Saturday, March 24, 2007
Monday, March 12, 2007
Mercy and Justice
Without Mercy, Justice would be harsh,
But with her he is tender.
Without Justice, Mercy would be lost,
Having no defender.
So many in the courts today
And in the halls of power---
Throw all their hopes on Mercy
And from Justice do they cower.
They think by trading sword for shield
And banishing Truth’s blade
They’ll reap the fruit that virtues yield
Though virtue’s image fade.
They think in Mercy only
They’ll find an easy rest
Without Justice to provide them either
Measurement or test.
They hoist a flag uncoloured;
Pirates plunder fast their hold
But in shipwreck or surrender
Their hands will yet grow cold.
The shield of Mercy covers well;
Its edge is ever soft
And shelters many in its shade
When it is held aloft.
But it cannot turn the battle tide
Nor force the routed foe
The sword of Justice must be raised
While Mercy shields the blow.
So call forth now your banners!
Unfurl them one by one!
And call on deck your sleeping crew
And powder every gun!
The robbers of the open sea
Do seek our weak submission
But resolute and daring
We must meet them in collision.
Collusion is their frontispiece
And calumny their finis---
But we have taken sacred vows
And Justice lives within us!
Copyright March 2007 by Rod Taylor
But with her he is tender.
Without Justice, Mercy would be lost,
Having no defender.
So many in the courts today
And in the halls of power---
Throw all their hopes on Mercy
And from Justice do they cower.
They think by trading sword for shield
And banishing Truth’s blade
They’ll reap the fruit that virtues yield
Though virtue’s image fade.
They think in Mercy only
They’ll find an easy rest
Without Justice to provide them either
Measurement or test.
They hoist a flag uncoloured;
Pirates plunder fast their hold
But in shipwreck or surrender
Their hands will yet grow cold.
The shield of Mercy covers well;
Its edge is ever soft
And shelters many in its shade
When it is held aloft.
But it cannot turn the battle tide
Nor force the routed foe
The sword of Justice must be raised
While Mercy shields the blow.
So call forth now your banners!
Unfurl them one by one!
And call on deck your sleeping crew
And powder every gun!
The robbers of the open sea
Do seek our weak submission
But resolute and daring
We must meet them in collision.
Collusion is their frontispiece
And calumny their finis---
But we have taken sacred vows
And Justice lives within us!
Copyright March 2007 by Rod Taylor
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Freedom to be Heard: An Open Letter to the Speaker of the House
Mr Speaker:
Thank you for accepting the responsibility of maintaining order in the House of Commons. As in any house, it is understood that there are rules of decorum to ensure peace and order and to allow for positive interaction.
Every schoolchild in our great country has been taught certain rules of behaviour to ensure order in the classroom and to allow every other child an opportunity to speak and to be heard. The simplest of these rules, but the most difficult to practice, is the admonition not to interrupt when someone else is speaking. The practical corollary is that one must value the time and opinions of others and therefore must not occupy the floor indefinitely, giving both time and place for others to express themselves. These simple courtesies, like all ethical courtesies emanate from the Golden Rule regarding human interaction: “Love your neighbour as yourself”.
It is unthinkable, in the great House of Commons, whose honourable members are chosen by the great people of this great land, that those members should behave toward one another in a manner less courteous, less polite and less honourable than that expected of every schoolchild.
In our country, for which men and women have died, we place a high value on freedom of speech…and rightly so. That freedom, that privilege, that courtesy---predates Canada’s founding, and is in evidence in every truly civilized nation in the world. Freedom of speech must be accompanied by freedom to be heard. If the opinions of some speakers in the House of Commons are drowned out by hisses and catcalls, we have dishonoured the house and denied representation to those people whose chosen member has been denied the freedom to be heard. Technology has taken us from sound exposition to the soundbite. The decay of public morality and ethics has turned soundbites into biting sounds. It used to be said “His bark is worse than his bite.” Today, we may say that the bark is the bite. Mr. Speaker, if only the loudest voices, only the angriest, only the rudest are allowed to be heard, Canada will become a nation governed by the loud, the angry and the rude. That must not be.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that while the House sits you exercise that necessary level of oversight to ensure that every member of the House may be heard. By exercising the special authority granted to you over the affairs of the House, to encourage full and free debate, full of thoughtful considerations and free of snide contempt for those we address as “honourable”, without partisan pandering, you may be remembered as the Speaker who raised the level of respect and honour among the honourable members both within and without the chambers of the House of Commons.
Thank you,
Rod Taylor
Thank you for accepting the responsibility of maintaining order in the House of Commons. As in any house, it is understood that there are rules of decorum to ensure peace and order and to allow for positive interaction.
