4 MY Canada

2010-05-03T14:35:00.000-07:00

by Ashley Beaudin

The abortion debate is currently lingering in Canada’s national atmosphere, initiated by the bold move made by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in recent weeks. Harper stood alone among the G8 in opposing abortion as part of family-planning projects in poor nations. This one decision has given Canada an anti-abortion stance on the world stage.

As a young person, I want to speak into a debate that has created more noise than it needs. In a global time of experiencing more death, disease, and disaster on children than ever before in history, it would be wise to value life in the womb. As a Canadian society, we have always presumed that we would be gifted with the ability to bear the greatest gift, children. It demands the question be asked, would it take complete barrenness of mankind in order for the human race to realize this treasure called life that lies in the womb?

It seems ironic to me for abortion to even be included in family planning. Abortion is not planning for a family. Abortion is planning for no family. The debate of abortion has been transformed into a debate of choice. Yet I find it intriguing how the third world had no choice to whether the aborting of their babies would even be funded. We see injustice in a set of first world nations making a decision for a set of third world nations who have no voice, yet we see complete reason in a woman making a decision for a child who has no voice? Perspective is precious.

Choice is a powerful thing. Suddenly, we find in our hands the option to give life or to take life and the option to protect little ones or completely exploit them. The difficulty about choice is that our decisions now are creating the legacy for future generations, whether that legacy is wanted or unwanted. When the generations shift places, we will hand to the younger generation a legacy, and it will not be our choice what that legacy looks like then, but it is our choice what that legacy looks like now.

I must say, as it is my generation who has experienced higher abortion rates than in any other generation, I look around and see half my generation missing and it causes me to wonder: what was so good about me that I could live?

Published in Yorkton

2010-04-19T14:12:00.001-07:00

An article by one of our Members, Ashely Beaudin, published in the Ottawa Citizen on April 17th, 2010.

2010-04-19T14:10:00.001-07:00

UNIVERSITIES ARE STIFLING FREEDOM OF SPEECH
by Sarah Sonne
The Guelph Mercury, December 15 2008

Lakehead University in Thunder Bay has announced it is modifying its student union constitution to require campus clubs displays and publications to be positive in nature.
Effectively, this means environmental clubs cannot spread literature about the negative effects of oil spills on northern wildlife, NDP groups cannot publish brochures challenging Conservative policies, and pro-life groups cannot talk or distribute anything about their view on abortion. All negativity has been banned, at the expense of exploration and learning.
This is the latest development in a disturbing trend spreading through Canadian universities that directly threatens freedom of speech and hinders intelligent debate among people seeking higher education.

The University of Guelph recently revoked club status from its pro-life group, and Queen's University in Kingston announced it was introducing conversation facilitators to listen to conversations between students and encourage correct thought on social justice issues.

The irony of this seems lost on universities, which do not realize that in their attempt to make everyone think the same they are creating a new social injustice by restricting freedom of speech and freedom of expression.
Universities are supposed to be a place that presents information to students and allows them to form opinions, think for themselves and debate with others in an academic environment, not a place that forces every student to fit a certain mold through rules and policing.

The human right to not be offended is being used to take human rights away.
The last place I expected this to happen was university. As a graduate I sincerely hope this trend does not continue, because if it does, my university degree will mean next to nothing in a few years.
It will mean nothing more than proof that I learned to tell people what they want to hear, not that I learned to think for myself.

In the name of human rights, please bring the right to freedom of speech back.
It's an important one.

-- Sarah Sonne, Guelph

2010-04-19T14:09:00.003-07:00

LETTER TO THE EDITOR RE: TESTING TESTING, BIGOT 1-2-3
by Craig Macartney
November 20, 2008

I've notice a few trends in our society. Often authorities are afraid of being seemingly racist so they go to extremes to try to make everyone happy. In doing so they often adopt other prejudice. The extent of our efforts (as Canadians) to make sure we do not appear racist has actually ended up building a degree of ethnic prejudice. For example: I worked with a group of people who always complained about Quebec and 'the French.' This was not because they were raised to hate French Canadians, it was a bitterness that came from how difficult it has become for people who don't speak French to find good paying jobs. They all felt that they were being discriminated against as English speaking Canadians while they said French speaking Canadians were more likely to get jobs in Government or around Ottawa.

I have seen similar bias in many areas and for the same reasons but I still believe that the statistics given from the online test are high, so I took the racist test referenced in the article. I found it was really set up with far too much room for error so that you appear racist. It asks you to sort pictures to the right or left, depending on whether the person is white or black and with words that are positive (ie: Joy) or negative (ie: horrible). Then it puts African AND Bad on one side and White AND Good on the other. You have to sort a mixture of faces and words to the right sides. After a while it flips them so that White and Bad are on one side and African and Bad are on the other. This change threw me off because you are supposed to do this fast. I got used to putting the African faces on the left and when it switched I was thrown off. The program reads every mistake that you make a bias against that group. In the end I was told that I am strongly racist against black people. This is totally wrong. I love African people. In fact, my biggest ambition in life is to go to Africa and set up orphanages and programs for the underprivileged and poor people there.

2010-04-19T14:09:00.001-07:00

WHAT'S LEFT TO DEBATE ABOUT ABORTION?
by Amy Good
Guelph Mercury, November 8 2008

It is appalling to hear that one voice is allowed while another is not.
Why and who decides what is and is not appropriate to be discussed in our schools?

As the letter writer stated, this issue of abortion in our country is not settled. People who are pro-life are not anti-choice. They are more concerned with an informed choice.
It actually surprises me that this debate is still going on. I am not sure what is left to debate about this issue. If you want to debate that God says that it is wrong that's fine.

You can't, however, debate with facts. Life begins at conception and this is a scientific proven fact.

I guess the real debate is whether people are willing to see abortion for what it really is, and that is murder of defenceless innocent babies that don't have a voice.

2010-04-19T14:08:00.003-07:00

HOPING FOR CHOICE
by Allison Kach
Guelph Mercury, November 6 2008

Dear Editor - A number of weeks ago, the student union at the U of G voted unanimously to remove club status from a club called Life Choice, arguing an incident last March violated the student union's policy. The club itself was not informed of discrepancies in their actions until they were told their status was cancelled. Where was the transparency and responsible communication on the part of the student government?

The issue of abortion has been heating up throughout the country, with controversial events such as Morgentaler's receipt of the Order of Canada, the subsequent returns of previously awarded Orders, bill C-484 and more. The issue is not settled in Canadians' hearts and minds and it is not going away, so denial of discourse and even educational resources to the public would seem foolish.

The student union has the opportunity to support students who hold a differing view, a view of life, or to deny the appeal of the Life Choice group to keep their status.

This issue has been visited on a number of university campuses in Ontario and those standing for life have been labelled 'anti-choice' and rejected the support of student governments.
If we are really serious about choice, we should be bold enough to allow people the opportunity to all available resources.
Will the U of G set a precedent by supporting groups that do not fit into the cookie-cutter mould of modern humanism, or will it silence voices and opinions of their own students to keep with the crowd? Let's trust they make the right choice.

2010-04-19T14:08:00.001-07:00

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: FREE SPEECH MAY HAVE BEEN ONLY THING BETWEEN HARPER AND A MAJORITY
by Amy Good

The Edmonton Journal, October 24 2008
Re: "Free speech may have been only thing between Harper and majority: Tories have little to lose, much to gain from letting MPs speak their minds,"by In Rebecca Walberg, Opinion, Oct. 23.

It is very interesting how, in the 2006 election, Rod Bruinooge won by only 111 votes, and this time he won by more than 4,000 votes. It seems to me that people like to know whom they are voting for. When politicians are up front with where they stand the on the issues that are personally important to people, it takes the guess-work out of voting! I am pro-family and pro-life. If I lived in Winnipeg South, it would have been a no-brainer for who I would have voted for! Maybe the other MP's can learn a thing or two from Bruinooge's example.

2010-04-19T14:07:00.003-07:00

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: BOLD STANDS REWARDED
by Sven Eric Johnson
Winnipeg Free Press, October 27 2008

I recently read a newspaper article about how the Conservative party did not gain a majority government this time. It might be due to having left some social issues, such as abortion and same sex marriage, undiscussed during the past federal election.
This theory , I believe, can be backed up by the voter turn out with Rod Bruinooge’s landslide victory in the Winnipeg South area. Bruinooge took the seat by a 4,000 votes in what used to be known Liberal territory. Not a bad margin, seeing that throughout his campaign he made it clear that he was taking a pro-life stand if he got elected. It seems to me that it was a good selling point, seeing how in the previous election he won against his Liberal opponent with only 111 votes.

So the question stands, would the Conservatives have won a majority had they spoken up on such issues as these? Nobody knows for sure, but I think if you look around at all those who boldly took a stand on these issues, you’ll probably notice that they are going to be pulling up a chair when it comes time for the House to sit again.

SVEN ERIC JOHNSON
Canwood, SK

2010-04-19T14:07:00.001-07:00

RESPONSE TO EINSTEIN LETTER: BELIEF IN GOD A 'PRODUCT OF HUMAN WEAKNESS'

by Chris Wright
CBC, May 15, 2008

That Einstein did not believe in God is perfectly fair. With that, an unbiased perspective would also acknowledge that many others considered great minds throughout history were believers in and followers of the God of the Bible. An extremely abbreviated list could include: Soren Kierkegaard; Blaise Pascal; J.S. Bach; John Donne; Fyodor Dostoyevsky; Gerard Manley Hopkins; Dr. David Livingstone; Augustine; Francis Schaeffer; C.S. Lewis; George Washington Carver and Martin Luther King, Jr.

A similar contemporary list of scientists and scholars would only begin with such noted living doctors, philosophers and teachers as: Dr. Ben Carson; Dr. Gregory Boyd; Dr. John McRay; Dr. Bruce Metzger; Dr. Alexander Metherell; Dr. J.I. Packer, and many others.

An interesting point raised by Einstein's comment though, is that it is accurate to say that human weakness is connected to the belief in God, though perhaps for different reasons than he suggests. All through history it has been those men and women who have looked honestly at themselves and recognized their moral failings and inherent limitations - their weaknesses, despite whatever their own gifts, intellect and abilities may have been – who have agreed that their own self-righteousness was insufficient. Brilliant thinkers or not, it has been those who have adopted that posture of humility who have found peace, purpose, and meaning; it has always been those not too proud to acknowledge they have failed who have found forgiveness.

Chris Wright

Vancouver, BC

2010-04-19T14:06:00.003-07:00

ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
by Sarah Sonne
The London Press, September 4 2008

The Ontario Human Rights Commission just threw its weight behind a draft being proposed by the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons that would force doctors to "check their beliefs at the door" and provide any medical service a patient desires, under the threat of being dragged into a Human Rights Tribunal. This is insane. When did doctors become a McDonalds drive-through, where we can order whatever we want and they are forced to give it to us, at the threat of losing their license, even if what we are ordering is not in our best interest? And how has Canada, a country which prides itself on diversity and freedom, become an endorser of head-hunting and religious persecution? After 11 years and $120,000 in Medical School, I think doctors have earned the right to say no.
Sarah Sonne, Guelph

2010-04-19T14:06:00.001-07:00

ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION GIVEN UNPRECEDENTED POWER STARTING CANADA DAY
by Sarah Sonne

Human Rights Commissions continue to be at the forefront of issues facing Canadians today. Maclean's magazine is currently under-fire for an article they published about Islam called “The Future Belongs to Islam.” In the article, the author summarizes some of his interviews with Muslim leaders and explains how the population boom of Islamics compared to the extreme decrease in the size of western families is part of their strategy in gaining influence in the western world. The Canadian Islamic Congress promptly complained to the British Columbian, Ontario, and Canadian Human Rights Commissions that the article “could” cause people to become offended, and therefore “could” cause hatred against Muslims. Both Canada and Ontario rejected the complaint, citing that their Code was not broad enough to include articles in magazines, but British Columbia has brought the case to Tribunal.

