by Rod Taylor
Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Justice Minister Rob Nicholson have shown once again their penchant for cold and calculating strategy by abandoning Bill C-484 (the Unborn Victims of Crime Bill) and its author, fellow-Conservative MP Ken Epp. In a move designed to ensure that they cannot be accused of defending innocent human life, Mr. Nicholson announced his intention to introduce legislation this fall which would effectively scuttle C-484. Mr. Epp, by contrast, has been heroic in his efforts to establish legal protection for the unborn child in the case of a violent attack on its expectant mother where her right to choose life is violated.
The alternate legislation proposed by the Conservative insiders, besides being redundant, suggests only that pregnancy be considered as a factor in sentencing. It does nothing to recognize the loss of a wanted human life, as in the case of Olivia Talbot and her unborn son, Lane, who both died as the result of a gunshot to her abdomen. The attacker in her case testified that he wanted to "get the baby". Olivia's mother is left grieving for her daughter as well as the grandson she will never know. No charges can be laid in the death of the child because no legal recognition exists.
Mr. Harper's motives are clear enough. He is expected to force an election soon and doesn't want the voters to think that he shares Mr. Epp's views on the sanctity of human life. Although C-484 was never about abortion and contains language clearly excluding abortion from its purview, the Justice Minister took the bait offered by its pro-abort attackers and declared (once again): "Our government will not reopen the debate about abortion." I have news for him---the debate has never been closed. Abandoning the most vulnerable members of society cannot be confused with leadership and throwing your friends overboard for crass political advantage does not elicit trust.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Bill C-51 should be scrapped, not ‘amended’
Ron Gray – Leader of the Christian Heritage Party
Health Minister Tony Clement is engaging in sleightof-
hand with his proposed “amendments” to Bill C-51 (an act to
amend the Food and Drug Act and to make consequent
amendment to several other acts). Modifying a definition doesn’t
really amend the draconian powers the proposed new Act gives
the government over health foods and natural medicines.
A bit of background is necessary:
The dominant form of medical care in North America,
allopathic medicine, was primarily adopted because of the
influence of one man—and he was not a doctor—who in 1913
was given the authority by John D. Rockefeller to administer the
profits of the newly-created Rockefeller Foundation. That
foundation, created to shelter part of the huge Rockefeller
empire from America’s new Income Tax Act; the Foundation’s
profits from sheltered shares in Standard Oil (now Exxon) were
to be used for two purposes: education in the poorer regions of
the American South; and medical research.
The administrator of the funds visited Leipzig, in
Germany, to learn how medicine was being practiced there. He
found doctors commited to surgery and pharmaceuticals, so that
was the kind of medicine to which he committed the Rockefeller
funds. The only North American school teaching that kind of
medicine at the time was Johns-Hopkins; so they got all the
money. It didn’t take long for other university medical schools to
learn how to access the Rockefeller millions: they quickly
adopted the Leipzig model. The graduates of those schools
became the founders of the American Medical Association.
Thus did allopathic medicine come to dominate health
care in North America. The irony is that John D. Rockerfeller’s
personal physician was a homeopath—as is Queen Elizabeth’s
personal physician today.
Bill C-51 is, at its core, an attempt to force natural and
traditional medications into the same regulatory framework as
pharmaceuticals. If Vitamin C, for example, is declared a “drug”
and required to have a DIN (Drug Identification Number), only
Big Pharma can afford the laboratory research necessary.
Of course the government agencies have a role to play
in protecting the public; but the way to do that is not by handing
the protection role over to Big Pharma and the food
conglomerates, as this government has been doing. The CHP
would instruct Health Canada to make the public and the
medical profession aware of dangerous or mis-labeled products,
so Canadians can make informed choices about their own health
care; and to prosecute manufacturers who make or import mislabeled
or dangerous products.
But Bill C-51 is a veiled attempt to hand control over
traditional and natural health products to Big Pharma and the
Health Canada bureaucracy.
The Conservatives have had a very friendly relationship
with Big Pharma. One example is Ken Boessenkool, Stephen
Harper's close friend and policy advisor for years, who is now a
registered lobbyist working on behalf of Merck Frosst Canada.