Every schoolchild in our great country has been taught certain rules of behaviour to ensure order in the classroom and to allow every other child an opportunity to speak and to be heard. The simplest of these rules, but the most difficult to practice, is the admonition not to interrupt when someone else is speaking. The practical corollary is that one must value the time and opinions of others and therefore must not occupy the floor indefinitely, giving both time and place for others to express themselves. These simple courtesies, like all ethical courtesies emanate from the Golden Rule regarding human interaction: “Love your neighbour as yourself”.
It is unthinkable, in the great House of Commons, whose honourable members are chosen by the great people of this great land, that those members should behave toward one another in a manner less courteous, less polite and less honourable than that expected of every schoolchild.
In our country, for which men and women have died, we place a high value on freedom of speech…and rightly so. That freedom, that privilege, that courtesy---predates Canada’s founding, and is in evidence in every truly civilized nation in the world. Freedom of speech must be accompanied by freedom to be heard. If the opinions of some speakers in the House of Commons are drowned out by hisses and catcalls, we have dishonoured the house and denied representation to those people whose chosen member has been denied the freedom to be heard. Technology has taken us from sound exposition to the soundbite. The decay of public morality and ethics has turned soundbites into biting sounds. It used to be said “His bark is worse than his bite.” Today, we may say that the bark is the bite. Mr. Speaker, if only the loudest voices, only the angriest, only the rudest are allowed to be heard, Canada will become a nation governed by the loud, the angry and the rude. That must not be.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that while the House sits you exercise that necessary level of oversight to ensure that every member of the House may be heard. By exercising the special authority granted to you over the affairs of the House, to encourage full and free debate, full of thoughtful considerations and free of snide contempt for those we address as “honourable”, without partisan pandering, you may be remembered as the Speaker who raised the level of respect and honour among the honourable members both within and without the chambers of the House of Commons.
Thank you,
Rod Taylor
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Income Splitting and the Family-Friendly Tax Credit
Two building blocks of a successful economic policy to support Canadian families have long been championed by the Christian Heritage Party of Canada---income splitting and the family-friendly tax credit.
Income splitting would allow the most generous tax regime for a household whether both spouses are working or not. This would level the playing field so that a married couple with one spouse earning a high income and the other spouse nurturing children and keeping the household sane would pay the same tax as a home where both parents work at a lower salary and earn the same combined household income. Over time, this arrangement would benefit parents with children and would tend to support the choice of raising the next generation of Canadians---an outcome very important in light of Canada's "birth dearth". (If not for immigration, Canada's population would be in decline today. This demographic shift is becoming more obvious every day as our nursing homes are crowded and our schools are closing down for lack of students)
The CHP's family-friendly tax credit, granting a $1,000 per month tax credit to families where one parent is at home, nurturing and guiding their school-age children, provides similar practical support for the embattled Canadian family. In the upheavals we know as modern society, any move to re-establish the home as the place of security and training for our youth is a welcome effort.
Some have wondered about the economic costs of such policies. Our view is that any increased burden on the taxpayer will be more than offset by reduced unemployment as more parents are able to stay home where they really want to be, opening up existing jobs for those currently out of work. Others will start home businesses, injecting creativity and cash back into their communities. The social and economic benefits to Canada of having more stable families and more children enjoying a parent's close contact would be felt early and last well into the next few generations.
Income splitting would allow the most generous tax regime for a household whether both spouses are working or not. This would level the playing field so that a married couple with one spouse earning a high income and the other spouse nurturing children and keeping the household sane would pay the same tax as a home where both parents work at a lower salary and earn the same combined household income. Over time, this arrangement would benefit parents with children and would tend to support the choice of raising the next generation of Canadians---an outcome very important in light of Canada's "birth dearth". (If not for immigration, Canada's population would be in decline today. This demographic shift is becoming more obvious every day as our nursing homes are crowded and our schools are closing down for lack of students)
The CHP's family-friendly tax credit, granting a $1,000 per month tax credit to families where one parent is at home, nurturing and guiding their school-age children, provides similar practical support for the embattled Canadian family. In the upheavals we know as modern society, any move to re-establish the home as the place of security and training for our youth is a welcome effort.
Some have wondered about the economic costs of such policies. Our view is that any increased burden on the taxpayer will be more than offset by reduced unemployment as more parents are able to stay home where they really want to be, opening up existing jobs for those currently out of work. Others will start home businesses, injecting creativity and cash back into their communities. The social and economic benefits to Canada of having more stable families and more children enjoying a parent's close contact would be felt early and last well into the next few generations.
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Modern Inconveniences
Last night we attended a showing of “An Inconvenient Truth”, the movie produced by former US Vice President, Al Gore. The movie is an incredibly powerful media production. The graphics are awesome, the story compelling and the interleaving of scientific data about CO2 levels and global warming with Mr. Gore’s own personal story is superbly executed. In rough summary, the movie posits that mankind has raised CO2 levels in the earth’s atmosphere far beyond any historical levels, that that condition has created an insulating blanket, trapping the sun’s rays and, if unchecked, will result in the melting of the polar ice caps, the raising of world sea levels by 20 feet, the flooding of all the world’s largest port cities, the destruction of wildlife species and other dire consequences too numerous to mention here.