No one who has ever had a complaint brought against them has won in a Human Rights Tribunal. If that's not scary enough, the Human Rights Commission in Ontario (the Commission responsible for completely changing the way faith-based businesses are run after the Christian Horizon's ruling) will be given unprecedented power within two weeks.

Starting July 30, 2008 there will be a number of significant changes to the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The OHRC has given itself the power to initiate their own complaints and start their own investigations into what they may consider human rights violations. Practically, this means they do not have to wait for someone to complain that a Justice of the Peace would not marry a homosexual couple, the Human Rights Commission can go looking for people unwilling to perform gay marriages and when they find them, make their own complaint, and start their own investigation, and make their own ruling. It stands to reason that if they are the ones making the complaint, their investigation will be extremely biased from the beginning. The Ontario Human Rights Commission has given itself the power to be secret police and go looking for people they can prosecute.

The OHRC will now also have the right to interrupt and change cases before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, if they do not agree with what is happening or with a ruling that the Tribunal has made. This means that even if they are not involved in a human rights complaint being made, they still have the power to step in and decide what the verdict is.

As of July, the OHRC will also be engaging in “pro-active” measures such as public education, policy development, and research and analysis to further their own agendas. They will also “have the power to monitor the state of human rights and report directly to the people of Ontario.” This means that they can go into schools and businesses and promote their own views, regardless of religious freedom or freedom of speech. This will be seen directly in Christian Horizons, where the Human Rights Commission will be stepping in to "help" re-write Christian Horizons' policies regarding faith statements, and training the employees on “human rights” over their religious beliefs.

When a person files a human rights complaint, it will no longer go through the Commission but it will go straight to the Tribunal, and a new legal service called the Human Rights Legal Support Center will give legal support and services to anyone who files a complaint. This means there is no longer any screening service to complaints, and anyone who wants to file a complaint will be given legal advice on how to do it.The logic behind this is to "free up" more time for the OHRC to be pro-active in preventing human rights violations.

Every year, the Human Rights Commission used to have to file a report and submit it to the Attorney General for review. Now they do not have to be reviewed, but can submit whatever they want with direct access to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly. They also have the “power to monitor and report on anything related to the state of human rights in the Province of Ontario” not just the cases they are involved in.

They also will have the power to review any new legislation that is passed in Ontario to make sure that it fits their definition of human rights.Thus it would appear that the OHRC has become the first and final say on anything involving human rights in Ontario and possibly Canada.

In short, this means that the Human Rights Commission of Ontario now has the power to police Ontario with no accountability, and with final say, unless the government steps in and stops them.

You can read the new mandate of the Ontario Human Rights Commission on their website here.
In May of 2008 MP Keith Martin tabled a motion (M-446) calling for a public examination of the Canada Human Rights Act and the Commission and Tribunal that stems from it. The motion calls on the Federal Government to hold public hearings across Canada into this matter. The motion and letter will enable all Canadians to see the current workings of the CHRA and offer solutions that will protect free speech, while protecting people from hate speech. It specifically calls for Section 13 of the Human Rights Act to be deleted, as this is the section being used to fine people for possibly inciting hate crimes by something they may have said. For more information contact:
Office of Dr. Keith Martin
613-996-2625
MartiK@parl.gc.ca
Action Points:

1) Write to your MP, the Justice Minister, and the Liberal and NDP justice critics to let them know of your support for an investigation into the CHRC.
2) Make an appointment this summer to meet with your MP face to face and talk about Human Rights
3) Write a letter to the editor or an article and submit it to your local and national newspapers
4) Pray for the government to have wisdom regarding the Human Rights Commission, protection over socially conservative and faith based groups in Ontario as of July 2008, and favour for everyone appealing a decision by the Human Rights Commissions across Canada.
Here is a brief summary of what the Human Rights Commissions across Canada have been ruling so far in 2008:
June 2008: Update on Reverend Stephen Boissoin. Following a six year trial, the Alberta Human Rights Commission has fined Rev. Boissoin $5,000 and ordered him to renounce his faith after he wrote a letter to the editor in 2002 expressing concern on homosexual agendas in the school system. Rev. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition have been ordered to publicly apologize to the gay community, never express opposition to homosexuality again, and renounce all previous statements on homosexuality. The HRC has not explained where the damage fee is going because there are no defined "victims" to pay the damage fine to.
For practical ways to support Mr. Boisson as he attempts to get his case appealed, please visit his websites here.

June 2008: Catholic Insight Magazine has been burdened with $20,000 in legal fees so far defending itself against human rights complaints from homosexual activitists. In February of 2007, Pride Centre of Edmonton filed a human rights complaint against the monthly Catholic magazine, and 18 months later there has still be no word of whether the case will proceed past the investigation stage. The magazine is also coming under fire from a homosexual couple in Toronto who are attempting to get Insight's funding stripped from Heritage Canada's Publications Assistance Program. The magazine is paying its legal fees with support from donors.
May 2008: In Saskatchewan, Orville Nichols, a Regina marriage commissioner for 25 years, was found guilty of violating the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code for declining to perform a same-sex marriage three years ago. Nichols was fined $2,500 and asked to comply with with the Human Rights Code. If he refuses, he will lose his appointment as a commissioner. As a result of this case, The Human Rights Commission plans on asking every marriage commissioner if they comply with the legislation requiring them to marry same-sex couples. Although this does not affect clergy (they can refuse on the basis of religious beliefs under the Human Rights Code and Charter because they are a religious organization), civil marriage commissioners are required to perform marriages as a public service without religious content, and therefore if they are found in non-compliance they will lose their job.

April 2008: The Ontario Human Rights Commission ruled that Christian Horizons (a Christian care facility) pay former employee Connie Heintz $23,000 plus to compensation for 2 years of lost wages after she was let go because of a lesbian lifestyle, even though when hired she had signed an agreement declaring she was committed to living according to biblical values. The tribunal also found that a company cannot have two main focuses; therefore Christian Horizons cannot be both a care facility and a ministry, and so they cannot screen who they hire on the basis of lifestyle or make new employees sign a Statement of Faith contract. This has major implications not only for Christian Horizons but other faith based service organizations as well (eg. Salvation Army, Pro-Life Centres etc.).

For more on Freedom and Persecution, please visit the Informed Freedom page on MY Canada's website here.

2010-04-19T14:05:00.005-07:00

FORCED TO CHOOSE: A LETTER TO THE DOCTORS OF CANADA
from Cindy Lynne Kieffer
Thank you, for your service as a medical professional to the Nation of Canada. I am writing to you today to share my experience as a young woman during pregnancy. I would like you to know about this experience, so that when you are faced with situations such as mine, you will know a first hand account. I would like to share with you specific events during my time of pregnancy. These events begin with my first doctors appointment to the last time your colleagues were with me. Do not worry; I am not going to share nine whole months of experiences. I am only going to share one month.

On my first doctors appointment I went to see my family doctor but he was not available, so I was taken care of by an attending physician. I found out that I was pregnant. The physician did not talk to me too much about keeping the baby. He did however tell me I had to decide quickly if I wanted an abortion or not. I was confused and scared. He referred me to a gynaecologist. I went to the gynaecologist appointment within a week. He confirmed that I was eight weeks pregnant and he did not discuss pregnancy or childbirth beyond the basic fact that I was physically pregnant. However, he did say that he could book me an appointment to perform the abortion. He did not explain to me how the abortion would affect me or put me at risk. I was still in shock to find out that I was pregnant. I again was uneducated on either side of the issue, but I had to make a quick decision about what to do. I was leaving the doctors office both scared and confused, and then I saw on the wall a poster of the development of a baby. I stepped in to take a closer look and the gynaecologist stepped in front of me and said, "You don't want to look at that, it will only make you confused, and your decision harder." I was unable to think clearly because of the shock I was experiencing. In a daze I just walked out of his office thinking that he knew what was best. My life at that moment literally was in the hands of the professionals. Looking back now I do not understand why my decision had to be made so quickly and why I was not properly educated or cared for regarding this major decision.

One week after I left that doctors office I showed up to the hospital for the abortion appointment. I went into the pre-op room and had a friend with me. By this time I had just begun to process that I was pregnant and I began to change my mind. I knew that I wanted to be a mom. I tried to tell my friend but she got the nurse and they sedated me with drugs. I was so groggy that I was unable to stand up to them and could no longer tell them that I really did not want to have an abortion. The sedation began to wear off while I was in another room where I had been medically prepared for the abortion, but the doctor was late, so we were waiting for him. When I could finally speak and think clearly again the doctor had arrived and they were putting the gas mask on me. I began to fight. I tried to get out from under it. I was thrashing about so they had to hold me down, but I kept moving my head too much and they had to take the mask away to see what all the thrashing was about. I was trying to tell people again that I did not want the abortion. Instead of honouring my choice they held me back down and turned the mask up to sedate me. I heard someone say "cold feet" as I went unconscious. I woke up out of the anaesthetic screaming and crying out, "I just want to be a mom!" After being released from the hospital I had to be re-admitted three days later. They kept me in the hospital and treated me for a post-op/post trauma infection known as Endometritis.

In retrospect I can say that I was forced against my will. I was not cared for as a person by the doctors but seemed to be a drive-by victim of their precepts with no genuine regard for my own will. I know for certain I was not given all the facts that I needed to make a healthy choice; the following 9yrs I have lived are a proof of this. I am now beginning to share my story more openly, and I know that my case is not an isolated one and this too disturbs me. It seems the pro-choice perspective is not really interested in choice. I will always know I wanted to be a mother to that child. I do not know where you stand on these things or if you have the openness of mind to consider my story without writing it off as fanatical or freak, but I ask you now as a medical professional please remember my story as you perform your respected duties, and may it help you to make stronger decisions for a healthier Nation.

Thank you kindly,

Cindy Lynne Kieffer

Thank you for your time and your contributions to the health of all Canadians.
Copyrighted 2007

2010-04-19T14:05:00.003-07:00

MY LIFE IS A BLESSING
by Lee Harding

My mother was on the psychiatric ward while I grew in her womb in 1974. Her live-in relationship with my abusive and criminal father was over while her pregnancy meant new hurdles. Public shame for having a baby out of wedlock was one thing. A bigger question was how she could live as a single mom without a high school diploma.

The medical professionals counseled her to abort. In her heart, Mom wanted me. But she was vulnerable, and, so was I.

Elsewhere, her own mother was losing sleep. Grandma dearly loved the seven children she raised and was distressed over her daughter’s impending abortion.

The night before the scheduled abortion, Grandma had a dream so vivid she thought she was awake. She saw my mother as a little girl, playing with a doll. In the next scene her head was down, her arms empty. “Where’s your dolly?” asked Grandma.

With tears in her eyes, the little girl looked up and said, “They took it away!”

With shared resolve, my grandparents made the two-and-a-half hour drive from their little town to see my mom in Regina. Grandma wept so long, my grandpa couldn’t bear it any longer. “I’m going to put you in the hospital if you don’t stop crying,” he said.

After they finally made it to the hospital, Grandma said to Mom, "You really want this baby, don't you?"
“Yes, I do,” she replied.

With that, Grandma told the doctor, “This abortion is not going to happen.”

“But it’s been approved by the board,” the doctor protested.

“You can’t play God and neither can I,” Grandma said. “C’mon Debbie, we’re going home with our baby!”