Remember how this government handed $300 million to Merck
for a campaign to make young girls in Canada guinea pigs in
tests of an HPV vaccine? Lifesite News reports that in the USA,
that campaign has been associated with at least five deaths in
just over a year—not to mention thousands of reports of adverse
effects, hundreds that were deemed serious, and many that
required hospitalization.
That’s not the regime that should regulate Canadians’
health care, and they should certainly not be handed a monopoly
on vitamins and natural health products. It’s worth noting that
thousands of people die every year from the use (or mis-applied
use) of potent pharmaceuticals. But as far as I’ve been able to
find out, no one has ever died from natural health products.
Bill C-51 should be scrapped, not “amended” as the
Tories propose; because even as amended, it still gives the
government the hidden power to define vitamins and health
foods as “drugs”, and impose excessively draconian regulations
on them.
PO Box 4958, Station E Ottawa ON K1S 5J1
Vol 15, No 31 This Communiqué may be copied August 12, 2008
Health Minister Tony Clement is engaging in sleightof-
hand with his proposed “amendments” to Bill C-51 (an act to
amend the Food and Drug Act and to make consequent
amendment to several other acts). Modifying a definition doesn’t
really amend the draconian powers the proposed new Act gives
the government over health foods and natural medicines.
A bit of background is necessary:
The dominant form of medical care in North America,
allopathic medicine, was primarily adopted because of the
influence of one man—and he was not a doctor—who in 1913
was given the authority by John D. Rockefeller to administer the
profits of the newly-created Rockefeller Foundation. That
foundation, created to shelter part of the huge Rockefeller
empire from America’s new Income Tax Act; the Foundation’s
profits from sheltered shares in Standard Oil (now Exxon) were
to be used for two purposes: education in the poorer regions of
the American South; and medical research.
The administrator of the funds visited Leipzig, in
Germany, to learn how medicine was being practiced there. He
found doctors commited to surgery and pharmaceuticals, so that
was the kind of medicine to which he committed the Rockefeller
funds. The only North American school teaching that kind of
medicine at the time was Johns-Hopkins; so they got all the
money. It didn’t take long for other university medical schools to
learn how to access the Rockefeller millions: they quickly
adopted the Leipzig model. The graduates of those schools
became the founders of the American Medical Association.
Thus did allopathic medicine come to dominate health
care in North America. The irony is that John D. Rockerfeller’s
personal physician was a homeopath—as is Queen Elizabeth’s
personal physician today.
Bill C-51 is, at its core, an attempt to force natural and
traditional medications into the same regulatory framework as
pharmaceuticals. If Vitamin C, for example, is declared a “drug”
and required to have a DIN (Drug Identification Number), only
Big Pharma can afford the laboratory research necessary.
Of course the government agencies have a role to play
in protecting the public; but the way to do that is not by handing
the protection role over to Big Pharma and the food
conglomerates, as this government has been doing. The CHP
would instruct Health Canada to make the public and the
medical profession aware of dangerous or mis-labeled products,
so Canadians can make informed choices about their own health
care; and to prosecute manufacturers who make or import mislabeled
or dangerous products.
But Bill C-51 is a veiled attempt to hand control over
traditional and natural health products to Big Pharma and the
Health Canada bureaucracy.
The Conservatives have had a very friendly relationship
with Big Pharma. One example is Ken Boessenkool, Stephen
Harper's close friend and policy advisor for years, who is now a
registered lobbyist working on behalf of Merck Frosst Canada.
Remember how this government handed $300 million to Merck
for a campaign to make young girls in Canada guinea pigs in
tests of an HPV vaccine? Lifesite News reports that in the USA,
that campaign has been associated with at least five deaths in
just over a year—not to mention thousands of reports of adverse
effects, hundreds that were deemed serious, and many that
required hospitalization.
That’s not the regime that should regulate Canadians’
health care, and they should certainly not be handed a monopoly
on vitamins and natural health products. It’s worth noting that
thousands of people die every year from the use (or mis-applied
use) of potent pharmaceuticals. But as far as I’ve been able to
find out, no one has ever died from natural health products.
