Ron Gray on the Fair Tax

Obama Turns Back the Clock

by Colin Mason Population Research Institute At a time when highly significant—even historic—breakthroughs in adult stem cell research have become almost daily occurrences and almost to the point of being mundane, President Obama has chosen to turn back the clock, and starting today, will force taxpayers to subsidize the unethical over the ethical, the unworkable over what works, and hype and hyperbole over hope. Human embryo destroying stem cell research is not only unethical, unworkable, and unreliable, it is now demonstrably unnecessary. --Congressman Christopher Smith (R-NJ), March 9, 2009 This speech, at which were present so-called “snowflake babies” (former frozen embryos, implanted and carried to term), was made in response to President Obama’s March 9th executive order, which sweepingly legalized embryonic stem-cell research in an attempt to remove “limitations on scientific inquiry.” “Rather than furthering discovery,” said Obama in his March 9th statement immediately preceding the signing of the order, “our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values. In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering.” While most pro-lifers are vigorously opposed to embryonic stem-cell research, many have difficulty defending their stance because of supposed medical advances which the research has made possible. Many would be surprised to learn that any and all medical breakthroughs made regarding stem cells have been made without using embryos. Work with these cells has produced promising research and may lead to dramatic cures of all manner of diseases. As Michaela Kingston writes, in an article entitled “Pardon Me, Your Ideology is Showing”: ESCs may have the potential to cure many diseases. But after ten years and billions of dollars, they still have not realised their potential. In the meantime, stem cells isolated from adults have proven to be quite effective in relieving human suffering. Even better, if you’re on the ESC bandwagon, are "induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells", which behave almost exactly like ESCs but do not involve embryo destruction. These iPS cells do not involve costly embryo manipulation and can be made from a patient’s own cells, avoiding immune rejection. So, in other words, Obama has not only signed off on a procedure which would be morally unacceptable no matter what its scientific advantages, he has done so in the face of all medical and scientific evidence. In addition to this, Obama also rescinded Bush’s Executive Order 13435, which poured funding into research involving adult stem cells. In short, Obama has effectively worked to kill adult stem cell research (i.e., the only stem cell research that has produced results) to pour money into a dead-end, highly controversial research instead. The president’s supposed desire to “work to ease human suffering” rings hollow when it is clear that the procedures he espouses have proven scientifically fruitless. In addition to this, morally concerned scientists have not only identified the moral hazard, but they have even offered a workable solution. But it is to no avail. Obama’s ideological bone-tossing apparently extends to forced abortion, as well. The FY2009 Omnibus Bill, signed into law by the president on March 11th, contains a loophole that allows funding to go the UNFPA, regardless of whether or not they are involved in forced abortion or sterilization. The Reagan-era Kemp-Kasten amendment, clearly dictates that American tax dollars cannot be used to fund coercive abortion or sterilization overseas. Even when House pro-lifers proposed an amendment that would essentially force the UNFPA to be regulated under Kemp-Kasten like everyone else, it was overturned. The message that this sends is very clear: Obama wants his programs funded, regardless of the costs. He is perfectly willing to cut a swathe through both legal and moral concerns to achieve this goal. However, not only is he willing to cast aside concerns, he is even willing to disregard the basic cold logic of the matter, the logic upon which delicate, bi-partisan agreements are made. This logic dictates that, while we may not agree on abortion, we agree that women should never be forced to have abortions; that, shelving the moral controversies, embryonic stem cell research is a sterile science and should be abandoned in favor of more productive investigations. This logic dictates that Americans are split on the subject of abortion, and it is thus irresponsible to use their tax dollars equally to fund something that so many of them find morally repugnant. In the words of Kingston, far from promoting “responsiblility,” Obama has only paved the way for “pressure on scientists from media hype, special interest groups, lobbyists and a poorly informed but well-meaning public to pursue dead-end research.” Simply speaking, Obama really is willing to turn back the clock—to turn it back to a time when the people had little say in government, and when government took little interest in the scientific or moral conundrums placed before it. God save us from “change” like this.