So they took us home. A few days before Christmas, my mom returned to the hospital she left—to give me birth. True to their word, my grandparents took me after ten days and later adopted me. Grandma called me her little lamb and always said I was a gift from God. I stole Grandpa’s heart as well.

My birth mother still lives in Regina and has been married for many years, though not to my father. Now that I’m a married parent myself, my mom likes to take my little daughter out for walks in the stroller. She’s looking forward to my next child arriving in March. My birth father and his family also have a place in my life and count me a blessing.

Every once in awhile, as I reflect on the joy I have brought to my family, I’m horrified by the thought I could have been aborted. It’s not just that I would never have seen the light of day. It’s the void in my family where I was supposed to be, and the haunting grief they would still carry.

God is my only consolation when I grieve for the millions aborted in Canada in my lifetime. I count Him big enough to save the souls of the unborn and heal the hurts of the living.

Copyrighted 2007

2010-04-19T14:05:00.001-07:00

Bill C-22 Will Cut Canada's Sex Victims by Thousands
June 8th, 2007
by Aaron Graham, Edited by Faytene Kryskow

On May 4, Members of Parliament passed Bill C-22, which raises the age of consent from 14 to 16 years. Currently C-22 is on it's way to Royal Assent and, if passed in the Senate, could significanlty reduce the number of sex victims across the country. The passing of this legislation would also weaken Canada's reputation from that as a haven for sexual predators and place us in line with standards held by most other western nations on this issue.

Children and youth account for 61% of all victims of sexual assaults reported to police, and according to 122 police departments, there were over 9,000 child and youth victims of sexual assaults in 2003, 80% of the victims were female. Teenaged girls aged 14-to-17 accounted for 31% of all child and youth sexual assault victims and females aged 11-to-13 accounted for 23%.

In the United States, the age of consent in most states is either 16 or 18 years, while other countries such as New Zealand, Russia and the United Kingdom, have placed their age of consent at 16.

"Police point out that this low age is often known by sexual predators and encourages them to target Canada in search of younger victims who would not be able to consent in countries with a higher age of consent" said Hon. Vic Toews in a second reading. Another MP, Rob Moore, stated at the Justice Committee hearings that though the average Canadian may not know that the current age of sexual consent in Canada is 14yrs of age you better believe that most pedofiles do. Doug Cryer from the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada also pointed out in a recent conversation with on of our Members that a 40 yrs old man can have sex with a ‘consenting’ boy or girl but if that same 40yr old takes pictures of the act it is classified as child pornography. The incosistencies here are blatant. To give the youth of our nation an even greater slap in the face, the Canadian Government agreed with the UN Converntion of the Rights of Children’s definition of a child as anyone under the age of 18yrs. This means, currently in Canada, we are saying it is ok for adults to have sex with children. SICK is the only descriptive. Ask Donny Melanson, a Member of 4 MY Canada and a former boy-child prostitute on the streets of Vancouver. In Donny’s own words, “It is well known on the streets, the younger the sex partner the better.” What kind of Canada are we building? What kind of Canada are we maintaining? As youth and young adults in this nation we feel these are not only good but important questions.

Cybertip.ca is Canada's national tip line for on-line sexual exploitation of children. It is supported by the federal government under the national strategy to protect children from sexual exploitation on the Internet.

Cybertip.ca reported in March of 2005 that luring reports represented 10% of all reports received during its two year pilot phase. Of these reports, 93% of the victims were female and the majority, or 73%, were between the ages of 12 and 15 years. These reports indicate that individuals 14 and 15 years old are at greater risk of being sexually exploited through Internet luring and so we believe that Bill C-22 will enable police to more effectively protect youth aged 14 and 15 years from on-line predatory behavior." One pimp said it well, “There aint no rules, that’s why I win.” It is time to give our law enforcers some rules to work with so that sicko-s like this have less to ‘play’ with.

"This issue has often come before us and, as in the past, I hope that it will once again unite us in condemning adult sexual predators who prey on vulnerable youth, for this is what lies at the core of Bill C-22", said Hon. Ethel Cochrane in a Senate debate.

The legislative will we have seen in the House of Commons is encouraging and, for this, all concerned Canadians should be thankful. Unconcerned Canadians should become concerned. The safety of thousands of our Canadian youth is at stake. Hopefully the lure of summer picnics an party politics will not impeded force of reason and thereby stall C-22 from receiving royal assent speedily. If it is stalled there is a good chance some 14 or 15 yr old is going to have to pay the price this summer. Hopefully it will not be yours, nor the grandchild of some Senator that decided to go golfing instead of to committee.
Copyrighted 2007

2010-04-19T14:02:00.003-07:00

NATIONAL POST PRESENTS BALANCED VIEWS
by Chris Wright
The National Post, January 12 2009

I applaud the National Post for consistently presenting a variety of perspectives on relevant issues -- without adopting the unthinking, clearly biased status quo position often presented by other members of the media. It is refreshing to find an unflinching willingness to call Hamas terrorism what it is, and likewise reject the knee-jerk vilification of Israel. Similarly, in areas of Canadian politics, topics are handled even-handedly. This isn't to say the Post's writers' views always align with my own, and the adherence to the principles of free speech may mean enduring Colby Cosh's stupid article on abortion--but, for the sake of reading a newspaper that truly does present a balanced worldview, it is worth it.

Copyright 2009

2010-04-19T14:02:00.001-07:00

A MISSED OPPORTUNITY
by Chris Wright

The National Post, December 6 2008

By literal definition, the office of prime minister is meant to be held by the one who is the chief servant in Canada, who cares for the nation and the greater good of its citizens. Surely the rhetoric of the past days from the opposition leaders can be clearly seen for what it is: not concern for the economic state of the nation, but rather a selfish grab for power, previously withheld from them by the people of Canada themselves.

Calling another election will be expensive, but to acquiesce to the ghastly arrogant and self-serving agenda of the three opposition leaders would prove even more costly.

Copyright 2008

2010-04-19T14:01:00.001-07:00

POLITICIANS CAN DEAL WITH MULTIPLE ISSUES
by Sarah Sonne
Guelph Mercury, January 13 2009

This week Conservative Members of Parliament Mark Warawa and David Sweet have released statements to the press that "now is not the time to re-open the abortion debate" and that "Canada should focus on the economy as a priority."

With all due respect, it has always been Parliament's job to discuss multiple issues at the same time. Until now, the government has managed to debate and legislate the economy as well as international affairs, justice, health, and multiple other issues at the same time. This is how a nation is run. Is the government saying that because the economy is more challenging this year than it was last year that we are not going to talk about the 800 plus women that are imported to Canada annually for the sex trade either? If we cannot talk about an issue like late term abortions, how are we able to talk about infrastructure or education? We have a justice committee, will their priority be the economy as well?

There is never a good time to talk about something that is uncomfortable. But to say that the government only has the capacity to discuss one issue at a time is a poor excuse. Especially when Canadians have been hearing the "not now" excuse for 40 years.

Copyright 2009

2010-04-19T14:00:00.001-07:00

I'M BEHIND BRUINOOGE: LETTER TO THE EDITOR

by Sean McIntyre
Red Deer Advocate, January 10 2009

Dear Editor:
I want to say publicly how happy I am that Canadian member of parliament Rod Bruinooge has stepped out, and taken a public stance to re-open an intelligent national debate on the issue of abortion as it stands in our nation. He represents a huge number of Canadians who object to Canada's total lack of legislation regarding abortion since 1988.

I commend Mr. Bruinooge for his stance, and his willingness to put his name as a Canadian MP on the line, to be a voice for the voiceless in Canada. He is a rarity as a openly pro-life candidate, and serves as an inspiration to not only his constituency of Winnipeg South, but to all of Canada as someone who stands up for what he believes in when it counts. I want to thank Mr. Bruinooge for being brave enough to address this emotionally charged issue. We can only hope that more MP's will accurately represent the will of their own constituents, by representing their views on abortion as the debate for the unborn resurfaces in this country. Many Canadians are not happy with their government's lack of regulation and blind eye approach to abortion for over 20 years.

Mr. Bruinooge, who now serves as the recently elected chair of the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus, aims to be an “advocate for the unborn and seek to have their value restored in my Canada.” He has my support, and respect.

Copyright 2009

2010-04-19T13:58:00.000-07:00

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHOICE AND EDUCATED CHOICE

by Amy Good
January 28 2009

As Vicki Saporta states in her article Access to Abortion Still Patchy in Canada, "today marks the 21st anniversary of R. v. Morgentaler, the Supreme Court ruling that decriminalized abortion in Canada. This landmark decision has undoubtedly protected the health and saved the lives of countless women...". As a woman I would like to bring a different perspective. There is a lot of research and statistics that show abortion is linked to an increase in mental health problems, suicide, depression, substance abuse, anxiety, sleep disorders, symptoms of post-traumatic stress as well as a link between abortions and breast and cervical cancer. That doesn't sound like Canada has "undoubtedly protected the health and saved the lives of countless women". For a group of women that claim to be "Pro-Choice", these women should be educating all the aspects of abortion, however it appears that "Pro-Choice" is more about pushing an agenda, then a genuine care and concern for a woman's educated choice.

2010-03-30T19:46:00.000-07:00

THE ABORTION ISSUE IN PARLIAMENT:

ABORTION DEBATE ALREADY RE-OPENED

by Amy Good

Langley Advance January 15, 2009

Dear Editor,

Your article [No abortion debate: MP, Jan. 6, Langley Advance] indicates that Langley MP Mark Warawa does not believe that now is the time to re-open the abortion debate in Canadian Parliament.

As a young adult in Canada, I would like to ask our MPs when a good time to open the abortion debate might be?

I have a funny feeling that, in a month, a year, or maybe even two years, the answer would be the same: "Now is not the time to re-open the abortion debate."

It is apparent that "the abortion debate" does not need to be re-opened; that already happened after awarding Henry Morgentaler with the Order of Canada.

Amy Good, Vanier, Ontario

2010-03-30T19:41:00.000-07:00

THE ABORTION ISSUE IN PARLIAMENT:

I'M BEHIND BRUINOOGE: LETTER TO THE EDITOR

by Sean McIntyre
Red Deer Advocate, January 10 2009

Dear Editor:

I want to say publicly how happy I am that Canadian member of parliament Rod Bruinooge has stepped out, and taken a public stance to re-open an intelligent national debate on the issue of abortion as it stands in our nation. He represents a huge number of Canadians who object to Canada's total lack of legislation regarding abortion since 1988.

I commend Mr. Bruinooge for his stance, and his willingness to put his name as a Canadian MP on the line, to be a voice for the voiceless in Canada. He is a rarity as a openly pro-life candidate, and serves as an inspiration to not only his constituency of Winnipeg South, but to all of Canada as someone who stands up for what he believes in when it counts. I want to thank Mr. Bruinooge for being brave enough to address this emotionally charged issue. We can only hope that more MP's will accurately represent the will of their own constituents, by representing their views on abortion as the debate for the unborn resurfaces in this country. Many Canadians are not happy with their government's lack of regulation and blind eye approach to abortion for over 20 years.

Mr. Bruinooge, who now serves as the recently elected chair of the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus, aims to be an “advocate for the unborn and seek to have their value restored in my Canada.” He has my support, and respect.

2010-03-30T19:32:00.000-07:00

THE ABORTION ISSUE IN PARLIAMENT:

POLITICIANS CAN DEAL WITH MULTIPLE ISSUES

by Sarah Sonne
Guelph Mercury, January 13 2009

This week Conservative Members of Parliament Mark Warawa and David Sweet have released statements to the press that "now is not the time to re-open the abortion debate" and that "Canada should focus on the economy as a priority."

