More Taxpayer-Funded Propaganda

If you live in Skeena-Bulkley Valley, you’ve no doubt received the latest report from MP Nathan Cullen (Spring Report ’08), highlighting his service and accomplishments for the region. I hope you got one because you did pay for it. This piece of shameless partisan literature comes out four times each year and gives the sitting MP of whatever political stripe an opportunity to get his message into every household with a mailing address and costs him and his party nothing. While it purports to be an information package (and indeed it does contain some useful resource links) it has “NDP” emblazoned on the first three pages, is printed in NDP colours, uses the NDP logo and carries an NDP message. It is political propaganda, plain and simple. It is extremely well done, mind you. Nathan and his team are efficient and talented. They recognize the value of this tool and make the most of the opportunity. It is well-written, well laid out and urges interaction from the voter, uh, I mean reader. It mentions what Nathan has done for you, what he can do for you in the future and invites you to contact him. I’m going to speculate that the direct and indirect costs of this brochure in Skeena-Bulkley Valley are in the neighbourhood of $8,000 each time or $32,000 per year. It could be more. This is pure speculation, mind you, based only on past experience with printing and postage. Ah, but Nathan may say, “There is no postage cost for correspondence between an MP and his constituents.” That would be NDP economics philosophy but in the real world, goods and services cost money and costs not paid in any other way come directly from the pocket of the long-suffering taxpayer. It’s not enough that the NDP receives direct deposits from the taxpayer each and every year to conduct expensive election campaigns. (Ottawa shells out about $30 million each year to the big four parties with members in the House.) On top of that, four times each year I am obliged to help pay the costs of this self-serving brochure which sounds so noble and leaves all the important things unsaid. So, according to the brochure, what did Nathan do? He spent taxpayers’ money---every time he says he “got” or “ensured” federal spending, he means that taxpayers paid for a project. Don’t get me wrong, some of these are good things. But government is about a lot more than doling out money and wringing it out of the taxpayer’s hide. Government’s primary role really should be to protect people, ensure their freedom and security and maintain a level playing field where they can prosper and succeed. He promoted Al Gore’s version of reality. Nathan has busied himself making sure that every schoolchild has seen “An Inconvenient Truth”, Al Gore’s masterful misrepresentation of “climate change”. (The phrase “global warming” has already gone out of style because that pesky climate just doesn’t keep following Al’s creative predictions. With little real temperature change since 2001 and now the regrowth of Arctic ice, “climate change” has become a less risky concept. After all, that’s what climates do---change.) He visited people around the electoral district. Well I guess…In Skeena-Bulkley Valley, what comes with the territory is---territory! It’s good that during slow periods in Ottawa, Nathan can gas up at taxpayer expense and visit the people who put him in office. The details lacking in Nathan’s Spring Report are “What did he NOT do?” For one, he FAILED to defend life. It was so simple. C-484 was designed with him in mind. He could have voted to protect the Unborn Victims of Crime. But he and his colleagues got jittery about recognizing the unborn person and sided with the violent attackers of women instead. He FAILED to defend traditional marriage. When Stephen Harper put forward his pathetically weak motion, asking whether the House “wished to revisit the issue of same-sex marriage”, Nathan predictably said “No”. He FAILED to defend democracy and freedom of speech. Since 2005, I’ve been waiting for Nathan to speak one word in defense of courageous truth-speakers like Ron Gray and Chris Kempling who are being attacked on phony “human rights” grounds. All is quiet because Nathan and his supporters oppose the truthful messages that Ron and Chris are speaking. And when the Supreme Court violates the Constitution (1995 Egan case), nary a peep! He FAILED to defend taxpayers. How you spend taxpayers’ money is a moral issue. Every MP should be calling for government spending restraint and the paydown of national debt. Our massive interest payments today rob our children of resources for tomorrow. He FAILED to defend the Constitution, which asserts “the supremacy of God”. If every MP would seek to write legislation consistent with our mandate to submit to divine order in our homes, businesses and government, Canada would know the blessing of God to a degree we’ve not yet seen! So when the NDP or any other party puts out a brochure full of carefully selected items to win your hearts and then bills you for it through taxes---what do you do? The only thing you can do…first pay your taxes (“Render unto Caesar…”) and then go to work promoting the CHP---the ONLY pro-life, pro-family federal party and the ONLY one that supports the “supremacy of God” clause in Canada’s Constitution. Our freedoms are vanishing fast and they’re using YOUR money to promote a godless, self-centred, atheistic society for your children. Let’s hold them accountable for what they do and what they FAIL to do! By Rod Taylor March 21, 2008

A Righteous Man Who Refuses to Give Up

Video of Mike Huckabee in Plano Texas--Listen Up!

Ezra Levant Defends Himself Before the Kangaroo Court

Gay Activists to Speak in Ontario Elementary Schools

By Hilary White

OTTAWA, February 8, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Ken O'Day, chairman of the Renfrew County Family Action Council, has sent a letter to Ontario Education Minister Kathleen Wynne, asking for the cancellation of a planned visit by homosexual activists to an Ottawa Valley school, Goulbourn Middle School, in Stittsville, Ontario. A school newsletter confirms that an Ottawa-based homosexual lobby organization will send speakers to the school this year to bring the group's "diversity training" to grade 7 and 8 students.

Mr. O'Day asked the minister to ensure that "gay agendas in our schools will be stopped."