Everyone should see the movie. Before seeing it though, it may be helpful to reflect on a few other “inconvenient truths” conveniently ignored.
-While the theory of “greenhouse gases” is widely believed and is generally credible, it is still a theory. Mr. Gore said there was basically “no” disagreement within the scientific community. This is false. Of course, this does not imply we should be complacent about pollution, CO2 emissions or the rampant over-consumption of non-renewable resources. If we care about the earth, our children and about living a life that’s pleasing to the Creator, we must diligently evaluate our lifestyles and our national policies regarding energy, pollution and recycling. As stewards of the earth, we have been entrusted by God to care for our environment. We are to respectfully share the goodness and richness of this fragile planet, not only with our neighbours but also with our grandchildren.
-Using ice-core samples and tiny trapped air bubbles, which Mr. Gore claims are 650,000years old, he says the atmospheric temperatures existing when the ice froze can be determined by the measurement of “isotopes”. I do not believe that scientists are able to determine with any accuracy either the age of those ice core samples or the average atmospheric temperatures of the year the ice was formed. I can tell you though, what the temperature was the day the water froze. It was zero degrees Celsius. I believe, of course, in a much younger planet than the one Mr. Gore describes. I believe about 4,000 years ago, our great-great-grandfather Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives were floating over the land masses which we now call continents in a large wooden boat we now call the ark. This was after the first rain, which turned out to be a real gully-washer.
-The Great Flood of Noah’s day, which destroyed all but eight of the world’s citizens and most of the animal life of that time, was a judgment of God the Creator. He wiped the slate because of the wickedness of man and the violence, greed and lust rampant in the earth. Because of Noah’s unique faithfulness, God spared him and commanded him to preserve a remnant of all the animal life we have today (as well as many which have since gone extinct). At that time ALL the earth’s species were endangered.
-Almighty God, the One who created the earth, and its atmosphere, the One who created the sun, the moon and the stars, the One who set the planets in motion and who is the source of all energy---He is able to save or destroy. He put the earth at a 23 ½ degree-tilt, thus creating the seasons. He created wind and water. He created oxygen and gave us lungs. He alone has the right and the authority to set standards for man’s moral behaviour. It is He who has said “Do not commit murder.” When He observes our social life today, He sees over 100,000 babies being killed each year in Canada alone and millions across the globe. He sees the greed and the lust and the violence we tolerate and encourage in this land, in our media and in our economy. If He once judged the earth for these things, why should He not do it again? My question is: Without discarding the science around greenhouse gases and global warming, perhaps our moral pollution is at least as great a cause of the climatic turmoil we are observing today.
-After the waters of the Great Flood dissipated, the earth’s surface dried and our ancestors emerged from the ark, bringing the entire animal kingdom with them, God made a covenant with Noah, his children (that includes us) and all living things. He promised to never again destroy the entire earth by flood. The sign of this covenant is the rainbow. God reinforces His promise with these words: “…neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.” (Gen. 8)
-There is, however, a time coming in the future when “…the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” (II Peter 3)
Do these promises of God give us an excuse to treat the earth carelessly or take for granted the great privilege of living in this place of stunning beauty, together with the awesome biodiversity of plant and animal life? Does it mean we can burn up all the oil and coal and natural gas, polluting as we go, without regard for future generations, or pollute the lakes and rivers?
No, God forbid. Paul tells us to “use the world and not abuse it.” John tells us in Revelation that “the Lord will destroy those who destroy the earth.” (Rev. 11) Speaking through the prophet Ezekiel (ch 34), the Lord rebukes the powerful elite of that day using this illustration, comparing them with cattle: “Does it seem a small thing unto you to have eaten up the good pasture, but ye must tread down with your feet the residue of your pastures? and to have drunk of the deep waters, but ye must foul the residue with your feet?” Contained in that rebuke is the admonition to be respectful of creation, of the resources we’ve been given.
The fact that the creation is “groaning, waiting for the manifestation of the sons of God”---that we have distressing conditions in our waters, our forests and our air---should motivate us to become better stewards, better nurturers of this planet. It does not belong to us. It belongs to Him!
Likewise our own bodies, our social structures, our families, our justice system, unborn babies. We can not simply treat the human side of creation as our own invention, ignoring the instructions of our Creator. We must live in respectful awe of all that He has put within us---our sense of justice, respect for human life, our desire and responsibility to protect and nurture. We did not create the sun and the planets, nor can we by strength or intellect sustain them. Our intelligence (which is also a gift from God) has allowed us to explore the universe. But it is His wisdom that will allow us to enjoy His presence in the new heavens and the new earth He has promised. His recurring theme is to seek to know Him and to call on Him, to walk with Him. “If my people, which are called by My Name, shall humble themselves and seek My Face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.” (II Chron 7:14)
Everyone should see the movie. Before seeing it though, it may be helpful to reflect on a few other “inconvenient truths” conveniently ignored.