With all due respect, it has always been Parliament's job to discuss multiple issues at the same time. Until now, the government has managed to debate and legislate the economy as well as international affairs, justice, health, and multiple other issues at the same time. This is how a nation is run. Is the government saying that because the economy is more challenging this year than it was last year that we are not going to talk about the 800 plus women that are imported to Canada annually for the sex trade either? If we cannot talk about an issue like late term abortions, how are we able to talk about infrastructure or education? We have a justice committee, will their priority be the economy as well?

There is never a good time to talk about something that is uncomfortable. But to say that the government only has the capacity to discuss one issue at a time is a poor excuse. Especially when Canadians have been hearing the "not now" excuse for 40 years.

2010-03-30T19:19:00.000-07:00

ELECTION
A MISSED OPPORTUNITY

by Chris Wright
The National Post, December 6 2008

By literal definition, the office of prime minister is meant to be held by the one who is the chief servant in Canada, who cares for the nation and the greater good of its citizens. Surely the rhetoric of the past days from the opposition leaders can be clearly seen for what it is: not concern for the economic state of the nation, but rather a selfish grab for power, previously withheld from them by the people of Canada themselves.

Calling another election will be expensive, but to acquiesce to the ghastly arrogant and self-serving agenda of the three opposition leaders would prove even more costly.

2010-03-30T18:53:00.000-07:00

ISRAEL IN CANADIAN POLITICS

NATIONAL POST PRESENTS BALANCED VIEWS

by Chris Wright
The National Post, January 12 2009

I applaud the National Post for consistently presenting a variety of perspectives on relevant issues -- without adopting the unthinking, clearly biased status quo position often presented by other members of the media. It is refreshing to find an unflinching willingness to call Hamas terrorism what it is, and likewise reject the knee-jerk vilification of Israel. Similarly, in areas of Canadian politics, topics are handled even-handedly. This isn't to say the Post's writers' views always align with my own, and the adherence to the principles of free speech may mean enduring Colby Cosh's stupid article on abortion--but, for the sake of reading a newspaper that truly does present a balanced worldview, it is worth it.

2010-03-29T19:07:00.000-07:00

This post has been removed.

2010-03-29T19:02:00.000-07:00

AGE OF CONSENT RAISED, BILL C-22:

Bill C-22 Will Cut Canada's Sex Victims by Thousands

June 8th, 2007

by Aaron Graham, Edited by Faytene Kryskow

On May 4, Members of Parliament passed Bill C-22, which raises the age of consent from 14 to 16 years. Currently C-22 is on it's way to Royal Assent and, if passed in the Senate, could significanlty reduce the number of sex victims across the country. The passing of this legislation would also weaken Canada's reputation from that as a haven for sexual predators and place us in line with standards held by most other western nations on this issue.

Children and youth account for 61% of all victims of sexual assaults reported to police, and according to 122 police departments, there were over 9,000 child and youth victims of sexual assaults in 2003, 80% of the victims were female. Teenaged girls aged 14-to-17 accounted for 31% of all child and youth sexual assault victims and females aged 11-to-13 accounted for 23%.

In the United States, the age of consent in most states is either 16 or 18 years, while other countries such as New Zealand, Russia and the United Kingdom, have placed their age of consent at 16.

"Police point out that this low age is often known by sexual predators and encourages them to target Canada in search of younger victims who would not be able to consent in countries with a higher age of consent" said Hon. Vic Toews in a second reading. Another MP, Rob Moore, stated at the Justice Committee hearings that though the average Canadian may not know that the current age of sexual consent in Canada is 14yrs of age you better believe that most pedofiles do. Doug Cryer from the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada also pointed out in a recent conversation with on of our Members that a 40 yrs old man can have sex with a ‘consenting’ boy or girl but if that same 40yr old takes pictures of the act it is classified as child pornography. The incosistencies here are blatant. To give the youth of our nation an even greater slap in the face, the Canadian Government agreed with the UN Converntion of the Rights of Children’s definition of a child as anyone under the age of 18yrs. This means, currently in Canada, we are saying it is ok for adults to have sex with children. SICK is the only descriptive. Ask Donny Melanson, a Member of 4 MY Canada and a former boy-child prostitute on the streets of Vancouver. In Donny’s own words, “It is well known on the streets, the younger the sex partner the better.” What kind of Canada are we building? What kind of Canada are we maintaining? As youth and young adults in this nation we feel these are not only good but important questions.

Cybertip.ca is Canada's national tip line for on-line sexual exploitation of children. It is supported by the federal government under the national strategy to protect children from sexual exploitation on the Internet.

Cybertip.ca reported in March of 2005 that luring reports represented 10% of all reports received during its two year pilot phase. Of these reports, 93% of the victims were female and the majority, or 73%, were between the ages of 12 and 15 years. These reports indicate that individuals 14 and 15 years old are at greater risk of being sexually exploited through Internet luring and so we believe that Bill C-22 will enable police to more effectively protect youth aged 14 and 15 years from on-line predatory behavior." One pimp said it well, “There aint no rules, that’s why I win.” It is time to give our law enforcers some rules to work with so that sicko-s like this have less to ‘play’ with.

"This issue has often come before us and, as in the past, I hope that it will once again unite us in condemning adult sexual predators who prey on vulnerable youth, for this is what lies at the core of Bill C-22", said Hon. Ethel Cochrane in a Senate debate.

The legislative will we have seen in the House of Commons is encouraging and, for this, all concerned Canadians should be thankful. Unconcerned Canadians should become concerned. The safety of thousands of our Canadian youth is at stake. Hopefully the lure of summer picnics an party politics will not impeded force of reason and thereby stall C-22 from receiving royal assent speedily. If it is stalled there is a good chance some 14 or 15 yr old is going to have to pay the price this summer. Hopefully it will not be yours, nor the grandchild of some Senator that decided to go golfing instead of to committee.

Copyrighted 2007

2010-03-29T18:59:00.000-07:00

TESTIMONY, LIFE:

MY LIFE IS A BLESSING

by Lee Harding

My mother was on the psychiatric ward while I grew in her womb in 1974. Her live-in relationship with my abusive and criminal father was over while her pregnancy meant new hurdles. Public shame for having a baby out of wedlock was one thing. A bigger question was how she could live as a single mom without a high school diploma.

The medical professionals counseled her to abort. In her heart, Mom wanted me. But she was vulnerable, and, so was I.

Elsewhere, her own mother was losing sleep. Grandma dearly loved the seven children she raised and was distressed over her daughter’s impending abortion.

The night before the scheduled abortion, Grandma had a dream so vivid she thought she was awake. She saw my mother as a little girl, playing with a doll. In the next scene her head was down, her arms empty. “Where’s your dolly?” asked Grandma.

With tears in her eyes, the little girl looked up and said, “They took it away!”

With shared resolve, my grandparents made the two-and-a-half hour drive from their little town to see my mom in Regina. Grandma wept so long, my grandpa couldn’t bear it any longer. “I’m going to put you in the hospital if you don’t stop crying,” he said.

After they finally made it to the hospital, Grandma said to Mom, "You really want this baby, don't you?"

“Yes, I do,” she replied.

With that, Grandma told the doctor, “This abortion is not going to happen.”

“But it’s been approved by the board,” the doctor protested.

“You can’t play God and neither can I,” Grandma said. “C’mon Debbie, we’re going home with our baby!”

So they took us home. A few days before Christmas, my mom returned to the hospital she left—to give me birth. True to their word, my grandparents took me after ten days and later adopted me. Grandma called me her little lamb and always said I was a gift from God. I stole Grandpa’s heart as well.

My birth mother still lives in Regina and has been married for many years, though not to my father. Now that I’m a married parent myself, my mom likes to take my little daughter out for walks in the stroller. She’s looking forward to my next child arriving in March. My birth father and his family also have a place in my life and count me a blessing.

Every once in awhile, as I reflect on the joy I have brought to my family, I’m horrified by the thought I could have been aborted. It’s not just that I would never have seen the light of day. It’s the void in my family where I was supposed to be, and the haunting grief they would still carry.

God is my only consolation when I grieve for the millions aborted in Canada in my lifetime. I count Him big enough to save the souls of the unborn and heal the hurts of the living.

Copyrighted 2007

2010-03-29T18:55:00.000-07:00

FORCED TO CHOOSE:

A LETTER TO THE DOCTORS OF CANADA

from Cindy Lynne Kieffer

Thank you, for your service as a medical professional to the Nation of Canada. I am writing to you today to share my experience as a young woman during pregnancy. I would like you to know about this experience, so that when you are faced with situations such as mine, you will know a first hand account. I would like to share with you specific events during my time of pregnancy. These events begin with my first doctors appointment to the last time your colleagues were with me. Do not worry; I am not going to share nine whole months of experiences. I am only going to share one month.

On my first doctors appointment I went to see my family doctor but he was not available, so I was taken care of by an attending physician. I found out that I was pregnant. The physician did not talk to me too much about keeping the baby. He did however tell me I had to decide quickly if I wanted an abortion or not. I was confused and scared. He referred me to a gynaecologist. I went to the gynaecologist appointment within a week. He confirmed that I was eight weeks pregnant and he did not discuss pregnancy or childbirth beyond the basic fact that I was physically pregnant. However, he did say that he could book me an appointment to perform the abortion. He did not explain to me how the abortion would affect me or put me at risk. I was still in shock to find out that I was pregnant. I again was uneducated on either side of the issue, but I had to make a quick decision about what to do. I was leaving the doctors office both scared and confused, and then I saw on the wall a poster of the development of a baby. I stepped in to take a closer look and the gynaecologist stepped in front of me and said, "You don't want to look at that, it will only make you confused, and your decision harder." I was unable to think clearly because of the shock I was experiencing. In a daze I just walked out of his office thinking that he knew what was best. My life at that moment literally was in the hands of the professionals. Looking back now I do not understand why my decision had to be made so quickly and why I was not properly educated or cared for regarding this major decision.

One week after I left that doctors office I showed up to the hospital for the abortion appointment. I went into the pre-op room and had a friend with me. By this time I had just begun to process that I was pregnant and I began to change my mind. I knew that I wanted to be a mom. I tried to tell my friend but she got the nurse and they sedated me with drugs. I was so groggy that I was unable to stand up to them and could no longer tell them that I really did not want to have an abortion. The sedation began to wear off while I was in another room where I had been medically prepared for the abortion, but the doctor was late, so we were waiting for him. When I could finally speak and think clearly again the doctor had arrived and they were putting the gas mask on me. I began to fight. I tried to get out from under it. I was thrashing about so they had to hold me down, but I kept moving my head too much and they had to take the mask away to see what all the thrashing was about. I was trying to tell people again that I did not want the abortion. Instead of honouring my choice they held me back down and turned the mask up to sedate me. I heard someone say "cold feet" as I went unconscious. I woke up out of the anaesthetic screaming and crying out, "I just want to be a mom!" After being released from the hospital I had to be re-admitted three days later. They kept me in the hospital and treated me for a post-op/post trauma infection known as Endometritis.

In retrospect I can say that I was forced against my will. I was not cared for as a person by the doctors but seemed to be a drive-by victim of their precepts with no genuine regard for my own will. I know for certain I was not given all the facts that I needed to make a healthy choice; the following 9yrs I have lived are a proof of this. I am now beginning to share my story more openly, and I know that my case is not an isolated one and this too disturbs me. It seems the pro-choice perspective is not really interested in choice. I will always know I wanted to be a mother to that child. I do not know where you stand on these things or if you have the openness of mind to consider my story without writing it off as fanatical or freak, but I ask you now as a medical professional please remember my story as you perform your respected duties, and may it help you to make stronger decisions for a healthier Nation.

Thank you kindly,

Cindy Lynne Kieffer

Thank you for your time and your contributions to the health of all Canadians.