"Parents, teachers and anyone else with a rational mind," he wrote, "are against any program that normalizes homosexual behaviour especially within the confines of our educational institutions. Our children attend school to receive an education in academic subjects and all topics, except for the biological and physiological aspects of sexual education, [which] belong to the parents only."

O'Day told LifeSiteNews.com that he has sent the emails also to George Smitherman, the Ontario Health Minister, who is a political homosexual activist. O'Day said the purpose of the circulars, which were sent additionally to local family supporters and MP Cheryl Gallant, was "so that parents could check with their school boards and see if similar things are going on."

"[Health Minister] Smitherman and [Education Minister] Wynne have a history of activism with the homosexual community and a lot of people aren't aware of that and should be aware that their views may be biased."

Mr. O'Day said that he has received "nothing but resistance" from school boards, including the Catholic school boards.

Kathleen Wynne is Ontario's first openly lesbian cabinet minister, having lived with another woman for over 25 years. Wynne helped found a community fundraising group that has donated over $50,000 to homosexual youth organizations. In 2001, Wynne helped pass a measure encouraging public schools to purchase pro-homosexual teaching materials.

The organization scheduled to appear in the school is the latest government-sponsored effort in "diversity" training for young people. Jer's Vision: Canada's Youth Diversity Initiative, is a registered charity that began as a scholarship funded by a Human Rights Commission settlement in a case brought against an Ontario school board.

The organization provides speakers for lectures and seminars in the Ottawa area on issues of "diversity training" and discrimination. University student volunteers are sent into high schools to "educate high school youth on diversity and respect."

Since establishing itself as one of Canada's foremost homosexual lobby groups, Jer's Vision has moved into new areas, including "education about religious discrimination".

Jer's Vision, a registered charity, was started by a high school homosexual activist, Jeremy Diaz, who attempted to force school officials to adopt a "Positive Space" policy at his school. After the board refused to cooperate a petition that ultimately garnered only 15 per cent of student support was circulated in the school.

When Sir James Dunn Collegiate and Vocational School in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario refused to cooperate with the programme that would have seen the active promotion of homosexuality as a legitimate "lifestyle", Diaz launched a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Commission against the school and the Algoma District School Board.

After three years, the Algoma District School Board offered a financial settlement, but refused to apologize or make changes in the district or the school.

Using the money from the settlement, Diaz, who is now a 21-year-old psychology and political science student at the University Of Ottawa, established a scholarship touted by his organization as "the first national LGBTQ scholarship for youth in Canada".

In 2006, the scholarship fund was changed to a national charity activist organization, of which Diaz is the executive director, that has since received support both from government and the homosexual activist community, including recently, a cheque for $1000.00 from Mr Leather Ottawa, an organization that holds an annual sado-masochistic sex show competition. In the same year, the City of Ottawa awarded Diaz its Youth Citizen of the Year award.

(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).

NEWS TIPS to lsn@lifesitenews.com or call toll free 1-866-787-9947.

Donate to LifeSiteNews.com at http://www.lifesite.net/contribute/

Reporters Blow Whistle on Fox News

YouTube video shows Fox covering up for Monsanto.

Kangaroo Court

www.ezralevant.com

By Ezra Levant on January 11, 2008 5:04 PM

I have just returned home from my session at the kangaroo court, called the Alberta human rights commission. Here is my opening statement that I delivered at the interrogation. I will post more details about the interrogation soon.

Alberta Human Rights Commission Interrogation

Opening remarks by Ezra Levant, January 11, 2008 – Calgary

My name is Ezra Levant. Before this government interrogation begins, I will make a statement.

When the Western Standard magazine printed the Danish cartoons of Mohammed two years ago, I was the publisher. It was the proudest moment of my public life. I would do it again today. In fact, I did do it again today. Though the Western Standard, sadly, no longer publishes a print edition, I posted the cartoons this morning on my website, ezralevant.com.

I am here at this government interrogation under protest. It is my position that the government has no legal or moral authority to interrogate me or anyone else for publishing these words and pictures. That is a violation of my ancient and inalienable freedoms: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and in this case, religious freedom and the separation of mosque and state. It is especially perverted that a bureaucracy calling itself the Alberta human rights commission would be the government agency violating my human rights. So I will now call those bureaucrats “the commission” or “the hrc”, since to call the commission a “human rights commission” is to destroy the meaning of those words.

I believe that this commission has no proper authority over me. The commission was meant as a low-level, quasi-judicial body to arbitrate squabbles about housing, employment and other matters, where a complainant felt that their race or sex was the reason they were discriminated against. The commission was meant to deal with deeds, not words or ideas. Now the commission, which is funded by a secular government, from the pockets of taxpayers of all backgrounds, is taking it upon itself to be an enforcer of the views of radical Islam. So much for the separation of mosque and state.

I have read the past few years’ worth of decisions from this commission, and it is clear that it has become a dump for the junk that gets rejected from the real legal system. I read one case where a male hair salon student complained that he was called a “loser” by the girls in the class. The commission actually had a hearing about this. Another case was a kitchen manager with Hepatitis-C, who complained that it was against her rights to be fired. The commission actually agreed with her, and forced the restaurant to pay her $4,900. In other words, the commission is a joke – it’s the Alberta equivalent of a U.S. television pseudo-court like Judge Judy – except that Judge Judy actually was a judge, whereas none of the commission’s panellists are judges, and some aren’t even lawyers. And, unlike the commission, Judge Judy believes in freedom of speech.