-While the theory of “greenhouse gases” is widely believed and is generally credible, it is still a theory. Mr. Gore said there was basically “no” disagreement within the scientific community. This is false. Of course, this does not imply we should be complacent about pollution, CO2 emissions or the rampant over-consumption of non-renewable resources. If we care about the earth, our children and about living a life that’s pleasing to the Creator, we must diligently evaluate our lifestyles and our national policies regarding energy, pollution and recycling. As stewards of the earth, we have been entrusted by God to care for our environment. We are to respectfully share the goodness and richness of this fragile planet, not only with our neighbours but also with our grandchildren.
-Using ice-core samples and tiny trapped air bubbles, which Mr. Gore claims are 650,000years old, he says the atmospheric temperatures existing when the ice froze can be determined by the measurement of “isotopes”. I do not believe that scientists are able to determine with any accuracy either the age of those ice core samples or the average atmospheric temperatures of the year the ice was formed. I can tell you though, what the temperature was the day the water froze. It was zero degrees Celsius. I believe, of course, in a much younger planet than the one Mr. Gore describes. I believe about 4,000 years ago, our great-great-grandfather Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives were floating over the land masses which we now call continents in a large wooden boat we now call the ark. This was after the first rain, which turned out to be a real gully-washer.
-The Great Flood of Noah’s day, which destroyed all but eight of the world’s citizens and most of the animal life of that time, was a judgment of God the Creator. He wiped the slate because of the wickedness of man and the violence, greed and lust rampant in the earth. Because of Noah’s unique faithfulness, God spared him and commanded him to preserve a remnant of all the animal life we have today (as well as many which have since gone extinct). At that time ALL the earth’s species were endangered.
-Almighty God, the One who created the earth, and its atmosphere, the One who created the sun, the moon and the stars, the One who set the planets in motion and who is the source of all energy---He is able to save or destroy. He put the earth at a 23 ½ degree-tilt, thus creating the seasons. He created wind and water. He created oxygen and gave us lungs. He alone has the right and the authority to set standards for man’s moral behaviour. It is He who has said “Do not commit murder.” When He observes our social life today, He sees over 100,000 babies being killed each year in Canada alone and millions across the globe. He sees the greed and the lust and the violence we tolerate and encourage in this land, in our media and in our economy. If He once judged the earth for these things, why should He not do it again? My question is: Without discarding the science around greenhouse gases and global warming, perhaps our moral pollution is at least as great a cause of the climatic turmoil we are observing today.
-After the waters of the Great Flood dissipated, the earth’s surface dried and our ancestors emerged from the ark, bringing the entire animal kingdom with them, God made a covenant with Noah, his children (that includes us) and all living things. He promised to never again destroy the entire earth by flood. The sign of this covenant is the rainbow. God reinforces His promise with these words: “…neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.” (Gen. 8)
-There is, however, a time coming in the future when “…the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” (II Peter 3)
Do these promises of God give us an excuse to treat the earth carelessly or take for granted the great privilege of living in this place of stunning beauty, together with the awesome biodiversity of plant and animal life? Does it mean we can burn up all the oil and coal and natural gas, polluting as we go, without regard for future generations, or pollute the lakes and rivers?
No, God forbid. Paul tells us to “use the world and not abuse it.” John tells us in Revelation that “the Lord will destroy those who destroy the earth.” (Rev. 11) Speaking through the prophet Ezekiel (ch 34), the Lord rebukes the powerful elite of that day using this illustration, comparing them with cattle: “Does it seem a small thing unto you to have eaten up the good pasture, but ye must tread down with your feet the residue of your pastures? and to have drunk of the deep waters, but ye must foul the residue with your feet?” Contained in that rebuke is the admonition to be respectful of creation, of the resources we’ve been given.
The fact that the creation is “groaning, waiting for the manifestation of the sons of God”---that we have distressing conditions in our waters, our forests and our air---should motivate us to become better stewards, better nurturers of this planet. It does not belong to us. It belongs to Him!
Likewise our own bodies, our social structures, our families, our justice system, unborn babies. We can not simply treat the human side of creation as our own invention, ignoring the instructions of our Creator. We must live in respectful awe of all that He has put within us---our sense of justice, respect for human life, our desire and responsibility to protect and nurture. We did not create the sun and the planets, nor can we by strength or intellect sustain them. Our intelligence (which is also a gift from God) has allowed us to explore the universe. But it is His wisdom that will allow us to enjoy His presence in the new heavens and the new earth He has promised. His recurring theme is to seek to know Him and to call on Him, to walk with Him. “If my people, which are called by My Name, shall humble themselves and seek My Face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.” (II Chron 7:14)
Saturday, January 06, 2007
Liberal Leader Finds BiPartisan Cooperation "Bizarre"
In the wake of Wajid Khan's defection to the Conservatives, Liberal leader Stephane Dion commented that he always thought it "bizarre" that a Liberal MP could serve as a consultant to the Conservative prime minister.