Copyrighted 2007

2010-03-29T18:53:00.000-07:00

DOCTORS CHOICE ON PERFORMING ABORTIONS:

ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION GIVEN UNPRECEDENTED POWER STARTING CANADA DAY

by Sarah Sonne

Human Rights Commissions continue to be at the forefront of issues facing Canadians today. Maclean's magazine is currently under-fire for an article they published about Islam called “The Future Belongs to Islam.” In the article, the author summarizes some of his interviews with Muslim leaders and explains how the population boom of Islamics compared to the extreme decrease in the size of western families is part of their strategy in gaining influence in the western world. The Canadian Islamic Congress promptly complained to the British Columbian, Ontario, and Canadian Human Rights Commissions that the article “could” cause people to become offended, and therefore “could” cause hatred against Muslims. Both Canada and Ontario rejected the complaint, citing that their Code was not broad enough to include articles in magazines, but British Columbia has brought the case to Tribunal.

No one who has ever had a complaint brought against them has won in a Human Rights Tribunal. If that's not scary enough, the Human Rights Commission in Ontario (the Commission responsible for completely changing the way faith-based businesses are run after the Christian Horizon's ruling) will be given unprecedented power within two weeks.

Starting July 30, 2008 there will be a number of significant changes to the Ontario Human Rights Commission. The OHRC has given itself the power to initiate their own complaints and start their own investigations into what they may consider human rights violations. Practically, this means they do not have to wait for someone to complain that a Justice of the Peace would not marry a homosexual couple, the Human Rights Commission can go looking for people unwilling to perform gay marriages and when they find them, make their own complaint, and start their own investigation, and make their own ruling. It stands to reason that if they are the ones making the complaint, their investigation will be extremely biased from the beginning. The Ontario Human Rights Commission has given itself the power to be secret police and go looking for people they can prosecute.

The OHRC will now also have the right to interrupt and change cases before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, if they do not agree with what is happening or with a ruling that the Tribunal has made. This means that even if they are not involved in a human rights complaint being made, they still have the power to step in and decide what the verdict is.

As of July, the OHRC will also be engaging in “pro-active” measures such as public education, policy development, and research and analysis to further their own agendas. They will also “have the power to monitor the state of human rights and report directly to the people of Ontario.” This means that they can go into schools and businesses and promote their own views, regardless of religious freedom or freedom of speech. This will be seen directly in Christian Horizons, where the Human Rights Commission will be stepping in to "help" re-write Christian Horizons' policies regarding faith statements, and training the employees on “human rights” over their religious beliefs.

When a person files a human rights complaint, it will no longer go through the Commission but it will go straight to the Tribunal, and a new legal service called the Human Rights Legal Support Center will give legal support and services to anyone who files a complaint. This means there is no longer any screening service to complaints, and anyone who wants to file a complaint will be given legal advice on how to do it.The logic behind this is to "free up" more time for the OHRC to be pro-active in preventing human rights violations.

Every year, the Human Rights Commission used to have to file a report and submit it to the Attorney General for review. Now they do not have to be reviewed, but can submit whatever they want with direct access to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly. They also have the “power to monitor and report on anything related to the state of human rights in the Province of Ontario” not just the cases they are involved in.

They also will have the power to review any new legislation that is passed in Ontario to make sure that it fits their definition of human rights.Thus it would appear that the OHRC has become the first and final say on anything involving human rights in Ontario and possibly Canada.

In short, this means that the Human Rights Commission of Ontario now has the power to police Ontario with no accountability, and with final say, unless the government steps in and stops them.

In May of 2008 MP Keith Martin tabled a motion (M-446) calling for a public examination of the Canada Human Rights Act and the Commission and Tribunal that stems from it. The motion calls on the Federal Government to hold public hearings across Canada into this matter. The motion and letter will enable all Canadians to see the current workings of the CHRA and offer solutions that will protect free speech, while protecting people from hate speech. It specifically calls for Section 13 of the Human Rights Act to be deleted, as this is the section being used to fine people for possibly inciting hate crimes by something they may have said. For more information contact:
Office of Dr. Keith Martin
613-996-2625
MartiK@parl.gc.ca

Action Points:

1) Write to your MP, the Justice Minister, and the Liberal and NDP justice critics to let them know of your support for an investigation into the CHRC.
2) Make an appointment this summer to meet with your MP face to face and talk about Human Rights
3) Write a letter to the editor or an article and submit it to your local and national newspapers
4) Pray for the government to have wisdom regarding the Human Rights Commission, protection over socially conservative and faith based groups in Ontario as of July 2008, and favour for everyone appealing a decision by the Human Rights Commissions across Canada.

Here is a brief summary of what the Human Rights Commissions across Canada have been ruling so far in 2008:

June 2008: Update on Reverend Stephen Boissoin. Following a six year trial, the Alberta Human Rights Commission has fined Rev. Boissoin $5,000 and ordered him to renounce his faith after he wrote a letter to the editor in 2002 expressing concern on homosexual agendas in the school system. Rev. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition have been ordered to publicly apologize to the gay community, never express opposition to homosexuality again, and renounce all previous statements on homosexuality. The HRC has not explained where the damage fee is going because there are no defined "victims" to pay the damage fine to.

June 2008: Catholic Insight Magazine has been burdened with $20,000 in legal fees so far defending itself against human rights complaints from homosexual activitists. In February of 2007, Pride Centre of Edmonton filed a human rights complaint against the monthly Catholic magazine, and 18 months later there has still be no word of whether the case will proceed past the investigation stage. The magazine is also coming under fire from a homosexual couple in Toronto who are attempting to get Insight's funding stripped from Heritage Canada's Publications Assistance Program. The magazine is paying its legal fees with support from donors.

May 2008: In Saskatchewan, Orville Nichols, a Regina marriage commissioner for 25 years, was found guilty of violating the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code for declining to perform a same-sex marriage three years ago. Nichols was fined $2,500 and asked to comply with with the Human Rights Code. If he refuses, he will lose his appointment as a commissioner. As a result of this case, The Human Rights Commission plans on asking every marriage commissioner if they comply with the legislation requiring them to marry same-sex couples. Although this does not affect clergy (they can refuse on the basis of religious beliefs under the Human Rights Code and Charter because they are a religious organization), civil marriage commissioners are required to perform marriages as a public service without religious content, and therefore if they are found in non-compliance they will lose their job.

April 2008: The Ontario Human Rights Commission ruled that Christian Horizons (a Christian care facility) pay former employee Connie Heintz $23,000 plus to compensation for 2 years of lost wages after she was let go because of a lesbian lifestyle, even though when hired she had signed an agreement declaring she was committed to living according to biblical values. The tribunal also found that a company cannot have two main focuses; therefore Christian Horizons cannot be both a care facility and a ministry, and so they cannot screen who they hire on the basis of lifestyle or make new employees sign a Statement of Faith contract. This has major implications not only for Christian Horizons but other faith based service organizations as well (eg. Salvation Army, Pro-Life Centres etc.).

2010-03-29T18:50:00.000-07:00

DOCTORS CHOICE ON PERFORMING ABORTIONS:

ONTARIO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

by Sarah Sonne
The London Press, September 4 2008

The Ontario Human Rights Commission just threw its weight behind a draft being proposed by the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons that would force doctors to "check their beliefs at the door" and provide any medical service a patient desires, under the threat of being dragged into a Human Rights Tribunal. This is insane. When did doctors become a McDonalds drive-through, where we can order whatever we want and they are forced to give it to us, at the threat of losing their license, even if what we are ordering is not in our best interest? And how has Canada, a country which prides itself on diversity and freedom, become an endorser of head-hunting and religious persecution? After 11 years and $120,000 in Medical School, I think doctors have earned the right to say no.

Sarah Sonne, Guelph

2010-03-29T18:48:00.000-07:00

EINSTEIN ON BELIEF IN GOD:

RESPONSE TO EINSTEIN LETTER: BELIEF IN GOD A 'PRODUCT OF HUMAN WEAKNESS'

by Chris Wright
CBC, May 15, 2008

That Einstein did not believe in God is perfectly fair. With that, an unbiased perspective would also acknowledge that many others considered great minds throughout history were believers in and followers of the God of the Bible. An extremely abbreviated list could include: Soren Kierkegaard; Blaise Pascal; J.S. Bach; John Donne; Fyodor Dostoyevsky; Gerard Manley Hopkins; Dr. David Livingstone; Augustine; Francis Schaeffer; C.S. Lewis; George Washington Carver and Martin Luther King, Jr.

A similar contemporary list of scientists and scholars would only begin with such noted living doctors, philosophers and teachers as: Dr. Ben Carson; Dr. Gregory Boyd; Dr. John McRay; Dr. Bruce Metzger; Dr. Alexander Metherell; Dr. J.I. Packer, and many others.

An interesting point raised by Einstein's comment though, is that it is accurate to say that human weakness is connected to the belief in God, though perhaps for different reasons than he suggests. All through history it has been those men and women who have looked honestly at themselves and recognized their moral failings and inherent limitations - their weaknesses, despite whatever their own gifts, intellect and abilities may have been – who have agreed that their own self-righteousness was insufficient. Brilliant thinkers or not, it has been those who have adopted that posture of humility who have found peace, purpose, and meaning; it has always been those not too proud to acknowledge they have failed who have found forgiveness.

Chris Wright

Vancouver, BC

2010-03-29T18:24:00.000-07:00

MP'S SPEAKING UP ON MORAL ISSUES:

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: BOLD STANDS REWARDED

by Sven Eric Johnson
Winnipeg Free Press, October 27 2008

I recently read a newspaper article about how the Conservative party did not gain a majority government this time. It might be due to having left some social issues, such as abortion and same sex marriage, undiscussed during the past federal election.

This theory , I believe, can be backed up by the voter turn out with Rod Bruinooge’s landslide victory in the Winnipeg South area. Bruinooge took the seat by a 4,000 votes in what used to be known Liberal territory. Not a bad margin, seeing that throughout his campaign he made it clear that he was taking a pro-life stand if he got elected. It seems to me that it was a good selling point, seeing how in the previous election he won against his Liberal opponent with only 111 votes.

So the question stands, would the Conservatives have won a majority had they spoken up on such issues as these? Nobody knows for sure, but I think if you look around at all those who boldly took a stand on these issues, you’ll probably notice that they are going to be pulling up a chair when it comes time for the House to sit again.

SVEN ERIC JOHNSON
Canwood, SK

2010-03-29T18:19:00.000-07:00

MP'S SPEAKING UP ON MORAL ISSUES:

LETTER TO THE EDITOR RE: SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES LEFT OUT IN THE COLD

by Sarah Sonne
Ottawa Citizen, November 3 2008

I thank Rebecca Walberg for her opinion article. As a young, social conservative voter in Canada, I fully agree with Ms. Walberg that ignoring and isolating voters like myself because we have no other choice of who we vote for is costing the Conservative party.

I do not live in Winnipeg, yet I made the effort to volunteer for Winnipeg South MP Rod Bruinooge's campaign over the telephone, because he is one of the few MPs who is bold enough to be a social conservative voice and speak out on moral issues.

I voted and volunteered in six riding campaigns, because I am passionate about my country. But I personally know of many people who, at the last minute, decided to spoil their ballot or not vote after hearing that a Harper government would not encourage legislation that restricts access to abortion.

With polls showing 56 per cent of Canadians opposing Dr. Henry Morgentaler's Order of Canada, and 75 per cent of Canadians supporting the private Bill C-484 on protection for unborn victims of crime, it made no sense for the Conservative party to silence their MPs, whip votes on freedom of conscience issues, and ignore the majority of Canadians whom they are supposed to represent.