It’s bad enough that this sick joke is being wreaked on hair salons and restaurants. But it’s even worse now that the commissions are attacking free speech. That’s my first point: the commissions have leapt out of the small cage they were confined to, and are now attacking our fundamental freedoms. As Alan Borovoy, Canada’s leading civil libertarian, a man who helped form these commissions in the 60’s and 70’s, wrote, in specific reference to our magazine, being a censor is, quote,“hardly the role we had envisioned for human rights commissions. There should be no question of the right to publish the impugned cartoons.” Unquote. Since the commission is so obviously out of control, he said quote “It would be best, therefore, to change the provisions of the Human Rights Act to remove any such ambiguities of interpretation.” Unquote.

The commission has no legal authority to act as censor. It is not in their statutory authority. They’re just making it up – even Alan Borovoy says so.

But even if the commissions had some statutory fig leaf for their attempts at political and religious censorship, it would still be unlawful and unconstitutional.

We have a heritage of free speech that we inherited from Great Britain that goes back to the year 1215 and the Magna Carta. We have a heritage of eight hundred years of British common law protection for speech, augmented by 250 years of common law in Canada.

That common law has been restated in various fundamental documents, especially since the Second World War.

In 1948, the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Canada is a party, declared that, quote:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

The 1960 Canadian Bill of Rights guaranteed, quote

1. “ human rights and fundamental freedoms, namely,

(c) freedom of religion; (d) freedom of speech; (e) freedom of assembly and association; and (f) freedom of the press.

In 1982, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guaranteed, quote:

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

a) freedom of conscience and religion;

b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

Those were even called “fundamental freedoms” – to give them extra importance.

For a government bureaucrat to call any publisher or anyone else to an interrogation to be quizzed about his political or religious expression is a violation of 800 years of common law, a Universal Declaration of Rights, a Bill of Rights and a Charter of Rights. This commission is applying Saudi values, not Canadian values.

It is also deeply procedurally one-sided and unjust. The complainant – in this case, a radical Muslim imam, who was trained at an officially anti-Semitic university in Saudi Arabia, and who has called for sharia law to govern Canada – doesn’t have to pay a penny; Alberta taxpayers pay for the prosecution of the complaint against me. The victims of the complaints, like the Western Standard, have to pay for their own lawyers from their own pockets. Even if we win, we lose – the process has become the punishment. (At this point, I’d like to thank the magazine’s many donors who have given their own money to help us fight against the Saudi imam and his enablers in the Alberta government.)

It is procedurally unfair. Unlike real courts, there is no way to apply for a dismissal of nuisance lawsuits. Common law rules of evidence don’t apply. Rules of court don’t apply. It is a system that is part Kafka, and part Stalin. Even this interrogation today – at which I appear under duress – saw the commission tell me who I could or could not bring with me as my counsel and advisors.

I have no faith in this farcical commission. But I do have faith in the justice and good sense of my fellow Albertans and Canadians. I believe that the better they understand this case, the more shocked they will be. I am here under your compulsion to answer the commission’s questions. But it is not I who am on trial: it is the freedom of all Canadians.

You may start your interrogation.

What’s ahead in 2008?

by Ron Gray Let me say at the outset that I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet; but sometimes I can read some of the handwriting on the wall: There may well be a federal election this Spring. The Liberals’ strategy of hiding in the bushes cannot continue forever. And the most likely strategy of the Ignatieff cabal is to precipitate a defeat under Stephan Dion’s leadership as the first stage in a palace revolt. Will a Spring election give the Conservatives their majority? Probably not. As the Harper government gains support from disaffected Liberals by avoiding the moral issues, it is at the same time alienating its social conservative base. Many Christians—those who are pro-life and pro-family—will stay home if they think they don’t have an alternative place to park their vote. For us in the CHP, that means we must build new Electoral District Associations and raise new candidates. Right now, we offer a moral alternative in about one-fifth of Canada’s federal ridings. That must increase—dramatically. It’s interesting to re-read the words of Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, writing a majority decision about the role of smaller political parties in our democracy: "The ability of a party to make a valuable contribution is not dependent upon its capacity to offer the electorate a genuine “government option”. Political parties have a much greater capacity than any one citizen to participate in debate and they act as a vehicle for the participation of individual citizens in the political life of the country. All political parties are capable of introducing unique interests and concerns into the political discourse and marginal or regional parties tend to raise issues not adopted by national parties." Even without any elected MPs (yet), the CHP has had an impact on federal politics. And now that the Green Party calls itself “the smallest of the big parties”, the CHP is the biggest of the small parties. And growing! More important, the CHP is the only federal party that brings these important policy issues into the national dialogue about what kind of nation we’ll leave for our children: • The sanctity of life: only the CHP proposes adoption instead of abortion, and opposes euthanasia. • The sanctity of marriage: only the CHP continues to oppose the Liberals’ illegitimate imposition of same-sex “marriage” on an unwilling nation. • Only the CHP advocates Canada leading a global drive for abolition of slavery by limiting trade with nations that allow the use of slave and exploitative child labour. • Only the CHP has a plan for defending democracy and the Constitution against judicial activism. • Only the CHP has a child-care plan focused on strengthening families. • Only the CHP has a plan for increased productivity through labour peace. • Only the CHP has proposals for making home ownership accessible to more Canadian families. • And among federal political parties, only the CHP has spoken against the STD vaccination program that makes guinea pigs of young girls. These are only the highlights of the many policy distinctives that set the CHP apart from the other 15 or so federal political parties. Behind them all is one dramatic difference: • Only the CHP has shown it believes in the Constitutional statement that “Canada was founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.” That’s what will carry us forward into this coming year. And I hope to see you at the CHP convention in Regina in November!