This shows not only the narrowness of Mr. Dion's hopes and aspirations for Canada but also his failure to grasp the lessons of history. Sir Winston Churchill, one of recent history's most outstanding political leaders, who steered England and the world between the shoals of annihilation and tyranny, was a multiple floor-crosser and served his country in a variety of capacities from both sides of the house.
One would hope that most politicians, like the overwhelming majority of Canadians, would aspire to be participants in a governance style that embraces multi-party cooperation in the common interests of all Canadians.
I would like to thank Mr. Khan for his willingness to help the prime minister. Mr. Dion's failure to appreciate that contribution signals a shrinking world-view that grasps for power but shuns servanthood. Like Mr. Churchill, we should all look for the place where we can best serve our nation's interests.
This shows not only the narrowness of Mr. Dion's hopes and aspirations for Canada but also his failure to grasp the lessons of history. Sir Winston Churchill, one of recent history's most outstanding political leaders, who steered England and the world between the shoals of annihilation and tyranny, was a multiple floor-crosser and served his country in a variety of capacities from both sides of the house.
One would hope that most politicians, like the overwhelming majority of Canadians, would aspire to be participants in a governance style that embraces multi-party cooperation in the common interests of all Canadians.
I would like to thank Mr. Khan for his willingness to help the prime minister. Mr. Dion's failure to appreciate that contribution signals a shrinking world-view that grasps for power but shuns servanthood. Like Mr. Churchill, we should all look for the place where we can best serve our nation's interests.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
To all those working so hard to protect Life and Family and to restore Justice and Truth in Canada:
Thank you for your hard work and sacrifices. Almighty God is faithful and He declares that, even for a “cup of cold water” you shall never lose your reward.
However, I do wish, once again, to register my disappointment that, in the midst of our joint efforts, some of you continue to make excuses for the Conservative government of the Rt. Hon. Mr. Stephen Harper, based on its "minority" position. That minority position has not stopped Mr. Harper from taking strong and principled stands on other controversial subjects, like Kyoto, Israel, Afghanistan, income trusts, etc. Why then is it okay to "wimp out" on protection for the unborn and a true defense of the traditional family?
Review these facts:
· At the founding convention of the "new" Conservative Party, the members, with Mr. Harper's approval, passed a resolution stating that "a Conservative government will not support any legislation regulating abortion". Mr. Harper followed this up with his personal promise to do his best to keep legislation regarding abortion from coming to the floor of the House. He kept his promise by pressuring the committee to rule Leon Benoit's "Unborn Victims of Violence" bill "unvotable", thus killing the most meaningful and hopeful piece of legislation put forward so far to establish "personhood" for the unborn.
· Mr. Harper's government continues to apply legal pressure to New Brunswick to fund private abortion clinics.
· Mr. Harper's powerful core has dictated that Conservative candidates, including recent byelection candidate, Dianne Haskett, may not answer questionnaires from pro-life groups such as Campaign Life Coalition, preventing these candidates from giving a full and forceful defense of their pro-life positions.
· Mr. Harper's poorly-planned and poorly-defended motion re. reopening the debate on same-sex marriage was not only doomed to fail (a Royal Commission to study the matter with a complete vetting of the issue would have been much better) but the wording of the motion gave tacit support to same-sex civil unions and guaranteed the ongoing endorsement of the government for the 12,000 same-sex "marriages" that have been solemnized to date. The lack of a forceful approach to this critical issue has resulted in the humiliation of the pro-family position.
While I congratulate Mr. Harper for his successes and achievements, I continue to support the only truly pro-life, pro-family national party, the Christian Heritage Party. The CHP policies are rooted in the foundational statement in the Preamble to the Charter: "...Canada is founded upon principles which recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law..." All righteous legislation can be built around this concept enshrined in our Constitution. These principles do not change with the winds of political opportunism. It's interesting that the Conservative Party at its founding convention substituted the words "supremacy of democratic parliamentary institutions" for the Canadian Constitution's "supremacy of God".Thanks again for your good efforts. Let’s keep the Truth in the forefront as we seek to influence politicians and citizens of all parties to become defenders of Life, Family and Justice. All the best in 2007.
However, I do wish, once again, to register my disappointment that, in the midst of our joint efforts, some of you continue to make excuses for the Conservative government of the Rt. Hon. Mr. Stephen Harper, based on its "minority" position. That minority position has not stopped Mr. Harper from taking strong and principled stands on other controversial subjects, like Kyoto, Israel, Afghanistan, income trusts, etc. Why then is it okay to "wimp out" on protection for the unborn and a true defense of the traditional family?
