupt in structure where boards kow-tow to Toronto for funding, teachers kow-tow to greedy unions and a handful of secular beaurocrats, with a personal agenda, know how to milk the whole system. As long as they could keep interest and information away from the public , they were safe. That time has passed. Parents must take back our education system.

Ken O’Day, chairman,

Renfrew County Family Action Council

Eganville, Ont. 7-Jan-07
[*The questions given were sent out in the July, 2006, BCPTL E-Mail Bulletin to our readers outside of British Columbia, with a request that we be informed of the answers for other provinces and territories. Thanks to Ken O'Day for the information from Renfrew County Family Action Council.]

Stem Cells Discovered in Amniotic Fluid, Scientists Announce
Scott Norris
for National Geographic News

January 8, 2007

Stem cells have been discovered in amniotic fluid, the liquid that
surrounds a fetus during pregnancy, scientists have announced.

The cells appear to rival embryonic cells in their ability to give
rise to all of the major tissue types present in the human body.

Researchers at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, North
Carolina, used the amniotic stem cells to form bone, muscle, nerve,
fat, blood vessel, and liver cells.

The report by Anthony Atala and colleagues appears in yesterday's
edition of the journal Nature Biotechnology.

The finding raises new hope for advances in tissue repair and organ
regeneration without the ethical objections that have surrounded
embryonic stem cell research.

Such objections arise because embryonic stem cells must be harvested
from a fertilized human egg, which is destroyed in the process.

In contrast, amniotic stem cells can be collected during a routine
medical procedure that draws fluid from the womb without harming the
developing fetus. The cells can also be taken from the placenta that
is expelled after delivery.

In a teleconference Friday, Atala said that while it is too soon to
know their full therapeutic potential, the new stem cells have
advantages over other stem cell types because they are so potent and
fast growing.

"I don't think these cells are going to replace [human embryonic
stem cells], but they provide another choice and are more readily
available," Atala said.

Engineering Organs
Amniotic fluid is known to be rich in fetal cells of various types,
and physicians have already used some of these to clone "patches" of
connective or muscle tissue for repairing certain birth defects.

Atala said the cells his group isolated are unique in their ability
to form a range of cell types, while also possessing characteristics
of adult stem cells that generate only a single type.

The researchers used special chemicals to coax the amniotic stem cells
to develop different specialized structures and functions.

Cloned lines of the cells grew readily in the laboratory, with populations
doubling every 36 hours.
[Click here to read the whole article at National Geographic online.]

Landmark ruling allows children to have three parents

Peter Brieger, CanWest News Service

Published: Wednesday, January 03, 2007
[Saskatchewan StarPhoenix]

TORONTO -- Ontario's highest court has ruled a child can have three parents, in a landmark case experts say rewrites the definition of a family.

Calling it an "important and novel case," the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned an earlier judgment that denied a woman status as the legal guardian of a boy she has been raising with her female partner.

"This is the first time in Canada that three parents will be recognized on a birth certificate," said Karen Busby, University of Manitoba law professor. "That's clearly novel." The lesbian couple, a lawyer and university professor in London, Ont., had the child with the help of a longtime male friend.

The boy's biological father, who sees his son twice a week, donated his sperm to one woma

New plan for teacher education focuses on social justice, diversity

Hold the fort on 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell'

Military readiness is not the objective of having openly gay soldiers in the US armed services.

New plan for teacher education focuses on social justice, diversity

Reporter Fired Over Gay Marriage E-Mail

Abortion an obstacle to health-care bill

Some Democrats vow to block final passage if amendment stays

Election Results Good for Conservatives [in the United States]

Sask. MP Trost launches petition against funding of planned parenthood group

Thursday October 29, 2009

Did Feminism Benefit Men more than Women? Prominent US Feminist Asks

School club controversy raises more questions

. . . .

Naoibh O'Connor, Vancouver Courier

Ministry disregarded legal advice to return seized children: document Surrey parents insist they never harmed baby daughter

Friday, April 3, 2009

CBC News

European Parliament Raps Lithuania for “Protection of Minors” Law Curbing Homosexual Advocacy [title altered]

Good News: Science Awards Go to Adult-Cell Researchers

Catholics launch anti-euthanasia campaign

Evangelical Francis Collins Named to Head NIH

Tiffany Stanley

Religion News Service

Obama Chooses Sotomayor for Supreme Court Nominee

Thursday May 14, 2009

12,000: Canadian 2009 March for Life Smashes Previous Attendance Records

Alberta's culture minister not backing down on parents' rights bill

Good News - Human Trafficking Bill Easily Passes First Vote in Parliament [from the ARPA website at http://www.arpacanada.ca/index.php/mn/563-human-trafficking-bill-easily-passes-first-vote-in-parliament]

A Look Back at Obama's First 100 Days

German Parents Convicted after Withdrawing Daughter from Explicit Sex-Ed Program: Appeal Filed

Miss California USA Loses Crown after Defending Marriage

Obama to lift stem-cell restrictions

Medical ethics at issue

Jon Ward THE WASHINGTON TIMES Saturday, March 7, 2009

Local study sheds light on HIV

One small victory for freedom of speech

Sexually transmitted disease rates soar: CDC

Richard Neuhaus Brought 'Gentle Spirit to Great Debates about Truth'

Like a Virgin: The Press Take On Teenage Sex

Yes, attitudes do make a difference in behavior.

By WILLIAM MCGURN

Massachusets Department of Public Health "groundbreaking" report says homosexuality linked with health problems, destructive behavior.

December 3, 2008

Pro-gay marriage protests staged in California

Articles in Prominent Medical Journal Doubt Worth and Benefit of HPV Vaccine

Source: www.LifeSiteNews.com

MPs take sides on unborn victims bill

Canada Finally Moves Age of Consent for Sex from 14 to 16

From citizenlink.com Feb. 11, 2008

[U.S.] CDC: 1 in 4 Teen Girls Has Sexually Transmitted Infection

Drug-resistant staph passed in gay sex -US study

Senior at centre of life-support battle improving

But Grace still seeking the right to pull plug

Biased Abstinence Ed Report Draws Criticism

GSAs: not as innocent as they may seem

Playing fast, loose

[U.S.] Senate passes stem-cell funding bill

CNN, April 11, 2007

Story Highlights

Appeals Court Rebuffs ACLU; Boy Scout Jamboree Will Go On

Landmark ruling allows children to have three parents

Ministry disregarded legal advice to return seized children: document
Surrey parents insist they never harmed baby daughter

European Parliament Raps Lithuania for “Protection of Minors” Law Curbing Homosexual Advocacy
[title altered]

Good News - Human Trafficking Bill Easily Passes First Vote in Parliament
[from the ARPA website at http://www.arpacanada.ca/index.php/mn/563-human-trafficking-bill-easily-passes-first-vote-in-parliament]

Jon Ward THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Saturday, March 7, 2009

CNN, April 11, 2007