Tsawassen Treaty Establishes Third Order of Government

by John Williamson, Federal Director, Canadian Taxpayers Federation Who Pays and who gets to keep the money Tsawwassen to its own members on taxes Representative government is a two-way street that gives citizens authority to remove lawmakers. If citizens lose this right, but the state retains its ability to tax and spend the outcome is authoritarianism. When corruption is exposed in such dictatorships, its leaders insist self-rule trumps political accountability. Countries on this path tend to be governed by a self-appointed, well-heeled cabal and are often reliant on foreign money for survival. We call them banana republics and a parallel type of home rule is about to be ratified in Canada – call it the teepee republic. British Columbia’s Aboriginal Relations Minister Michael de Jong was in Ottawa this week to trumpet the Tsawwassen treaty along with Canada’s Minister of Indian Affairs Chuck Strahl. It is a sweeping agreement that will transfer provincial and federal powers to the reserve’s council and create a third order of government. The band will be handed over 700 hectares of land in Delta, south of Vancouver, 14-million dollars, and management over child protection, health services, education as well as control of land, resources, wildlife and the environment. Minister de Jong candidly calls it “powers of self-government.” Along with the cash handout and new governing authority, governments that negotiated the treaty are telling B.C. voters that band members will begin to pay tax. True enough – the exemption on federal income taxes will be removed 12 years after the treaty is law. Left unsaid is that taxpaying natives will not be sharing the cost of things like health care and defence along with other Canadian taxpayers. This is because income tax collected from the reserve will go to the band, not Ottawa. Moreover, a side agreement is expected for a similar share of GST revenues. Most Canadians will instinctively find these tax schemes objectionable. It is conceivable a sound argument could be made that bands such as this one need cash to develop economic infrastructure and help its members. And perhaps there is even value in the federal government diverting tax collected on reserves to band governments to establish the important principal that natives ought to pay taxes. But the tax requirements under this agreement are not limited to natives. Instead, federal taxes paid by non-natives living on the Tsawwassen reserve will also go the band government. Incredibly, these same taxpayers will not be permitted to vote in band elections, which mean they will lose the mechanism to remove lawmakers that waste money. Non-native citizens will suddenly become disenfranchised legal aliens, permitted to stay but without a direct say in the management of their tax dollars. This is hardly an exaggeration – the term our government bureaucrats use in native agreements to describe these non-natives is “non-citizens.” It is a disgrace public servants engage in these linguistic gymnastics to placate the cant of native sovereignty. Ottawa’s department of Indian affairs and B.C. treaty negotiators also suppose the ability to tax “serves as a means of government accountability.” They skip over the caveat that this statement is only true if citizens have an ability to remove government officials. Without that there is no real accountability – any despot can tax. A government is responsible only when it is answerable to the public. The Tsawwassen agreement will instill little accountability on the band council. According to The Delta Optimist, the 2006 Census showed of the 674 people living on this reserve 506 were non-natives. The band is already salivating over the fact it will collect $3 from non-voting, non-citizens for every $1 it taxes from people it considers bona fide citizens (i.e. natives). This is not about self-sufficiency but skewering a new cash cow. Conservative MP John Cummins (Delta-Richmond East) has reviewed the Tsawwassen tax agreements in advance of the treaty vote in Parliament. His findings have generated little interest. This treaty should be unacceptable to anyone committed to democracy, yet the Parliament of Canada is fixated on the Mulroney-Schreiber saga. Winston Churchill once said democracy is the worse form of government, except for all the others. Does the federal government think he was wrong? If you are supportive of this commentary, please consider becoming a supporter of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and add your voice to the campaign for lower taxes, less waste and more accountable government. Click here to become a supporter. --30-- For further information contact: John Williamson, Federal Director, CTF - Ottawa Ph: 1-613-234-6554

Next >

[ Back ]

Ron Gray Defends Freedom of Speech

Ron Gray, National Leader of the Christian Heritage Party, appeared on the Miracle Channel's Insight program, hosted by Paul Arthur. on Wednesday. Ron explained the urgency of defending freedom of speech and talked about the current situation with the Human Rights Commission. As he said so well: "If an agency of the government can tell a political party what it may or may not say, we no longer live in a democracy."

Listen to the interview here---Audio only--plays instantly

Watch the complete broadcast on video---Takes about 5 minutes to download on High Speed

Ron Gray Legal Defence Fund
Money will be needed for court costs and legal expenses. We’re asking every Canadian who believes in freedom and Biblical morality to help. As in all cases of this nature, taxpayers are forced to fund the case for the complainant but those who wish to defend freedom in Canada must pay their own costs. All donations to Ron’s legal defence fund, of any size, are important.

Please send cheques to:

Ron Gray Legal Defence Fund
c/o Ronald McDonald Law Office
406 Stafford Dr.
Lethbridge, AB
T1J 2L2

How Much Do You Know About Roe?

Take the Roe IQ Test
Sure, Roe v. Wade is American Law
but Canadian law is very close.

Sign a Petition to Eliminate the Human Rights Commissions

John Pacheco at Socon or Bust has a petition to get rid of the useless, costly and dangerous human rights commissions. You can sign it or comment on it here.

CHP Leader to Discuss ‘Human Rights’ Cases on Miracle Channel Wednesday

Does a registered federal political party have a right to promote the policies it has held for 20 years?

Does a Christian have a right to state publicly that he (or she) regards homosexuality as immoral, unnatural and unhealthy?