Review these facts:
· At the founding convention of the "new" Conservative Party, the members, with Mr. Harper's approval, passed a resolution stating that "a Conservative government will not support any legislation regulating abortion". Mr. Harper followed this up with his personal promise to do his best to keep legislation regarding abortion from coming to the floor of the House. He kept his promise by pressuring the committee to rule Leon Benoit's "Unborn Victims of Violence" bill "unvotable", thus killing the most meaningful and hopeful piece of legislation put forward so far to establish "personhood" for the unborn.
· Mr. Harper's government continues to apply legal pressure to New Brunswick to fund private abortion clinics.
· Mr. Harper's powerful core has dictated that Conservative candidates, including recent byelection candidate, Dianne Haskett, may not answer questionnaires from pro-life groups such as Campaign Life Coalition, preventing these candidates from giving a full and forceful defense of their pro-life positions.
· Mr. Harper's poorly-planned and poorly-defended motion re. reopening the debate on same-sex marriage was not only doomed to fail (a Royal Commission to study the matter with a complete vetting of the issue would have been much better) but the wording of the motion gave tacit support to same-sex civil unions and guaranteed the ongoing endorsement of the government for the 12,000 same-sex "marriages" that have been solemnized to date. The lack of a forceful approach to this critical issue has resulted in the humiliation of the pro-family position.
While I congratulate Mr. Harper for his successes and achievements, I continue to support the only truly pro-life, pro-family national party, the Christian Heritage Party. The CHP policies are rooted in the foundational statement in the Preamble to the Charter: "...Canada is founded upon principles which recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law..." All righteous legislation can be built around this concept enshrined in our Constitution. These principles do not change with the winds of political opportunism. It's interesting that the Conservative Party at its founding convention substituted the words "supremacy of democratic parliamentary institutions" for the Canadian Constitution's "supremacy of God".Thanks again for your good efforts. Let’s keep the Truth in the forefront as we seek to influence politicians and citizens of all parties to become defenders of Life, Family and Justice. All the best in 2007.
Friday, December 08, 2006
Harper's Day of Infamy
December 7, 1941 is remembered as a Day of Infamy when Japan launched a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, attempting to put the US Pacific Fleet out of commission.
December 7, 2006 may also be remembered as a Day of Infamy when Stephen Harper betrayed his socially conservative supporters by allowing traditional marriage to be subjected to humiliating abuse as MPs voted on the government's limp-wristed motion that would have restored the traditional definition of marriage "...without affecting civil unions and while respecting existing same-sex marriages."
After one day of debate, the motion was defeated. There was no free vote, no Royal Commission on Marriage, no attempt to engage the Canadian public. The original same-sex marriage bill, which passed in 2005, still poses significant threats for our youth and undermines freedom of religion, yet Mr. Harper considers the case closed.
Those who understand God's great love for mankind, His plan to redeem a fallen world and the significance He places on marriage know that the case is not closed. Like abortion, that ruthless killer of innocent human life, same-sex marriage is not a policy that social conservatives can accept. It must be opposed with vigour while we still have a semblance of freedom.
The Christian Heritage Party (one local site is: http://skeenabulkley.ca ) remains Canada’s ONLY national party that is unequivocally PROLIFE, PRO FAMILY and committed to Christian principles of morality, justice and virtue.
Rod Taylor
December 7, 2006 may also be remembered as a Day of Infamy when Stephen Harper betrayed his socially conservative supporters by allowing traditional marriage to be subjected to humiliating abuse as MPs voted on the government's limp-wristed motion that would have restored the traditional definition of marriage "...without affecting civil unions and while respecting existing same-sex marriages."
After one day of debate, the motion was defeated. There was no free vote, no Royal Commission on Marriage, no attempt to engage the Canadian public. The original same-sex marriage bill, which passed in 2005, still poses significant threats for our youth and undermines freedom of religion, yet Mr. Harper considers the case closed.
Those who understand God's great love for mankind, His plan to redeem a fallen world and the significance He places on marriage know that the case is not closed. Like abortion, that ruthless killer of innocent human life, same-sex marriage is not a policy that social conservatives can accept. It must be opposed with vigour while we still have a semblance of freedom.
The Christian Heritage Party (one local site is: http://skeenabulkley.ca ) remains Canada’s ONLY national party that is unequivocally PROLIFE, PRO FAMILY and committed to Christian principles of morality, justice and virtue.
Rod Taylor
Saturday, November 04, 2006
The Other Environment
by Rod TaylorEveryone seems to be talking about the environment. From air quality to wind currents, ocean levels and bio-plagues of epic proportions, our planet seems challenged daily by new assaults on the complex relationships between species and food sources, temperature and growth cycles. As we learn more about the complex and amazing world in which we live, we are awe-struck by the delicate conditions without which, we and our fellow-creatures would die in moments. We look for ways, not only to understand the forces at work in and around us---social, economic, and biological---but to counter them with proactive and creative policies to shape a more hopeful tomorrow.
