When we want to go to hell, sometimes we need to just let down the barricades.

Have at it. 

The great thing is that both the Left and the Right feel vindicated at the same time.

The Left thinks it’s all about progress, while the Right looks at it and says, “that’s a righteous punishment for the stupidity of your sin”.

I just can’t wait until some Feminist gets assailed in those new trans-washrooms.  That’ll be a real hoot.

You really have to wonder if there are any breaks on the Left’s Chevy Van.  It’s really quite amazing.

In 2008, Fr. Rosica interviewed Dalton McGuinty as a “devout” practicing Catholic on his program Witness. McGuinty, in talking about his faith, stated that he’s a practicing Catholic, but differs with the Holy Father on the issues of abortion and “same-sex marriage”. Rosica said nothing and just kept nodding and then went on to something else. Some viewers were outraged and sickened by the scandalous message Rosica was sending out, and wrote to him. They received no reply from Rosica and the program was repeated on at least two occasions.

It sure is good to know all of the Catholic establishments are so anchored in the Faith and show such wonderful prudence in the company they keep.

This is an absolutely brilliant idea.

You go, Bill.  You ‘da best!

OTTAWA – Conservative MPs are under intense pressure from  the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) to vote against a Tory MP’s non-binding   motion that calls on Parliament to study when human life begins. 

Tory sources say Prime Minister Stephen Harper wants southern Ontario MP   Stephen Woodworth’s motion eliminated before Parliament rises for the summer   in late June. Read the rest of this entry »

“….What next? If one student says the communion wafer and wine aren’t really the body and blood of Christ, then the school has to adjust its theology accordingly? This is the educational equivalent of the inmates taking over the asylum…” (Source)

Right on, Christina.  Blizzard has become more conservative in the last few years.  It’s an encouraging sign that maybe hippiedom is growing up.

Everyone knows that Harper, to his credit, is big on preventing maternal deaths in the developing world.  But we also know where he stands on abortion too.

Well, here’s a little gem that should cause him to rethink his position.

What is more important to Stephen Harper?  Lowering Maternal Deaths or Supporting Abortion?

Which is it, Mr. Harper?

The Catholic Diocese of Erie’s lawsuit against the federal government highlights the rift between some in the Catholic hierarchy and the White House over birth-control coverage.

The suit also reveals local tension over the very same issue.

Not all Catholic institutions within the diocese are adhering to the tenets that the diocese, in the suit, said are sacrosanct for Catholics and Catholic organizations…(Source)

The Emperor has no clothes.

So, let me get this straight.  The Catholic Diocese of Erie is suing Obama for something that it already tolerates within its own jurisdiction?

As Michael Voris pointed out to me while we were having lunch on Thursday:  “What’s the big deal with the HHS lawsuit?  28 Dioceses already permit this stuff.” Read the rest of this entry »

From a Socon or Bust reader who submitted this letter to Maclean’s:

RE: The conservative stance on abortion you didn’t know about,
Maclean’s, May 14, 2012, p. 4-5

It would seem that all of the arguments being put forward against MP Stephen Woodworth’s motion proposing a re-examination of the definition of what constitutes a human being, are political in nature.  I have yet to hear a reasoned argument against the motion itself, i.e. providing solid evidence that an unborn child is not indeed a human being.

What if it turns out that we are right now denying the most basic of human rights to certain members of our society?  We’ve been wrong in the past regarding similar assumptions that in the mainstream were taken as a given; women, for instance, were not considered persons under Canadian law until 1929.

Only by putting aside the rhetoric and the slogans, and holding a full and honest debate, can we get to the bottom of important societal issues.  Shame on our Parliament, and on Canada, should we lack the courage to do so.

Thank you,
Glen G.

We’ve all heard many politicians use cowardly cop-outs while conceding ground to the Culture of Death. One of the classic lines is “I’m personally opposed to [insert depravity here], but I can’t impose my beliefs on others.”