Ron Gray, National Leader of the Christian Heritage Party of Canada, will be interviewed on these and other questions relating to the ‘gay rights’ conflict in Canada, Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2007 on the Miracle Channel’s Insight program, hosted by Paul Arthur. The main topic of the interview will be three human rights complaints brought against the CHP, one of its Electoral District Associations, and Mr. Gray .

The human rights allegations against the CHP bring into sharp focus the conflict between the rights of free speech, freedom of religious, freedom of conscience, and the political liberties guaranteed in Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, on the one hand; and the ‘equality rights’ for sexual orientation that were deliberately excluded from the Charter by Parliament, but later forced into the Charter—unconstitutionally, Mr. Gray contends—by the Supreme Court, bypassing the role of Parliament and the provincial legislatures in amending Canada’s Constitution (of which the Charter is a part).

Mr. Gray and the CHP are merely the latest in a long line of defendants subjected to ‘human rights’ allegations by militant homosexual activists. Earlier victims of the purge of free speech rights have included Toronto printer Scott Brockie; Hugh Owens of Saskatchewan, in whose case a judge declared that citing Bible verses made his newspaper advertisements “hate”; an elderly couple in PEI who had to close their Bed & Breakfast establishment because they did not want two unrelated men sleeping together in their home; Craig Chandler of Calgary, who wrote a letter to the editor of the Red Deer Advocate denouncing the ‘gay agenda’; Dr. Chris Kempling, a BC teacher with a doctorate in counselling psychology, who was punished by his employer for advocating CHP policies about homosexuality, when he sought the nomination as a CHP candidate; Rev. Stephen Boissoin of Calgary, convicted by an Alberta ‘human rights’ tribunal for writing a letter to the editor expressing his concerns about homosexuality. Other victims of the ‘human rights’ campaign against free speech have included Mark Harding of Toronto, accused of fomenting hatred when he published a booklet complaining that Christian prayers were not allowed at his daughters’ school, but a room was set aside for Muslim prayers. And now, internationally renowned columnist Mark Steyn has been accused before the Canadian Human Rights Commission of ‘Islamophobia’.

“If an agency of the government can tell a registered political party what it can and cannot say in advancing its policies,” notes Mr. Gray, “Canada has gone a long, long way down the road to totalitarianism—to becoming a one-party (militant Secularist) state. What the human rights commissions and others forget is that Secularism is also a religion—perhaps the most intolerant in the world; it seeks to drive every other faith out of the public square.”

The Miracle Channel is available coast-to-coast by satellite; or on the Internet by live streaming at www.miraclechannel.ca

PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING HOURS AND TIME ZONES

as a follow up to the previous email 're chp on television'

*Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2007 on the Miracle Channel’s Insight program, hosted by Paul Arthur.

10:00 PACIFIC STANDARD TIME

11:00 MOUNTAIN STANDARD TIME

12:00 CENTRAL TIME

1:00 EST

2:00 ATLANTIC TIME

2:30 NEWFOUNDLAND TIME

Comments on the proposed Social Justice 12 Curriculum

by Rod Taylor

Background: the BC Ministry of Education, in cooperation with Attorney General Wally Oppal, made a deal with two homosexual teachers (Corren and Corren), which gave the two men unprecedented influence over the development of new curricula for use in BC schools. The following commentary points out several obvious problem passages for family-values advocates.

The following comments on the proposed Social Justice 12 “Integrated Resource Package” (Curriculum) are merely specific points in regard to this blatant attempt by the BC government to introduce significant philosophical changes to current public school curricula.

These changes lack the warrant of proper public dialogue, and do not conform to the specific wording of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and fail the dictates of common sense.

These changes, initiated by the Corren Settlement Agreement, whereby two citizens have been given disproportionate influence over the curricula of the BC Education system, seem designed primarily to foster change in the sexual attitudes and lifestyle choices of young people.

P. 37 contains an attack on “religion” as a negative influence on public policies and practice; then encourages thinking based on this premise and lays a groundwork for the dismissal of policies “originating” from these beliefs.

P. 38 throws “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” into a list of other personal identification characteristics, and suggests that these newly-contrived aspects of personhood might lead to marginalization or oppression, thus eliciting from sincere students a desire to become “agents of change”.

P. 39 injects further “moral impetus” for students to work to create new protected categories, insinuated by the authors, such as “addictions, secular worldviews (merely another form of religion that denies a personal God) and the environment (clearly a call for students to jump on Al Gore’s bandwagon).”

P. 41 clearly places all gender-orientation issues (personal lifestyle choices) in the same category as race and gender in terms of potential discrimination. This is contrary to logic.

The endless appeal to victimhood is not justified by history.

P.42 is full of heavily propagandized language designed to move students towards a worldview different than that of their parents and the historical and cultural roots of our nation. Prostitution (“sex-trade”) and animals are loosely thrown into a discussion purported to be about human rights as protected under Canada’s Charter. The assumption that all lifestyle choices—such as prostitution—are of equal value, and that animals should be protected by the Charter, are imaginative positions inconsistent with logic and history.

The authors go far beyond any legitimate effort to encourage students’ thinking, and here show that their true intent is to tell students HOW and WHAT they should think.

Finally, the invitation for students to write a positive commentary on how the Civil Marriage Act (the 2005 endorsement of same-sex marriage forced upon Canadians by a partially ‘whipped’ vote [Cabinet ministers were not allowed to vote their conscience]) “promotes social justice.” This is clearly not meant to lead to an open-ended discussion of the Act, its pros and cons, but an endorsement of same-sex “marriage”. Note that the invivation is only for positive comments; the possibility that students might be aware of negative social consequences flowing from this Act is excluded. That exclusion typifies the one-sidedness of this IRP.