Within our psyche as a nation, we also are entering another climate change of unknown proportion. Our collective conscience and consciousness groan for certainty and hope, while with frantic tuggings at the anchors and tiller, we seek familiar waters for our national soul. The complexities of this shift have thrown mankind and the creatures with whom we share this earth into cataclysmic reelings to and fro. The very foundations of all we've known seem to be moving...
The gropings and guessings with which we are daily tossed have also caused a climate change in our land. Our ability to establish and maintain a moral and social environment which will sustain a dignified human existence past our generation and into a caring and sustainable future hangs in the balance.
A few of the destructive forces at work :
- Toddlers now spend their early years with someone else's parents and the ideas most repeated and reinforced come not from their primary caregivers and their biological link to past generations but from admen, intent on developing their consumer-identity and social idealogues who may never have children themselves.
- Links in young minds between cause and effect are weakened by distance and softened by the constant fantasies portrayed in living colour by those with deadened hearts. While children may never have seen a headless chicken flap its last before becoming supper, they have seen thousands of young men and women die tortured deaths between the commercials.
- Insecurities abound as violent offenders are loosed to re-offend and the deaths of millions of the most innocent are ignored by those who claim to bring us the "news".
- We move heaven and earth to find miraculous cures for the most difficult cases, then deprive the living and breathing of the most basic needs---food and water.
- We lurch along uncomfortably freeing the guilty, apologizing for things we didn't do and teaching the innocent that they should try things our parents knew were wrong. Later on we will feel new pangs of guilt and spend any amount of money to provide new drugs to offset the lethal diseases thus contracted. All the while, we put guilt itself on display in a museum along with sexual morality and patriotic sacrifice.
- We attempt to hold in our minds a coalition of mutually exclusive ideas in the name of tolerance and punish those who point out the contradiction (also in the name of tolerance).
We consider life too sacred to admonish and too valueless to protect.
We worship the earth and reject the Creator of the earth. In this our poverty of mind becomes absolute and our attempts to preserve the greatest values ring hollow against the declarations of the eternal God:
"The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein." Psalm 24:1
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Crossing the Line
Today's chaotic pace and the cacophony of mixed messages, both urgent and convincing, compel listeners / viewers / readers to focus on and analyze a myriad of inputs or block and delete---if only to maintain sanity.
The cries of "Injustice!" coming from left and right are so adamant and unapologetic as to dim the fact that sometimes the fastest way to get East is to go West.
While partisan camps endorse or oppose anything from the Big Box to the War on Terror to the War on the Unborn, many non-partisans are left to assume that all deep-thinking people will only join or vote for a certain party---they just can't agree on which party that is. The issues that divide a thinking populace are overlapping, not mutually exclusive. The information explosion, accompanied by the enhanced theatrics of an outraged advocate encourages complex people to make simple but unsatisfying choices, leaving the investigation of claims and counter-claims to the cadre of one's choice.
But some folks are not content to feast forever on pre-digested pablum but must have the real thing---meat that is savoury, fruits and vegetables that are vine-ripened. They acquire not only tastes but real choices. They are able to distinguish between information and peer pressure to conform.
Perhaps the greatest achievement of modern politics will be found, not in the passage of legislation embraced by the Left or the Right but by the release from bondage of a generation of creative thinkers who are able to stand on their own two feet and speak their minds. The proper and logical conclusion to many debates may be within our grasp if today's voters / editors / politicians give themselves permission to disagree with their high-profile leaders / readers and constituents. Blind allegiance to one's party imperils the ability to see the big picture. If there had ever been one group with no blind spots we would need only one nation, one party, one church, one university, one newspaper today. But diversity of thought, like fresh water flowing into a lake, brings nutrients, oxygen and cleansing for the mind. Think about it.
The cries of "Injustice!" coming from left and right are so adamant and unapologetic as to dim the fact that sometimes the fastest way to get East is to go West.
While partisan camps endorse or oppose anything from the Big Box to the War on Terror to the War on the Unborn, many non-partisans are left to assume that all deep-thinking people will only join or vote for a certain party---they just can't agree on which party that is. The issues that divide a thinking populace are overlapping, not mutually exclusive. The information explosion, accompanied by the enhanced theatrics of an outraged advocate encourages complex people to make simple but unsatisfying choices, leaving the investigation of claims and counter-claims to the cadre of one's choice.
But some folks are not content to feast forever on pre-digested pablum but must have the real thing---meat that is savoury, fruits and vegetables that are vine-ripened. They acquire not only tastes but real choices. They are able to distinguish between information and peer pressure to conform.