Well, the shoe was on the other foot last week for the March for Life. Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson proclaimed May 10th as “Respect for Life Day” in Ottawa, as he did last year. This triggered some angry reactions from a few pro-choicers, who attacked the mayor on Facebook and Twitter. The mayor’s response was a new twist on a familiar theme: Read the rest of this entry »

All 50 of them took off just before the March started down Ottawa’s streets.

So, uh, Mr. Harper, I assume you can count.  What are you afraid of?

Media hype and people who don’t even show?  What makes you think they’ll show up on Election night, either?

The “Conservative” Party really does need to learn how to count.

Thanks to Obama.

This whole sham effort by “pro-life Democrats” is a sucker punch.

They know they are bleeding support and they are losing on the abortion question. This is a fact.

It’s also a fact that the power brokers in the Democratic Party are never going to allow the pro-life voice to have any influence at all.

It’s also a fact that they’re not stupid on how to play the politics of abortion.

So they need to be seen as “widening their tent” to tolerate pro-life voices so they can say how “draconian” and “close minded” the Republicans are.

In other words they’ve initiated this “useful idiot” campaign to make people who are naturally inclined to the Democratic Party feel better that they’re “accepted” in the Party.

It’s a way of getting their vote and that’s it.  And it might be enough to sway people back who have seen what the Democratic Party really has become: a shill for Planned Parenthood.

Politics is a sucker’s game.

Anything less than a firm determination to sacrifice for one’s values will not survive the homosexual onslaught.

Those nations that resist Sodom’s advance will be blessed by God.

By coincidence, the same day O’Connor spoke those stirring words in the House of Commons, the government announced it would appeal an Ontario Court of Appeal ruling that had struck down key anti-prostitution laws. This was expected. The Conservatives have vociferously opposed any suggestion that the prostitution laws — which do not forbid prostitution per se but effectively make it impossible to do it without committing a crime — should be curtailed in any way.

So how does that square with the government’s declarations on abortion? Try replacing the word “abortion” in any part of Gordon O’Connor’s statement with “prostitution.”

“Whether one accepts it or not, prostitution is and always will be part of society. There will always be dire situations in which some women may have to choose the option of prostitution. No matter how many laws some people may want government to institute against prostitution, prostitution cannot be eliminated. It is part of the human condition.”

Fits rather nicely, doesn’t it?
…

Then there’s marijuana and the other illicit drugs the government is making war on. Try plugging them into O’Connor’s statement.

“I cannot understand why those who are adamantly opposed to drug use want to impose their beliefs on others by way of the Criminal Code. There is no law that says a person must use drugs. No one is forcing those who oppose drugs to use them.”

Again, the fit is close to perfect.

…

So what’s left? Why does the government think its ringing words apply to abortion but not to other moral choices? Simple. In O’Connor’s statement, he objects to “new laws” that curtail personal freedom but says that the exercise of that freedom must respect “current law.”

Today, there is no law banning abortion. But there are laws banning prostitution and drugs.

Thus, what looks like a highly principled statement about the relationship between morality and liberty in a pluralistic society is actually something less grand: It is a lazy and weak defence of the status quo.

Source

Boy, Dan Gardner really does slam the Conservative Government’s rationale for opposing any laws on abortion while concurrently proposing laws to keep prostitution and needle exchanges at bay.

It really does show how ridiculously shallow Harper and his cronies are on this question. They are hardly consistent in the arguments they employ in refusing to consider any law regulating abortion while blissfully dismissing those same arguments when it’s an easier “sell”.  It shows them to be the lowest of the low of the political class, pandering to what they think will keep them in power.  In fact, the brutal enforcement of the will without any consideration for justice, reason, science or the most basic decency is exactly what abortion is, and that’s the script that today’s Conservative government reads from too.

Pathetic.