All the above, which barely scrapes the surface of this terrible piece of work, should be sufficient to send this draft curriculum AND the companion curriculum “Making Space, Giving Voice” the overbroad and under-thought K-12 equivalent, back to the drawing board.

Family-values advocates, who actually represent a large segment of BC’s population, should be involved in the draft FROM the BEGINNING (real input) not merely be given a token opportunity to respond after the damage is done.

Patrick Carroll's Research and the ABC Debate

by Colin Mason Population Research Institute Rates of breast cancer are skyrocketing in countries which have legalized abortion. But this suggestion--that abortion causes breast cancer--causes radical feminists, who are otherwise greatly concerned about breast cancer--to go into spasms of denial. This is why it is vitally important to the pro-life cause that the ABC link be investigated rationally, documented carefully, and presented convincingly. British statistician Patrick Carroll, who is Director of Research at Britain’s Pension and Population Research Institute, has done just that in his new study, "Assessing the Damage," which was just published on October 25th of this year. Some years ago, Carroll recognized that the U.K., because of the all-pervasive British Medical System and the public funding of abortions, has some of the most complete data on abortion, breast cancer, and other illnesses available anywhere. He used this data, which spans the 40 years since the legalization of abortion in 1967, to see if it showed any connection between abortion and suiicide, mental illness, and breast cancer in each of the U.K.'s four regions: England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. He also looked at other medical sequalae of abortion, such as the level of mental illness and subsequent suicide rates. According to official figures, the modal age for abortions in England is 20, while the modal age for live births is 30. Women are marrying later, if at all, and the proportion of pregnancies among unmarried women continues to grow. Many of these women seek abortions. Of the 180,000 abortion in 2006, 100,000 were performed on women who had no prior abortions, while 80,000 were performed on women who have at least one prior abortion. Carroll's study shows, as one might suspect, that mental illness is more common following first-time abortion. As the number of first-time abortions grows, so has antidepressant use. Thirty-one million prescriptions were written in England in 2006, a nearly 10 million increase over the 21.3 million written in 2001. Most importantly, however, his study clarifies why there has been a radical upswing in the incidence of British breast cancer since the legalization of abortion. Rates of breast cancer have risen by an incredible 80 per cent since the late seventies. Carroll begins by noting that upper class women are more likely to develop breast cancer and more likely to have abortions. "The social gradient for female breast cancer is unlike that of other cancers with upper class women having a higher rate of incidence than those from lower social classes," Carroll writes. "As in other countries this is termed a negative or reverse social gradient for female breast cancer . . British official publications report on the social gradient but do not explain it in terms of known risk factors." This reverse social gradient for breast cancer is far too steep to be explained by the fact that upper-class women are having children later in life, when the risk for breast cancer is more severe. Rather, Carroll explains, "upper class and upwardly mobile women are more likely to choose abortion when they are pregnant and this helps to explain this otherwise inexplicable social gradient. Upper class women tend to postpone childbearing and have a later age at first birth. Abortions before full-term pregnancies are the more carcinogenic nulliparous [first-time] abortions." The results? After a judicious parsing of the data, Carroll concludes: "Breast cancer can be considered a long term sequel to abortion." Although the causes of breast cancer are not completely understood, it is commonly accepted that hormonal changes play a large role. Pregnancy causes breast cells to grow and divide. An abortion interrupts this process, leaving large number of undifferentiated cells which are especially susceptible to cancer. The media in the U.K., not surprisingly, have not been kind to Carroll's study and the British medical establishment has yet to comment. What can they say, after all? The data on abortions and breast cancer come from the government itself, and are not subject to "recall bias," or any of the other shortcomings that normally afflict survey data. The argument is clear and convincing. While Carroll ends by calling for further study, he also makes it clear that he thinks the facts speak for themselves. "The correlation [between breast cancer and abortion] is much higher than for other known risk factors such as Childlessness, Age at First Birth and Fertility," he says. He goes on to point out that "Modelling using abortion and birth rates as explanatory variables has been used to make forecasts for eight countries for the future incidence of female breast cancer." When you can not only explain the past, but offer predictions of the future, you are in possession of a very powerful theory indeed. We have long been convinced at PRI that the abortion breast cancer link is fact. Carroll's work should help convince all those who are not blinded by the ideology of choice. Colin Mason is the Director for Media Production at PRI.

Sign up for the Weekly Briefing Here Media Contact: Colin Mason Email: colin@pop.org (540) 622-5240, ext. 209 _________ (c) 2007 Population Research Institute. Permission to reprint granted. Redistribute widely. Credit required. _________ PRI is a 501(c)(3) educational organization. If you would like to make a tax-deductible donation to PRI, please go to our Donations Page. All donations (of any size) are welcomed and appreciated. _________ The pro-life Population Research Institute is dedicated to ending human rights abuses committed in the name of "family planning," and to ending counter-productive social and economic paradigms premised on the myth of "overpopulation." Find us at www.pop.org. PRI, PO Box 1559, Front Royal, VA 22630 USA Phone: 540-622-5240

Divorce is Bad for the Environment

A really inconvenient truth: Divorce is not green. Dec. 3, 2007

EAST LANSING, Mich. — The data are in. Divorce is bad for the environment.