Firearm Ownership is Your RIGHT

by Jim Hnatiuk CHP National Leader Canadian gun owners are discovering that the CHP promotes and champions the right to own a firearm and the right to own and enjoy their private property. The CHP also believes these rights must be embedded in our Constitution. Trappers, seal hunters, fishermen, elk and wild boar farmers, like all Canadians, need an assurance that the hard-earned reward of their labour is protected under the law inasmuch as they have a right to own their property. Currently, there is no such assurance, since the right to private property was intentionally left out of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The CHP policy 6.7.7 clearly states: “We assert that the federal government must not restrict the right of law-abiding citizens to own firearms, whether for sporting use or for self-defence.” CHP policy 7.1.6 states: “We believe the ‘Charter of Rights’ should be amended to include the right to private ownership and enjoyment of property.” CHP Canada is willing to take a stand on behalf of gun owners, gun retailers, and recreational shooting ranges. Canadian governments have tried to make Canada a safer country by enacting tighter firearms control. The results:  A gross misuse of Canadian taxpayer’s dollars  More Canadians feel unsafe in their homes, offices, and streets than at any other time in our history The newly developed Canadian Firearms Institute (https://www.cfi-icaf.ca/) recently reported that Canada's Gun Registry has cost Canadians one half million dollars per day, and two billion dollars over 10 years. The useful information gleaned is that only 2.27% of the guns used in homicides are registered. How does this information help to prevent crime or make us safer? The truth is that it doesn’t. Gary Mauser, a leading Canadian criminologist says, “the track record of 'gun control' actually reducing criminal violence is not good. No government in the world can boast that the introduction of stricter firearms laws has actually reduced criminal violence. Firearms have been banned in Jamaica, Hong Kong, New York City, and Washington, DC, without leading to decreases in homicides.” So what we have in Canada are successive governments spending a lot of your money - for little or no return! And a reduction in individual liberty. The CHP's "Better Solution" is...not to restrict the liberty of law abiding Canadian citizens but rather to appropriately punish criminals who attack our society. CHP Canada understands that this is where the deterrent should be applied. How many police officers and other effective resources could this money fund? In every other area of public activity – training is implemented to achieve greater safety. Why can’t our government understand that this is also true with firearms? The CHP does! Instead of the gun registry, a better solution is to invest in providing the best of training for our citizens, and to provide the technical expertise, facilities and instructions through certified education programs. This would develop and encourage the sport, enhance safety, and allow people to be aware of their obligations and responsibilities. Better Solutions begin at www.chp.ca

12-year-old steals day with pro-life speech

David Macdonald---telling it like it is

David Macdonald has been through it all. He has been an activist in the world of same-sex attraction and has experienced the highs and lows of that lifestyle. You can read his story in his words here.

Vicki Gunn---Prolife Profile in the Big Blue Wave

Suzanne Fortin's popular prolife blog, Big Blue Wave, is doing a series on Pro-Lifers in Their Own Words. Here's Suzanne's story on Vicki Gunn...

"Vicki Gunn is the Executive Director of the Christian Heritage Party of Canada. She also operates the CHP's Canadian Viewpoints message board. She was a federal candidate in the most recent elections, and I had the pleasure of working with her during the 2007 Ontario provincial election, during which she ran as a candidate in Glengarry-Prescott-Russell."

Here is her story:

My first awareness of abortion was when I started working in Toronto in the mid 1970s. I was stopped at Bloor and Yonge and asked to sign a petition for a Dr. Henry Morgentaler to be granted the right to perform abortions...

They Should be Happy Now---the Tank is Half Empty

by Rod Taylor Deputy Leader of the Christian Heritage Party of Canada
For several years now, the "coalition" parties have been calling for a slowing of development, less industry, less consumption of manufactured goods---all in the name of "saving the environment". Based on faulty science and propelled by hype, the bogus claim that CO2 is responsible for yet-unproven global warming has been the justification for policies worldwide more likely to usher in oppressive world government than to produce cleaner air or more sustainable forests and ice floes.