….It appears that Obama and his team misunderstood American Catholics, and indeed the public more broadly. I think it comes down to a misunderstanding of how Americans live out their “cafeteria Catholicism” in practice: Sure, they reserve the right to disobey Church teachings — but they acknowledge the right of the bishops to define the teachings that they are disobeying. We might put it this way: They do not take kindly to being bullied by bishops, but — and here’s the shock to the Obamaites — they also don’t much like it when bishops are bullied by someone else. Nobody likes a bully, and Obama showed himself to be one in this controversy….(Source)

The Messiah miscalculated on this one, big time.  Now he’s put his next term on the line, instead of being smart and pulling this stunt after the election. Now there is the potential for a “religious war” of sorts in the election.

Bad move, Barry.  You’ve awakened something that really is way, way above your pay-grade.

So, Prime Minister Stephen Harper “there’s-not-going-to-be-a-debate-no-way-no-how” plan hasn’t really worked out that way.  The debate is here, Steve, so you need to deal with it…now and in the future.  I’m sure there’ll be at least 2 other Bills coming round your way before your 4 year term is up.

Anyhow, Gordon O’Connor, one of his Ministers, has stepped up for the pro-abort side to offer the same lame arguments that have not changed since the ’60s – except this time he did it in Parliament.

You have to wonder just how long these arguments can withstand some basic logic and basic science, but I’m not complaining because he’s been useful in creating “the debate”, if only to make Harper look completely unreasonable and flakey on the most pressing moral issue of the day.  It’s bizarre.

Anyhow, I digress.  Back to Gord.  Let’s take a look at some of Gord’s recycled arguments and see if they hold any water….

Read the rest of this entry »

Speaking in the House of Commons’ first hour of debate on Motion 312, Tory MP Stephen Woodworth said: “Canadians expect parliamentarians to embody that courage, that strength, that principled quest for the truth. Will we be seen as bold for the sake of truth, or as fearful? We can trust Canadians to embrace the truth with us.”

MP Stephen Woodworth speaking at the National March for Life on Parliament Hill in 2011.

The Kitchener MP has called on Parliament to establish a special committee to re-examine section 223 of the Criminal Code, a 400-year-old provision inherited from British common law that states a child only becomes a “human being” once he or she has fully proceeded from the womb.

“How many Canadians believe that birth is a moment of magical transformation that changes a child from a non-human to a human being?” he asked in the House Thursday. “Perhaps that ancient definition made sense when leeches and bloodletting were standard medical practices, but does it make medical sense in the 21st century?”…

“If basic rights can be denied to even one vulnerable person, they can be denied to anyone,” he said. “If we accept a law that decrees some human beings are not human, the question that must be asked is: Who is next?”… (Source)

 

To answer his question above: ”anyone who is a burden or in the way” – the handicapped, the elderly, undesirable infants.  Anyone who doesn’t fit the lifestyle or eugenic mold. That’s what “abortion” has blessed our society with.

If you listen to the pro-life arguments, you will see that they are balanced, sober, humane, and backed up by hard science.  The pro-abort side’s arguments are still stuck in the sixties. They’re also lame with no real substance.  The pro-aborts are showing themselves to be knuckle-dragging, anti-science bigots.

Every year that advances is a “baby step” closer to abortion being overturned.  It’s inevitable. The only question is the timing.  How soon can pro-lifers (and God) make it happen?  That’s the only question.

If you look at great leaders in history, they are not considered great because of their economic tricks which they championed.  On the contrary, they are considered heroes or despots because of their view of the human person.  Abraham Lincoln opposed slavery. People remember him for that, not the rest of his politics.  Hitler hated the Jews, even though he was a cracker-jack at pulling Germany out of the economic dumps.  Nobody gives him much credit for the latter.  Likewise with Reagan and Thatcher.  They might have been great leaders on the economy, but they will be remembered for their fight against the Communists not on growing the economy or putting the boots to the Unions.  Read the rest of this entry »