A novel study that links divorce with the environment shows a global trend of soaring divorce rates has created more households with fewer people, has taken up more space and has gobbled up more energy and water. The findings of Jianguo “Jack” Liu and Eunice Yu at Michigan State University are published in this week’s online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences...

Posted on Solarion by RavenII Read the whole article

Parents Research Group Exposes Details of Corren Agreement

1. A contract was given by the B.C. government to two homosexual activists in April 2006. The contract grants special privileges to the Corren's to review the re-writing of the B.C. school curriculum from Kindergarten to Grade 12.

2. The Corren's are two homosexual activists, living together, who combined their names to one surname---Corren.

3. The intent of the contract is to cause the entire B.C. school curriculum to reflect a favourable portrayal of homosexuals and the homosexual lifestyle.

4. No other persons or groups were granted equal privileges.

5. The revised Social Justice Course (Grade 12) us already being taught in schools.

6. The Teachers Guide to teach the revised curriculum in all grades, (all subjects) is slated to be finalized for September 2008.

7. Parents rights are ignored. Will this teaching not contradict the religious, traditional, moral and cultural values of the parents?

8. Numerous reputable, established organizations are collaborating to protest the revising of the B.C. school curriculum..

9. To join the protest, contact PARENTS RESEARCH GROUP (Len Remple) lenremple@shaw.ca

Commie-Commission strikes again---Report from EPC

Friday, November 23, 2007

Christian Heritage Party investigated for writings about homosexuality

Canada's Christian Heritage Party and its leader, Ron Gray, are being taken to the Canadian Human Rights Commission over commentary and opinion related to how the government and society should treat homosexuality. And Gray says he's been told directly by an employee of the Human Rights Commission that the Canadian Human Rights Act is "about censorship".

Complaint centres in part on re-posting of 5-year old WorldNetDaily.com news article

An Edmonton man, Rob Wells, has filed three complaints against Gray and his party. Two of them relate to the reposting of an item first published on WorldNetDaily.com back in April of 2002; an article written by Jon Dougherty entitled "Report: Pedophilia more common among 'gays' - Research purports to reveal 'dark side' of homosexual culture". The third complaint is against Ron Gray personally for several commentaries he wrote and distributed to party members. One of those commentaries, entitled "Sitcom prophet", likened the current climate of debate about homosexuality in Canada to the "Cone of Silence" in the 1960's-era television situation comedy "Get Smart", where the two leading characters would isolate themselves in a room where no-one could hear them, but they couldn't hear one another either. Gray wrote in the commentary that: "The problem with Canada's 'Cone of Silence' over the issue of homosexuality is that, like the security device in 'Get Smart', the inevitable result is that no one can communicate anything - and even the truth gets silenced."

In an exclusive interview with noapologies.ca, Ron Gray says the complaints filed against him and his party allege they are "motivated by hate, and defaming homosexual persons."

Ron Gray: "Commission employee told me: 'Canadian Human Rights Act is about censorship.'"

And, he says, when he had a conversation with a Commission employee, mediator Bob Fagan, about the specifics of the allegation, he was astonished at what he heard. "I told him that it seemed to be an abuse of the Human Rights Act for someone to try and use it as an instrument of censorship. And when I said that, on the phone, there was a pause and then he said, in a somewhat astonished tone: 'But the Human Rights Act is about censorship'. Then it was my turn to be silent on my end, because I found that breath-taking. For the Human Rights Commission's own mediator to acknowledge that censorship was the purpose of their Act."

Gray: "Charge me under the Criminal Code; I'm perfectly willing to risk going to jail."

And Gray says as fas as the "hate motivation" is concerned, nothing could be further from the truth. "I would contend", he says, "that Christians are the best friends homosexuals have because we want to see them delivered from an addiction that will shorten their lives." Gray also says he'd be much happier fighting this battle in a regular court rather than before the Canadian Human Rights Commission, where the usual rules of evidence don't apply. "If (Mr. Wells) truly believes I am motivated by hate, his complaint should not be before the Human Rights Commission. He should charge me under Section 319 of the Criminal Code (of Canada). That carries with is the possiblity of two years in jail, but in defence of the (free speech) rights of Canadians I am perfectly willing to risk going to jail."

We'll have the full interview with Ron Gray on our "week in review" program this weekend.

To read more...

To listen on line...

Gifts of the Nation of Canada

Pastor Charlie Carlick
Prince Rupert, BC

When I was in the Yukon doing some evangelistic work in the year 2000, I was suddenly awakened about 4:30 or 5:00 in the morning by a voice that was speaking into my spirit; and it proceeded as such:

He said son, “What does the Yukon mean to you”? And as if I knew the answer I replied, “Gold. The Yukon is known for its gold.” And He said “Yes, and what does gold mean to you?” I replied, “Purity.” And He said,” That’s right!”

And then He said, “Go on. What is the next province?” I said, “BC.“ And he said, “What does BC mean to you?” I said, “BC, as far as I know, is known for its huge timber.” And He said, “Yes. Go to the mountain and get timber to build my temple.”

And then he went on to say, “What’s next?” I said, “Alberta.” And I heard Him say. “Yes, go on, what is Alberta known for?” I said, ”Alberta is known for its oil!” And his response was, “That is correct. And what does oil mean to you?” I said, “It means the anointing of God.”

By now I was getting a picture in my mind’s eye of what He was feeding into my spirit.

He was saying, “Through the purity of God is built the temple of God and through the purity of the temple of God flows the anointing of God.”