I am indebted to Mr. Bruinooge and other MPs who fight for my values. I hope that the "Bruinooge effect" as Ms. Walberg described affects Conservatives. Maybe then my friends will show up to vote, because they will actually have a voice in Parliament.

2010-03-29T18:13:00.000-07:00

MP'S SPEAKING UP ON MORAL ISSUES:

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: FREE SPEECH MAY HAVE BEEN ONLY THING BETWEEN HARPER AND A MAJORITY

by Amy Good
The Edmonton Journal, October 24 2008

Re: "Free speech may have been only thing between Harper and majority: Tories have little to lose, much to gain from letting MPs speak their minds,"by In Rebecca Walberg, Opinion, Oct. 23.

It is very interesting how, in the 2006 election, Rod Bruinooge won by only 111 votes, and this time he won by more than 4,000 votes. It seems to me that people like to know whom they are voting for. When politicians are up front with where they stand the on the issues that are personally important to people, it takes the guess-work out of voting! I am pro-family and pro-life. If I lived in Winnipeg South, it would have been a no-brainer for who I would have voted for! Maybe the other MP's can learn a thing or two from Bruinooge's example.

2010-03-29T18:10:00.000-07:00

ON UNIVERSITY CAMPUS:

HOPING FOR CHOICE

by Allison Kach
Guelph Mercury, November 6 2008

Dear Editor - A number of weeks ago, the student union at the U of G voted unanimously to remove club status from a club called Life Choice, arguing an incident last March violated the student union's policy. The club itself was not informed of discrepancies in their actions until they were told their status was cancelled. Where was the transparency and responsible communication on the part of the student government?

The issue of abortion has been heating up throughout the country, with controversial events such as Morgentaler's receipt of the Order of Canada, the subsequent returns of previously awarded Orders, bill C-484 and more. The issue is not settled in Canadians' hearts and minds and it is not going away, so denial of discourse and even educational resources to the public would seem foolish.

The student union has the opportunity to support students who hold a differing view, a view of life, or to deny the appeal of the Life Choice group to keep their status. This issue has been visited on a number of university campuses in Ontario and those standing for life have been labelled 'anti-choice' and rejected the support of student governments.If we are really serious about choice, we should be bold enough to allow people the opportunity to all available resources.

Will the U of G set a precedent by supporting groups that do not fit into the cookie-cutter mould of modern humanism, or will it silence voices and opinions of their own students to keep with the crowd? Let's trust they make the right choice.

2010-03-27T05:14:00.001-07:00

COMPASSION REQUIRES ACTION:
DIVINE DUTY
by Sarah Sonne
Calgary Herald, November 1 2008

If you believe the Bible, you believe in a God who not only did not create or cause suffering, but a God that experiences suffering Himself. Jesus was a crisis teenage pregnancy, was born in a manger, grew up on the wrong side of town, knew hunger, pain, exhaustion and rejection, was ridiculed, tortured and put to death on a cross. There is a reality that even God suffers. And yet, He loves us so much that He is willing to do that. Understanding suffering and wanting it to end, He sends people like Dr. Chris Brooks to alleviate it. There is enough food, money and resources that no one should be suffering; the things happening around the world are proof of our own apathy, nothing more. We need more people like Brooks who recognize God's call and are moved to action.

2010-03-27T05:10:00.000-07:00

DISCRIMINATION:
LETTER TO THE EDITOR RE: TESTING TESTING, BIGOT 1-2-3
by Craig Macartney
November 20, 2008

I've notice a few trends in our society. Often authorities are afraid of being seemingly racist so they go to extremes to try to make everyone happy. In doing so they often adopt other prejudice. The extent of our efforts (as Canadians) to make sure we do not appear racist has actually ended up building a degree of ethnic prejudice. For example: I worked with a group of people who always complained about Quebec and 'the French.' This was not because they were raised to hate French Canadians, it was a bitterness that came from how difficult it has become for people who don't speak French to find good paying jobs. They all felt that they were being discriminated against as English speaking Canadians while they said French speaking Canadians were more likely to get jobs in Government or around Ottawa.
I have seen similar bias in many areas and for the same reasons but I still believe that the statistics given from the online test are high, so I took the racist test referenced in the article. I found it was really set up with far too much room for error so that you appear racist. It asks you to sort pictures to the right or left, depending on whether the person is white or black and with words that are positive (ie: Joy) or negative (ie: horrible). Then it puts African AND Bad on one side and White AND Good on the other. You have to sort a mixture of faces and words to the right sides. After a while it flips them so that White and Bad are on one side and African and Bad are on the other. This change threw me off because you are supposed to do this fast. I got used to putting the African faces on the left and when it switched I was thrown off. The program reads every mistake that you make a bias against that group. In the end I was told that I am strongly racist against black people. This is totally wrong. I love African people. In fact, my biggest ambition in life is to go to Africa and set up orphanages and programs for the underprivileged and poor people there.

2010-03-23T09:47:00.000-07:00

FREEDOM OF SPEECH:

UNIVERSITIES ARE STIFLING FREEDOM OF SPEECH

by Sarah Sonne
The Guelph Mercury, December 15 2008

Lakehead University in Thunder Bay has announced it is modifying its student union constitution to require campus clubs displays and publications to be positive in nature.

Effectively, this means environmental clubs cannot spread literature about the negative effects of oil spills on northern wildlife, NDP groups cannot publish brochures challenging Conservative policies, and pro-life groups cannot talk or distribute anything about their view on abortion. All negativity has been banned, at the expense of exploration and learning.

This is the latest development in a disturbing trend spreading through Canadian universities that directly threatens freedom of speech and hinders intelligent debate among people seeking higher education.

The University of Guelph recently revoked club status from its pro-life group, and Queen's University in Kingston announced it was introducing conversation facilitators to listen to conversations between students and encourage correct thought on social justice issues.

The irony of this seems lost on universities, which do not realize that in their attempt to make everyone think the same they are creating a new social injustice by restricting freedom of speech and freedom of expression.

Universities are supposed to be a place that presents information to students and allows them to form opinions, think for themselves and debate with others in an academic environment, not a place that forces every student to fit a certain mold through rules and policing.

The human right to not be offended is being used to take human rights away.

The last place I expected this to happen was university. As a graduate I sincerely hope this trend does not continue, because if it does, my university degree will mean next to nothing in a few years.

It will mean nothing more than proof that I learned to tell people what they want to hear, not that I learned to think for myself.

In the name of human rights, please bring the right to freedom of speech back.

It's an important one.

-- Sarah Sonne, Guelph

2010-03-16T20:00:00.000-07:00

MORGENTALER AND THE ORDER OF CANADA:

CANADA HAS NOT CONCEDED THAT THE DEBATE OVER ABORTION HAS ENDED

by Chris Wright
The Calgary Herald, July 2 2008

There appears to be a minority group in Canada intent upon convincing the rest of the nation that the issue of abortion has already been settled and that it has been universally accepted and approved. The questionable actions of the Supreme Court Justices seeking to award Dr. Henry Morgentaler the Order of Canada is yet another example of this. Those members of the committee involved are blatantly ignoring the expressed desire of the larger part of Canadians.

The fact that the vast majority of Canadians do not support this awarding of the Order of Canada to Morgentaler is irrefutable. A Globe & Mail national poll conducted in the spring of this year clearly revealed that the consensus of Canadians is far from unanimous affirmation, in fact, 92% of the over 330,000 Canadians surveyed did not believe that Dr. Morgentaler should be awarded the Order of Canada.

One is similarly reminded of the move of the student governments of institutions such as York University who have presumptuously declared that the debate over abortion has ended in Canada, and as such, are preventing open and intelligent discussion over the issue, in effect, disrupting free speech. Despite the actions of that student government, and despite the agenda of the few judges, the people of Canada have not agreed that these individuals' opinions represent those of the entire nation.

As is easily discerned by the results of the national poll, Canada has not conceded that the debate over abortion has ended. Currently there are some who seek to honour a man who most Canadians in no way consider a hero in our nation, nor someone who has contributed a lifetime of outstanding achievement in service to Canada or to humanity at large.

We who are Canadians believe that the actions of the leaders of our country should reflect the beliefs of its citizens, and Canada has clearly not agreed as a nation that abortion is right or admirable, nor that an abortion doctor should be so honoured.

2010-03-16T19:57:00.000-07:00

MORGENTALER AND THE ORDER OF CANADA:

GIVE HONOUR WHERE HONOUR IS DUE

by Faytene Kryskow

Like so many Canadians we were shocked to hear the news of Henry Morgentaler's appointment to the Order of Canada. As the director of an organization that represents thousands of young Canadians who are concerned about Canada on a variety of issues I want to say loud and clear: I wholeheartedly disapprove of this appointment. My reasons are multi-fold. Lets begin with the least obvious.

By his own admission on national television Morgentaler slimily confessed that he "enjoys women." In my circle (which is wide) we call these men "womanizers" or "creeps." The thought of giving a self-professing womanizer the Order of Canada gives me the heebie-jeebies. What message are we sending young Canadian men and women when we give the highest civilian honour to such a person? Seeing as Canada has an estimated 800 women a year lured into abusive sex trade jobs within our borders, this is a really good question. We hope it will be asked, loudly, before Morgentaler is pinned with this honour at some un-named date in the future.

The second reason is one that has already been raised by many across the nation: Morgentaler's appointment is a thorough insult to democracy. Included in the opening Canada Day remarks on Parliament Hill was an exhortation regarding the need to strengthen Canadaís democratic system. The speaker shared with thousands of Canadians how, in the last election, 75% of young Canadians did not vote. He went on to say that this needs to change. I wholeheartedly agree. However, how can you expect young people to get excited about participating in a system that consistently overrides the voice of the people?

Young people often say to me, "what difference will my vote make?" Well, leaders of Canada, give me something to work with, would you! (I use the word "leaders" broadly here as I know Prime Minister Harper had nothing to do directly with the Morgentaler appointment.) I would love to encourage my friends to vote. However, the announcement of the appointment today validates their skepticism. Why do I say this? A recent Globe & Mail poll declared that 92% of Canadians did not want the Morgentaler appointment to happen. Wow. That's a big number! A CBC Facebook poll only a year ago reported that the number one wish of young Canadians for Canadaís 140th birthday was for the ending of abortion in Canada. Do you remember that poll? We have not heard much about it in the media for some reason. Strange. And finally, there is the report that nomination protocol was totally overridden in this case. Every other person that has received the Order of Canada (from what I understand) has been appointed by unanimous consent. In spite of the fact that 92% of Canadians did not want this to happen, and there was a split on the advisory council itself, it happened. As I understand it, in an unprecedented maneuver the advisory council chaired by Chief Justice McLachlin rammed this through. What kind of justice is this?

I agree with the speaker today on Parliament Hill. We need to revive democracy. So, Canada, letís actually do it. Then maybe I could encourage my friends to vote and they would respond.

The final, and obvious reason, is that at the hands of Morgentaler's choice movement a trail of devastated lives lace the land. It is estimated that 8 out of 10 women who have had abortions struggle with suicide and that 98% of women polled would not recommend it to a friend (Elliot Institute). That speaks loudly. Is Morgentaler a hero to those 98% of women who regret their abortion? Canada is littered with chilling stories of women who were traumatized both emotionally and physically as a direct result of abortion. I had lunch with a lady just last weekend whose friend has two scars on the outside of her body from a botched abortion that destroyed her uterus. To hear of Morgentalerís appointment only days after hearing this story was a little too much to take. So take it, I won't. I am here to say that this was a terrible decision and it should be rescinded.

I feel badly for others who have received this award that has been so cheapened by the announcement of Morgentalerís appointment. I hope that they give their medals back and that none of the appointees on the list with Morgentaler show up to get theirs. THAT would be an amazing day for Canada.