Now that a confluence of political and economic forces has resulted in a series of financial crises and we have the results so sought-after by the confused (less development, less industry, less consumption), one would expect the leaders of the movement to be ecstatic. Instead, they are racing around looking for ways to stimulate the economy, support the big auto business and protect the "rights" of political parties to feed from the public trough.

While conspiring to overthrow the government, they talk about "working together". While opposing corporate tax cuts, they insist on multi-billion dollar corporate bailouts. Happy with half-truths, they use the term "pay equity" to energize their base, rather than "equal pay for equal work", a concept we could all agree on. They use "death with dignity" to justify the killing of the aged and the infirm. George Orwell, in "1984" exposed this insidious abuse of language as a prop for the acceptance of evil. Public deception at public expense is a public disgrace.

Isn't it interesting...

by Elaine Taylor

Isn't it interesting.

If we take CHP into the public square, we are too religious.

We let liars speak in the public square. We are so tolerant.

We let wreckers speak in the public square. We are so tolerant.

We let God-haters speak in the public square. We are tolerantly dumb.

We pay, with our taxes, liars, wreckers, censors, & God-haters (whether misguided or intentional, the result is the same), to indoctrinate us. (national broadcasting, public education).

If we take CHP into the church, we are too political.

We say we believe in absolutes. Some things are wrong.

We say we believe absolute truth can only be based in God's Truth.

Do we really believe this?

Do we have convictions, or do we have mere preferences?

Do we have boldness or do we have timidity?

You may believe our "true North (is) strong & free", but why are you whispering?

Are church leaders more afraid of losing their tax exempt status than their freedom?

They will lose their tax-exempt status eventually anyway, and then their freedom, because both will be taken away. Better to lose it on principle, standing for what is right, than simply concede defeat to secular
oppressors.

What part of Christian Heritage Party is so scary or irrelevant or inappropriate or unscriptural that it cannot be presented with equal opportunity when we are faced with fulfilling our civic duty, that is, participating in the democratic privilege of helping to choose our country's leaders?

The secularists (our state religion) have no qualms about using the state's institutions to promote their Godless agenda. They are true to what they believe, while we won't even talk about the issues in the congregation lest we offend someone who disagrees.

We're taught throughout scripture & in church that the man of integrity has a walk consistent with his talk. The unbeliever's biggest complaint against Christians that I have heard over the years is this hypocrisy. Granted, with the world we're damned if we do & damned if we don't. But for which would you rather be criticised?

Do we really believe our faith should affect all areas of our lives? Well what about our politics? Does it make sense - is it consistent - to acknowledge as a legal & viable contender for Canada's leadership, a political party that upholds the very value system and democracy that derives from JudeoChristian foundations? No other party can claim that.

If 'viable' is a word that chokes you up, you must be fair and consider this: Our eda has about 60,000 eligible voters, with appr. 40,000 of those turning out to vote. 40,000 voters have the opportunity, the freedom, to vote for a CHP candidate. Every single one has that one vote with which to do the right thing, or to throw away to someone with whom they only agree somewhat. So how can you say CHP doesn't have a chance? Where does chance come into it? Do Christians go into the voter's cubicle blindfolded & play pin the X on the donkey? Or spin a wheel of fortune? It sounds like CHP would have better odds of winning that way than counting on Christians who prefer to play with a stacked deck, having already replaced the King with a jack.

If you & each of your friends & each of their friends simply voted on principle, and trusted God for the results, we could begin to reclaim the territory the secularists have stolen from our grandchildren. Since when does strategy qualify as faith? If we believe God is in control, then we'd better be caught doing what is right & good & true & acting in faith, for surely He is faithful, whatever the results. We know that in this life we won't always see the results of our making good choices - sometimes the right choice is even to our own hurt - at the time, anyway. But God is the ultimate judge, & we do not need to strategise for Him. We obey. He is faithful. Blessed is the nation whose God is The Lord.