Then he continued on by asking, “What is the next province?” And I said “Saskatchewan.” Then He asked me. “What does Saskatchewan, bring to your mind?” And I said, “The image that comes to mind is wheat.” And his response was, “That’s right, and what does wheat refer to?” And I replied, “Wheat refers to the bread basket of Canada and also the anointed word of God.”

So we went on to the next province, Manitoba, and he said, “What comes to your mind about Manitoba?” And I responded to his question, “I see in my mind an image of a buffalo on a flag.” “And what does the buffalo mean to you?” He asked. And I replied, “ It signifies the power of God and growth through the word of God.”

Then we proceeded on to the province where Canada is governed from, Ontario. And He said “What does Ontario mean to you?” And my spirit spoke and said, “It stands for the government of Canada, governed by the pure word of God. “That is correct”, He said.

Then we moved from the governing province on to Quebec and He questioned me again. “What does this province mean to you?” And the words rang out of my spirit that the French people are known for “love” and love speaks of God’s love for the lost through the word of God.

Then he asked, “What are the last three provinces?” And in return I said. “They are the Maritime provinces.” “And what do they mean to you?” He asked. I said what comes into my spirit is this: “They represent the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit at the Eastern gate.” (The gospel first came from the East to the West).

There was then a brief moment of silence and He said. “There is more.” Then it came into my spirit, and I replied, “Yes there is the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. He said. “Yes, and what does the Northwest Territories mean to you, and what significance does it have in relationship to God?” And again it came into my spirit first of all: “Didn’t they just find diamonds in the Northwest Territories?” And I said. “Yes, and it is now well known for its diamonds and the diamonds in the spirit refers to the sovereignty of God and all His glory.”

Last of all was Nunavat, the newest territory of Canada and all that could come to my mind was ice as in a desert place. And then I heard in my spirit, “What is ice made from?” And I said “Water?” He said, “That’s right! And what is happening up there now?” I said, “As far as I know the ice is melting.” And again He said, “That’s right, and what does water refer to in the word of God?” And my spirit said, “The flowing of the Holy Ghost through the word of God for Canada.”

Therefore He summed it up as such:

The Word of God over Canada.

• Through the purity of God comes the temple of God.

• Through the temple of God flows the anointing of God.

• Through the anointing of God comes the Word of God.

• Through the word of God comes the power of God.

• Through the power of God comes the love of God through the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit through the Eastern gate.

• And finally, the sovereignty of God hovering over Canada through the Holy Ghost.

Canada! “Be ye holy as I am holy.”

All this transpired in a very short time in the dim light of the morning. He spoke to me in a language that I could understand and I write it in the same manner---very simple!

I received this message in the year 2000 and the message rings clear as the day that it was birthed into my spirit on that cold dim morning in the Yukon Territory in the land of the midnight sun.

Pastor Charlie Carlick
530 6th Ave West
Prince Rupert, BC
V8J 1Z6

October 17, 2007

Friends of the Family Farm Meet in the Old Church in Smithers

A group of concerned citizens calling itself Friends of the Family Farm met at the Old Church in Smithers, BC on Saturday, October 27 to discuss the future of the family farm in the wake of provincial legislation aimed at eliminating "Farm Gate" sales and uninspected abbatoir (slaughtering) operations.

The group, composed of market gardeners, livestock producers, human rights advocates, abbatoir operators, consumers and advocates of personal freedom are concerned that such a restrictive approach to commerce between neighbours will limit their ability to purchase food for their families from trusted local sources. Additional concerns focused on exorbitant costs and liabilities with farmers being forced to invest unrealistic amounts of money into equipment, transportation and staffing. These costs are seen as prohibitive to new producers and discouraging to those currently in the business. The group sees a reduction in local production as inevitable unless the current legislation is modified.

A cheerful and cooperative atmosphere accompanied the meeting and as it was noted, the participants came from a diversity of philosophical backgrounds and experience. The shared concerns highlighted the broad-based ideals of personal freedom, enterpreneurial indepedence and the health and well-being of the family .

After covering the issue from a variety of angles, the group agreed to pursue a cohesive thrust by helping to form a network with other organizations with similar objectives and concerns which have sprung up around the province. The group plans to encourage the provincial government to include limits of scale in the legislation, ensuring public safety in the large-scale operations which provide food for most BC urban dwellers while incorporating the freedom of consumers to purchase locally-grown meat and produce from trusted sources. The farm-gate sale of produce has not been legislated but attendees agreed that if meat regulations were allowed to stand, the regulation and mandatory inspection of green leafy vegetables would not be far behind.

Members of the public who wish to support this initiative to preserve consumer choice and protect the small-scale family farm are encouraged to contact Rod Taylor (847-3990) in Smithers. Letters to your MLA are also in order. A website will soon be established and educational materials will be made available. It is expected that once the public understands the implications of this legislation, widespread opposition will be evident in both urban and rural areas because of the loss of consumer choice.

Unicef Claims Afghan Children More at Risk

by Rod Taylor
As reported by the CBC, Unicef spokesmen are raising the alarm over the dangers faced by Afghan children by bombing, suicide attacks and starvation. Strangely, for all their apparent concern for the safety of children, Unicef supports and promotes around the world the deliberate killing of children by abortion.

This schizophrenic approach to the issues of life and death has well-meaning schoolchildren in the US and Canada trick-or-treating for Unicef to help starving children, while the organization embraces brutal population control measures and promotes the taking of innocent human life.

Readers are encouraged to seek out other humanitarian organizations to support---ones which don't condone the killing of innocent children.