Bill C-51 should be scrapped, not “amended” as the
Tories propose; because even as amended, it still gives the
government the hidden power to define vitamins and health
foods as “drugs”, and impose excessively draconian regulations
on them.
PO Box 4958, Station E Ottawa ON K1S 5J1
Vol 15, No 31 This Communiqué may be copied August 12, 2008
Friday, August 01, 2008
Mark Penninga Brings ARPA's Vision to the Bulkley Valley
by Rod Taylor
On July 27 and 28, ARPA's Executive Director, Mark Penninga addressed gatherings in Smithers and Houston, BC about the role ARPA (Association for Reformed Political Action) can play in the struggle to return Canada's public policies and institutions to to a biblical worldview.
Being born and raised in the Bulkley Valley, and well known by his audience, Mark brought his message comfortably but very compellingly. His sincere desire was evident---to convey to his listeners his conviction that all family-oriented citizens and especially those who hold a Christian view of life have a responsibilty to work for change and to seek the transformation of our culture.
Mark has been setting a good example since taking on the position of Executive Director. The ARPA website
has been attracting lots of traffic and contains a lot of research on family issues. Local ARPA groups are being motivated across Canada, including the Bulkley Valley ARPA.
Innovative projects, such as the "hay bales and crosses" display in Southern Alberta have drawn public attention to the annual Canadian deaths by abortion of approximately 110,000 innocent human lives.
Mark spoke of "Sphere Sovereignty" and explained that God has ordained authority and responsibility for each of us within several distinct "spheres" such as family, state, church, labour, etc. and that one of our challenges is the encroachment by the state on the other areas of our life, distorting our understanding and limiting our success in achieving the noble and lofty standards established for us by God.
He also correctly identified a humanistic worldview as a form of religion and said "The question isn't WHETHER religion should be mixed with politics but WHICH religion?" Secular humanists want to direct policy-making while pretending to reflect a "non-biased, scientific" point of view. Nothing could be further from the truth. The narrow and intolerant opinions of those who reject God and His just requirements are every bit as "religious" as the tenets of biblical Christianity and are really nothing more than strong feelings.
We are pleased that Mark was able to present his creative vision for the role of ARPA in the Bulkley Valley and we expect to hear much more from this talented young man. We also expect to see BV ARPA taking on some important projects in these "interesting times."
On July 27 and 28, ARPA's Executive Director, Mark Penninga addressed gatherings in Smithers and Houston, BC about the role ARPA (Association for Reformed Political Action) can play in the struggle to return Canada's public policies and institutions to to a biblical worldview.
Being born and raised in the Bulkley Valley, and well known by his audience, Mark brought his message comfortably but very compellingly. His sincere desire was evident---to convey to his listeners his conviction that all family-oriented citizens and especially those who hold a Christian view of life have a responsibilty to work for change and to seek the transformation of our culture.
Mark has been setting a good example since taking on the position of Executive Director. The ARPA website
has been attracting lots of traffic and contains a lot of research on family issues. Local ARPA groups are being motivated across Canada, including the Bulkley Valley ARPA.
Innovative projects, such as the "hay bales and crosses" display in Southern Alberta have drawn public attention to the annual Canadian deaths by abortion of approximately 110,000 innocent human lives.
Mark spoke of "Sphere Sovereignty" and explained that God has ordained authority and responsibility for each of us within several distinct "spheres" such as family, state, church, labour, etc. and that one of our challenges is the encroachment by the state on the other areas of our life, distorting our understanding and limiting our success in achieving the noble and lofty standards established for us by God.
He also correctly identified a humanistic worldview as a form of religion and said "The question isn't WHETHER religion should be mixed with politics but WHICH religion?" Secular humanists want to direct policy-making while pretending to reflect a "non-biased, scientific" point of view. Nothing could be further from the truth. The narrow and intolerant opinions of those who reject God and His just requirements are every bit as "religious" as the tenets of biblical Christianity and are really nothing more than strong feelings.
We are pleased that Mark was able to present his creative vision for the role of ARPA in the Bulkley Valley and we expect to hear much more from this talented young man. We also expect to see BV ARPA taking on some important projects in these "interesting times."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)