Perhaps the greatest achievement of modern politics will be found, not in the passage of legislation embraced by the Left or the Right but by the release from bondage of a generation of creative thinkers who are able to stand on their own two feet and speak their minds. The proper and logical conclusion to many debates may be within our grasp if today's voters / editors / politicians give themselves permission to disagree with their high-profile leaders / readers and constituents. Blind allegiance to one's party imperils the ability to see the big picture. If there had ever been one group with no blind spots we would need only one nation, one party, one church, one university, one newspaper today. But diversity of thought, like fresh water flowing into a lake, brings nutrients, oxygen and cleansing for the mind. Think about it.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Engendering Confusion
by Rod TaylorThomas Barker (Interior News, Oct 18, A5) has asked some good questions and I thank him for acknowledging, in a democracy, the importance of freedom of speech and conscience. However, faulty logic has resulted in a misrepresentation of pro-family advocates. He insinuates that people like me, who believe marriage is only possible between a man and a woman, must therefore be questioning the “personhood” of homosexuals. Nothing could be further from the truth.
All men and women, regardless of their sexual behaviours deserve the protection of the law from violence and slander. All are persons and deserve to be treated with courtesy and respect. This is not a “rights” issue like the denial of voting rights or access to education. We are talking about marriage, the foundation of family life. A homosexual relationship cannot produce children and no amount of fanfare can give it the kind of generational impact exercised by the traditional family.
A man might similarly claim a “right” to bear children. Claiming that right would not make it possible. He is not designed that way.
Thomas is absolutely right to remind his readers that legislatures and courts have in the past wrongly denied the personhood of women, of First Nations people, of blacks in the US and Jews in Germany. This analogy fits the plight of the unborn child in Canada since the Supreme Court today claims the child is not a “person” until the head emerges from the birth canal---a preposterous assertion which results in the deaths of over 100,000 little people in Canada each year. But it is totally irrelevant to same-sex marriage since no groups are denying the personhood of homosexuals.
The goal of family values advocates is not to attack or demean people who are struggling with their sexual identities but to protect our children from the forced approbation of behaviours harmful to their health and well being.
Thomas quotes Nathan Cullen (Oct 18 page A9) as saying no further protection of freedom of conscience is needed since freedom of religion is mentioned in the Charter. Why then was Chris Kempling suspended for three months for writing a letter to the paper about same-sex marriage? Why was Scott Brockie fined $5,000 and ordered to pay $40,000 of costs for refusing, as a matter of conscience, to print materials promoting the homosexual movement? Mr. Cullen has shown no interest in defending their freedom of speech or conscience.
Mr Cullen also lamented the “weird mixing of church and state.” These words ignore that secular humanism is itself a religion and political correctness its creed. The “separation of church and state” is meant to protect the free exercise of religion from government control. Our Constitution begins with these words: “…Canada is founded upon principles which recognise the supremacy of God and the rule of law…” The so-called defenders of the Constitution seem willing to ignore its foundational premise, God’s supreme authority in all matters. To separate morality from public policy is to ignore our responsibility to future generations.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Entering the Blogosphere
Opening the door...just a crack. The weighty doors groan on the ancient hinges...light pours in, dust motes drifting across the light beams...old armour stands at attention, rusty chain mail, once polished with action and bravado, now waits in silent anticipation for the thunder of hooves and the clang of sword on shield.
The creak of harness and the calling into array. Heavy shiftings of restless warhorses, stabled too long but eager for the dust of tumult...the banners furled are sought in dim and musty corners...a few minutes in the breeze and their flapping gives to snapping!
The green hills roll away to the West and bright flashings of the mounted are seen again in glintings of the fresh and splashing riffles, men and horses dashing on through streams...the long necks and snorting lips drink rivers freely and are refreshed for the days ahead...days of mountings and spurrings, of hurryings in the semi-dark...shouts of joy and cries of urgency.
The Mighty Host begin to crest the hill...banners and medallions, shields and long-since silently sheathed swords. All are awakening with prayers and dreaming in their sleep of brave acts and stout words to call to life a nation from the dim ranks of wistful warriors.
The creak of harness and the calling into array. Heavy shiftings of restless warhorses, stabled too long but eager for the dust of tumult...the banners furled are sought in dim and musty corners...a few minutes in the breeze and their flapping gives to snapping!
The green hills roll away to the West and bright flashings of the mounted are seen again in glintings of the fresh and splashing riffles, men and horses dashing on through streams...the long necks and snorting lips drink rivers freely and are refreshed for the days ahead...days of mountings and spurrings, of hurryings in the semi-dark...shouts of joy and cries of urgency.
The Mighty Host begin to crest the hill...banners and medallions, shields and long-since silently sheathed swords. All are awakening with prayers and dreaming in their sleep of brave acts and stout words to call to life a nation from the dim ranks of wistful warriors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)