A Letter to Canadians from the CHP National Leader

December 4, 2008 by Jim Hnatiuk

Fundamental to good government is honesty, integrity and transparency. Regrettably, it is the total departure from these attributes that has brought instability, vain conceit and disingenuous motives to our nation's capital.

Prime Minister Harper must bear much of the blame for this crisis; the Conservative Party is after all the instigator. Leaders must lead, but equally important is the need to serve the people. The failure to provide conciliatory leadership during a minority government has resulted in today's chaos. Most Canadians do believe that the issue that precipitated this conflict was the Prime Minister's threat to cut subsidies to political parties.

Eliminating such subsidies is not an attack on democracy as the coalition members decry, but would represent a return to democracy. While the CHP would applaud the policy, it was unfortunately, recklessly proposed by the PM.

It should be pointed out to Canadians, that contrary to what they hear in the media, not all political parties benefit from such a funding scheme. The CHP has never received such funding, but is 100% member supported and funded.

The NDP and Liberals may never admit it, but the selfish ambition of the coalition is obvious and their attempts to convince Canadians to the contrary are pitiable. Driven together through greed, they saw an unprecedented opportunity to gain leverage and power, so they selfishly put partisanship aside and entered into negotiations for power with the Bloc.

While the Canadian economy is not collapsing, the economic signals are worrisome. Indeed, according to most analysts, Canada is one of the healthiest of the G8. It is also untrue, that the Conservative government has done nothing. On the contrary, they have acted with prudence in the face of the global economic crisis. There have been tax reductions at both the personal and the corporate levels which in themselves will act to modestly stimulate the economy. The question is, can we do more, and where should we put our focus?

Should we bail out the ailing auto industry? This requires careful analysis, not a quick fix by throwing millions of taxpayer's dollars at a patient that may not survive.
It needs to be pointed out that Canada is in desperate need of infrastructure renewal, and this has been the case for some time. Cities for successive elections have begged Ottawa to do something to help them cope with the problem. This is an issue on which all of the parties in the House of Commons have failed Canada.

The CHP has proposed for some time, an infrastructure policy that has already been used successfully in Canada. It's a simple, non-inflationary policy that was applied in Canada at the end of WWII. Implemented by the Liberals under C.D. Howe, McKenzie King's minister of reconstruction, it worked very well.

The Bank of Canada would issue interest-free loans to cities, municipalities, provinces and Crown corporations for infrastructure projects, such as water and sewage treatment systems, airports, bridges etc... which are in dire need of revamping. The builder, the province, would collect revenues from increased economic activity, which would be used to pay back the interest free loan and the money would then be withdrawn from the economy, so it wouldn't have an inflationary consequence. But the improved infrastructure would remain.

This policy has been used successfully in our nation's history, and should be implemented again to enable communities to meet urgent, current needs.

In addition, Canada would benefit greatly if out of this crisis emerged a truly democratic parliament with proportional representation, where the vote of every citizen would count, and political parties succeeded or failed depending on their own grassroots support, rather than feeding at the public trough. Such improvements to our democracy would benefit our nation by empowering the grassroots political involvement of citizens, leading to a more active electorate and increased voter turnout.

The CHP is a federal party that continues to offer Canada stability, honesty and loyalty. The CHP will only seek to lead through service, according to principle, for the good of the country, not just for the good of our political party.

Now that the Governor General has prorogued parliament, we hope that cooler heads will prevail in the coming months.

We know that during these times the focus should be on Canadian families and not the corporate sector. Before any policy is implemented, the question must be asked, "Is this good for Canadian families?"

Canadians should also note that all other parties have failed to put integrity and respect for human life ahead of power and finances. This abandonment of historic moral principles leaves all of them without a defence in claiming the moral high ground.

Historically, it has never been more important, that our nation's leaders recognize the constitutional requirement that Canada be governed in light of principles that recognizes the supremacy of God and the rule of law. Those principles made Canada the most desirable place in the world to live; and only the CHP is committed to restoring those principles for all Canadians.