To honour this man is to dishonour women who don't believe they are "meat." To honour this man is to dishonour a democratic system that we are (apparently) trying to revive. To honour this man is to dishonour countless women whose lives have been devastated as a direct result of abortion, not to mention 30-40% of my generation that never made it past the womb. Lets reserve honour for the ones who truly deserve it.

PS: My family, like Morgentaler's, was also in the holocaust - in the Ukraine. Ironically, because of him, now my generation is also.

Faytene Kryskow
Director, MY Canada Association

2010-03-16T19:53:00.000-07:00

MORGENTALER AND THE ORDER OF CANADA:

MORGENTALER HASN'T BETTERED CANADA

Robin-Lee Pereda
Guelph Mercury, July 04, 2008

Of the many reasons Dr. Henry Morgentaler should not be appointed to the Order of Canada, none seems to jump out at me more clearly than the order's own motto: desiderantes meliorem patriam, meaning "they desire a better country." The millions a year his clinics bring in tells me he desires a little more than a "better country," and that's just the beginning.

Morgentaler performed abortions illegally from 1969 to 1988. He was charged on two separate occasions, and was convicted on one after the Quebec Court of Appeal overturned a jury acquittal. He served 10 months while waiting for the appeal of that conviction. My concern is this: what message are we sending to future generations if we honour someone who had such blatant disregard for our nation's laws?

Our laws and judicial system have served to protect its citizen and serve them since this great nation's inception. And now the same nation that laid charges against Morgentaler for disregarding their laws now seeks to honour him.

How does that even begin to make sense?

Not to mention it seems hypocritical for the Order to honour someone with such legal indiscretions seeing that one member -- Alan Eagleson -- was removed in 1998 after being jailed for fraud.

Regardless of which side of the abortion debate you sit on, you should be able to plainly see that we as a nation do not agree on this appointment to the Order of Canada.

Isn't the whole point of the Order of Canada to honour those who have made a prodigious contribution to Canada? Shouldn't it reflect our heartfelt thanks and gratitude as a whole nation, not just a fraction of it?

To honour Morgentaler in this way is to intentionally disregard the opinions of a large percentage of the nation.

-- Robin-Lee Pereda, Guelph

copywright 2008

2010-03-16T19:49:00.000-07:00

MORGENTALER AND THE ORDER OF CANADA:

IS CANADA REALLY A DEMOCRACY?

by Sarah Sonne

On September 29th, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced that the Conservative government will never re-open the debate on abortion, and if bills are tabled that would lead to the re-criminalization of abortion, he will whip his cabinet to oppose them. This is somewhat ironic considering the debate on abortion has been wide open ever since it was announced on Canada Day that Henry Morgentaler would be receiving the Order of Canada, to which Harper vocally disapproved of as something that divides Canadians.

Both Harpers announcement, and Morgentaler’s ceremony to receive the Order of Canada this Friday, throw serious doubt on whether Canada is a democracy at all. By whipping his cabinet, Harper is doing the same thing that he disapproved of Chief Justice Beverly McLaghlin doing; that is, over-riding the voice of an individual to achieve an agenda. If that is the case, why have a cabinet at all?

Secondly, with 56% of Canadians disapproving of Morgentaler’s nomination, Canada saw a flurry of debate in the national media after July 1st that made one thing very clear; Harper was right, Canada is severely (and passionately) divided on the issue of abortion. This is further proven by the fact that the Governor General is traveling to Quebec City this Friday to present Morgentaler with the Order of Canada on a holiday weekend and on the eve of an election, with no announcement, when all eyes are diverted and watching other things. Sound like a repeat of Canada Day? Could it be that the ceremony is taking place in Quebec because Quebec is the most supportive province of abortion, and it is unlikely anyone will kick up a fuss there?

Why is it that in a so-called democracy, we have to sneak around and whip votes in order to silence the voice of a growing sector of society? If Canada’s mind is already made up, why have an election at all?.

2010-03-16T19:46:00.000-07:00

MORGENTALER AND THE ORDER OF CANADA:

A BIRTHDAY QUESTION FOR MR. MORGENTALER
by Faytene Kryskow

Friday, October 10th, is my birthday – the emphasis being on birth. I am thankful I had the privilege of being born. If given a choice, that is what I would have preferred. I was shocked when I heard on Wednesday that October 10th this year, with suspiciously short notice to Canadians, will also be the day that Henry Morgentaler will be awarded the Order of Canada in deep, out of reach, Quebec.

I am sorry. I can’t call him a doctor. I don’t know anyone he has healed. I don’t know any life he has actually saved. In contrast, a few weeks back I had my nails done by a sweet young lady who almost died on the floor of an abortion clinic. She didn’t need to get consent, so her parents weren’t there to support her. She was alone. The nurses had forgotten to give her an anesthetic (so much for compassion) and during the ‘procedure’ she got a blood clot that sent her into convulsions and near death. She told me that she writhed on the floor – alone and feeling every bit of the pain - as the nurses watched not knowing what to do. She has been on nerve pills ever since because of anxiety attacks. On my birthday I wonder if I could ask Mr. Morgentaler a question? If this is about compassion for women why don’t you give up the multi-million dollars you make ever year from it and put it towards helping women like this put their lives back together. To honor Mr. Morgentaler is to dishonour the thousands of women whose lives have been shredded through ‘safe’ abortions that are anything but safe. It is time to wake up Canada and call a spade a spade – or a knife a knife.

2010-03-16T19:28:00.000-07:00

MORGENTALER AND THE ORDER OF CANADA:

CANADIAN VOICES AREN'T BEING HEARD

by Amy Good

St. Catharine's Standard October 15, 2008

As a young Canadian, I consider myself very privileged to live in a democracy like Canada. There has been so much encouragement with the recent election to "make your voice heard" by voting.

But I'm feeling disappointed by the lack of voice I feel I have today. On Oct. 10, the highest civilian award in Canada was given to Dr. Henry Morgentaler. This might not be upsetting to most Canadians, however it should be.

This award is designed to unite Canada. Since the announcement of his appointment was made on Canada Day, several articles disagreeing with Morgentaler receiving the Order of Canada have been published, expressing disappointment in giving this award to Morgentaler.

How loud does your voice have to be in Canada before it gets heard? Is it any surprise why many Canadians didn't vote? Maybe we should look at why they feel their voice doesn't make a difference.

I know that is how I am left feeling

Amy Good

Jordan

2010-03-16T19:15:00.000-07:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

PREGNANT WOMEN DESERVE PROTECTION FOR THEIR FETUSES

by Amy Good

Montreal Gazette August 9, 2008

As a young woman in Canada, I would like to express my gratitude to Ken Epp for introducing Bill-C484. It is very disturbing to think that if I became pregnant in Canada there are no laws to protect my wanted child. However, if someone injured my cat I could press several different charges against the offender. It is pretty ridiculous that as a Canadian citizen I can protect my cat, and or my possessions, but there is nothing in Canadian law that says I have the right to protect a wanted child.

The only ridiculous thing about this bill is that we haven't spoken up about this issue sooner.

Amy Good

Vanier, Ont.

2010-03-16T19:12:00.000-07:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

QUIT SPECULATING AND LOOK AT THE VALUE OF BILL C-484

by Amy Good
St. Catherines Standard September 5, 2008

I would like to say that as a young woman (who is looking forward to being pregnant some day), I am so grateful for Ken Epp's Bill C-484.

Epp has collected countless stories of horrendous crimes that have been committed against pregnant women. Out of these atrocities, Epp has seen the need to table Bill C-484. If a crime was committed against a pregnant woman carrying a wanted child, there are no laws to protect this woman's choice to be pregnant. Instead of all of the speculation that is being made about Epp's or the Conservatives' ulterior motives to bringing this bill forward, why aren't we questioning the ulterior motives of the pro-choice organizations that are not getting behind this bill? If the motive is truly the political and ethical view that a woman should have complete control over her fertility and pregnancy, then what part of Epp's bill do they really have a problem with?

Amy Good, Jordan

2010-03-16T19:04:00.000-07:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:
A FIGHT FOR FETAL RIGHTS
by Ashley Beaudin
The Charlatan, Feb 28, 2008

The recent bill, Bill C-484, introduced Feb. 29 by Conservative MP, Ken Epp (Edmonton - Sherwood Park) is expected go to the floor of the House of Commons for its second hour of debate.

This bill, also known as the Unborn Victims of Crime Act would create “a separate offence when an unborn child is harmed or killed during the commission of an offence against the child’s pregnant mother.”

As a young woman and part of a generation that will soon emerge as mothers and fathers, I believe that this amendment to the Criminal Code is critical.

Today’s society has come to hold a large amount of concern for progression in human rights.

Unfortunately, in Canada this concern is rarely met with action. We have an opportunity to see a bill enacted that will raise the bar in both women’s and children’s rights. This bill can act as a strong disincentive to violence against pregnant women and will help protect the health and safe delivery of every child.

Notably, in the United States 37 states have fetal-homicide laws. But in Canada charges can be laid only if the baby has left the womb.

This is a grave and unwarranted injustice that we must address nationally.

Currently, if an attacker kills a pregnant woman and her child, no charges can be laid to recognize the fetal victim. This leaves the families of the victim, who are left grieving the death of two lives with a feeling of injustice.

One supporter, Mary Talbot, lost her daughter Olivia who was six months pregnant when she was killed. Her killer admitted that he shot Olivia in the torso to kill the baby and yet there is nothing in our Criminal Code that recognizes his intent to harm this unborn child.

Legally, we have given more protection to animals than to an unborn human child. Under current Canadian law, animal abusers can receive up to six months in prison, and new legislation might increase this to five years. This blatantly says that we value the life of an animal more than a human life.

We have protected, and shown commitment to continue to protect, the rights of animals.

Let’s do the same for our children and make protection accessible to unborn children.

Understandably, pregnant women are vulnerable. There is something in the heart of a woman that compels her to protect her child.

But when an attacker imposes on that defence and receives no consequence for that action, society affirms in public policy and in law that such violence is OK.

When a mother chooses life for her child, that child —unborn or not —should be protected under law.

A woman and a child are indeed within the same physical body, but are two separate lives. It seems ridiculous to charge an attacker with one account of homicide when it took two separate lives.

In some cases, an attacker attacks a pregnant woman for her baby. When the attacker is only charged for the case of the mother, society affirms the intention of the attacker under the reasoning that the life of the fetus was insignificant.

We cannot send a message to our children that the nine months of greatest intimacy with their mothers in the womb is trivial and of no importance.

Objectors to the bill have said this law will affect abortion rights; however, this is not the case. This law specifically states that the bill will not apply to any act of omission by the mother of the child, meaning that the mother could not be charged under this legislation for terminating her pregnancy.

While preliminary polls have shown that Canadians are divided on this issue, we should rather unite for the purpose of protecting our children.

Let’s be known as a society that defends the vulnerable and cares for the unborn. They are worth dignity and salvation and deserve to be guarded.

2010-03-15T10:31:00.000-07:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

WE PROTECT ANIMALS BETTER THAN WE PROTECT UNBORN CHILDREN
by Ashley Beaudin
The Standard, St. Catharine's May 2008

As a young woman in Canada, Bill C-484 - due to go to a parliamentary committee - has demanded my attention. Bill C-484 makes it a legal offence for an unborn child to be either killed or injured during the commission of an offence against the child's pregnant mother. To a generation that will quickly emerge onto the forefront as mothers and fathers, I believe this bill is critical.

We have an opportunity to see a bill enacted that will raise the bar in both women's and children's rights. This bill can act as a strong disincentive to violence against pregnant women and attest to the health and safe delivery of every child.

This bill has been opposed in the name of giving women choice. But we find the lack of this legislation is a direct attack on a woman's power to choose. A woman is choosing to receive her baby and if she is attacked, suffers a loss of the baby she is carrying and is unable to see any legal action made, that is a degradation of her choice. Currently and legally, if an attacker kills a pregnant woman's child, no charges can be laid.

Legally, we have given more protection to animals than to an unborn human child. This blatantly says that we value the life of an animal more than a human life. Let's do the same for our children and make protection accessible to the unborn child.

I speak to every father, every mother, every young man and young woman, let's not be known as a society that failed to protect the unborn from crime. Rather, let's be known as a society that sought justice and did not give up until it was found.

Ashley Beaudin
Smithville

Copyrighted 2008

2010-03-15T10:28:00.000-07:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

BILL C-484

by Ashley Beaudin
London Free Press, March 28 2008

Bill C-484 should grant national attention The recent bill, Bill C-484, introduced Feb. 29 by Conservative MP, Ken Epp (Edmonton - Sherwood Park) passed its second reading and is expected to go to the Justice and Human Rights Committee.

This bill, also known as the Unborn Victims of Crime Act would create "a separate offence when an unborn child is harmed or killed during the commission of an offence against the child's pregnant mother."

Currently, if an attacker kills a pregnant woman and her child, no charges can be laid to recognize the fetal victim. This leaves the families of the victim, who are left grieving the death of two lives with a feeling of injustice. Notably, in the United States thirty seven states have fetal-homicide laws. But in Canada charges can be laid only if the baby has left the womb. Canada has an opportunity to take a stand for progression and protection; advancing even beyond the world's biggest superpower.

A woman and a child are indeed within the same physical body, but are two separate lives. It seems discriminatory to charge an attacker with one account of homicide when it took two separate lives. In some cases, an attacker attacks a pregnant woman for her baby. When the attacker is only charged for the case of the mother, society affirms the intention of the attacker under the reasoning that the life of the fetus was insignificant.

We are looking at an issue of women's rights. Canada has been applauded for giving an equal voice to all people and being a land of choice. Yet the lack of this legislation is a direct attack on a woman's power to choose. A woman is choosing to receive her baby and beginning to establish a family. When a woman is attacked, suffers a loss of the baby she is carrying and is unable to see any legal action made; that is a degradation of her choice. It also expresses the message that the choice never belonged to her as the baby was taken from her by human hands without any legal repercussions. When a mother chooses life for her child, that child - unborn or not - should be protected under law.

Objectors to the bill have said this law will affect abortion rights; however, this is not the case. This law specifically states that the bill will not apply to any act of omission by the mother of the child, meaning that the mother could not be charged under this legislation for terminating her pregnancy. The presence of this legislation must be demanded by every man and woman. As, the lack of such legislation could be argued not only as a human rights issue in regards to the rights of women and children but also a discriminatory offense against the pregnant women of our nation. The issue here is not one of politics and debate, rather of justice and consequence.

Let's simply by known as a nation who determined to unite for the purpose of protecting our children, rather than be found fighting in the complexity and hype of political agendas that may or may not be affected. We can be a society that defends the vulnerable and cares for the lives of our children.. They are worth dignity and merit our defence.

Copyright 2008

2010-03-15T10:24:00.000-07:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

UNBORN VICTIMS: A LETTER TO THE EDITOR
by Ashley Beaudin
The News, Mississauga April 1 2008

Dear Editor:

The recent bill, Bill C-484, introduced Feb. 29 by Conservative MP, Ken Epp (Edmonton - Sherwood Park) passed its second reading and is expected to go to the Justice and Human Rights Committee.

This Bill, also known as the Unborn Victims of Crime Act, would create, "a separate offence when an unborn child is harmed or killed during the commission of an offence against the child's pregnant mother." Currently, if an attacker kills a pregnant woman and her child, no charges can be laid to recognize the fetal victim. This leaves the families of the victim, who are left grieving the death of two lives, with a feeling of injustice. In the United States, 37 states have fetal-homicide laws. But, in Canada, charges can be laid only if the baby has left the womb.

A woman and a child are within the same physical body, but two separate lives. It seems discriminatory to charge an attacker with one count of homicide when two lives were taken. When a mother chooses life for her child, that child – unborn or not – should be protected under law. Objectors to the Bill have said this law will affect abortion rights: Not the case. This law states the bill will not apply to any act of omission by the mother of the child, meaning the mother could not be charged under this legislation for terminating her pregnancy.

The presence of this legislation must be demanded by every man and woman. The issue here is not one of politics and debate, but rather of justice and consequence.
Copyright 2008

2010-03-12T19:29:00.000-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

BILL C-484 NEEDS ATTENTION

by Ashley Beaudin
Niagara This Week April 4, 2008

The recent Bill C-484, introduced Feb. 29 by Conservative MP Ken Epp (Edmonton-Sherwood Park), passed its second reading and is expected to go to the Justice and Human Rights Committee. This bill, also known as the Unborn Victims of Crime Act, would create "a separate offence when an unborn child is harmed or killed during the commission of an offence against the child's pregnant mother."

Currently, if an attacker kills a pregnant woman and her child, no charges can be laid to recognize the fetal victim. This leaves the families of the victim, who are left grieving the death of two lives with a feeling of injustice. Canada has an opportunity to take a stand for progression and protection; advancing even beyond the world's biggest superpower.

A woman and a child are indeed within the same physical body, but are two separate lives. It seems discriminatory to charge an attacker with one account of homicide when it took two separate lives. In some cases, an attacker attacks a pregnant woman for her baby. When the attacker is only charged for the case of the mother, society affirms the intention of the attacker under the reasoning that the life of the fetus was insignificant.

We are looking at an issue of women's rights. Canada has been applauded for giving an equal voice to all people and being a land of choice. Yet the lack of this legislation is a direct attack on a woman's power to choose. A woman is choosing to receive her baby and beginning to establish a family. When a woman is attacked, suffers a loss of the baby she is carrying and is unable to see any legal action made, that is a degradation of her choice. It also expresses the message that the choice never belonged to her as the baby was taken from her by human hands without any legal repercussions. When a mother chooses life for her child, that child -- unborn or not -- should be protected under law.

The presence of this legislation must be demanded by every man and woman. Let's simply be known as a nation who determined to unite for the purpose of protecting our children, rather than be found fighting in the complexity and hype of political agendas that may or may not be affected.

Ashley Beaudin

Smithville

2010-03-12T19:26:00.000-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

NO DANGER TO ABORTION RIGHTS

by Beck Poulsen

Montreal Gazette August 17, 2008

Joyce Arthur either doesn't know what she's talking about when she claims that Bill C-484 "negates the current 'born-alive' definition of a human being in the Criminal Code by prohibiting it as a defence. This in effect makes the fetus a human being, thereby jeopardizing abortion rights."

The bill clearly states that "It is not a defence to a charge under this section that the child is not a human being." This is proof that C-484 recognizes that the fetus is, in fact, not a "human being" in today's criminal law. How? By making it explicit that, in spite of it not being a "human being," it would be a crime to kill it without the pregnant woman's consent.

The Law Reform Commission of Canada, in its 1989 report, Crimes Against the Fetus, noted that criminal-law protection is not limited to persons. The Canadian Criminal Code already covers crimes against animals and dead bodies. Why can't we protect fetuses, though not "human beings," from third-party attacks against their mothers?

Beck Poulsen

Vanier, Ont.

2010-03-12T19:24:00.000-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

FETAL RIGHTS STIR DEBATE ON ABORTION

by Chris Wright

The National Post, March 5 2008

It is sadly hypocritical to discredit another's motives while defending a position based solely on your agenda. This was seen recently in the attempt by Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada to label the efforts of a grieving mother as seeking “vengeance,” when speaking of Mary Talbot, a supporter of proposed Bill C484.

Many Canadians know the ugly story of the killing of 19-year-old Olivia Talbot and her unborn child. As Mary Talbot (Olivia's mother) pointed out in response to Ms. Arthur, the killer of her daughter and her unborn child will not be affected by the passing of this legislation. His sentence -for one count of murder, not two, even though his own confession was that his intent was to murder the child - has already been determined. Seeking vengeance is no longer an option for Mary Talbot, even if she did desire it.

Bill C484 would allow charges to be laid in the death of an unborn child if the mother is a victim of violent crime. That is its sole application. That said, as Dr. Margaret Somerville noted in the article, this bill forces the Canadian people to confront the truth that there is life in the womb of a mother. In her words, “Unavoidably, this bill tells us that a fetus is not a nonexistent entity. Which is really what the pro-choice people have struggled to get Canadians to believe: that until it's born it doesn't exist, so you don't have to worry about abortion.”

Not surprisingly, therefore, the most prevalent voice of opposition to this bill is the voice of the pro-abortionist lobbyists. They seek to discredit Mary Talbot's position as being biased, and yet their own position is completely politically motivated. This is essentially why Ms. Arthur and others are criticizing this proposed bill - because they perceive it as challenging their vested interest, namely the pro-abortion movement.

Copyright 2008

2010-03-12T19:14:00.000-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

DON'T GIVE UP

by Sven Eric Johnson

Ottawa Citizen, September 3 2008

In recent news, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announced that the Conservative party was proposing to abandon Bill C-484, the Unborn Victims of Crime Act, due to the possible federal election.

As a young boy growing up on a farm in Saskatchewan, I distinctly remember my father telling me, at the age of five or six, how important it was to always finish any job or project that I'd started. I really wish a great big dad would sit down our government leaders and look them straight in the eye and tell them this.

It is a shame to see so much hard work to go down the tubes all in the hopes of being most popular party with the most votes. I also seem to remember from high school, those who moved on to the next grade or were honoured at graduation, were those who worked and completed their work, and not necessarily those who were most popular.

My hopes are, for the sake of demonstrating its integrity to Canadians, that the Conservative party continues working toward the goal they started with. They need to promise they will reintroduce legislation after the election outcome.

Sven Eric Johnson,

Ottawa

2010-03-12T19:12:00.000-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: BABY, IT'S REAL

by Sarah Sonne
The Calgary Herald, September 1 2008

Re: "It's not a baby," Letter, Aug. 29.

I'd like to respond to Andy Mulcahy's comment that we do not have an innate emotional attachment to a fetus, in his letter complaining about Bill C-484.

A good friend of mine is pregnant, and I and the rest of our group of friends are extremely attached to her fetus. We touch my friend's belly and talk to it, we call it by name, we discuss how it develops week by week, and we are all excited to meet it in a couple of months. How is this scary? I support Bill C-484 for my friends and their unborn children, not some unrelated stranger whose uterus I feel the need to control, as Mulcahy suggested. Mulcahy was once a fetus. This is something every pro-choicer has to come to terms with eventually.

Sarah Sonne,

Vanier, Ont.

2010-03-12T19:10:00.000-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: MINISTER'S ACTIONS SURPRISING, CONFUSING

by Sarah Sonne
The Guelph Mercury, August 30 2008

Dear Editor - Federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson's announcement Monday that the Conservative government would be introducing a replacement bill to Bill C-484, the Unborn Victims of Crime Act, in order to avoid "reopening the abortion debate" was both surprising and confusing. Bill C-484 only broadens what is already law in Canada -- embryos, fetuses, and unborn children are already afforded some protection through Section 238 of the Criminal Code and the Assisted Human Reproduction Act.

Section 238 of the Criminal Code, which Bill C-484 would be amending, protects unborn children during the act of birth. Likewise, the Assisted Human Reproduction Act states it is a criminal offence to destroy an embryo or fetus without the written permission of the parents or donors.

At conception and birth, it is a criminal offence to "kill or destroy" a wanted unborn child, and yet abortion has not been affected by either of these laws, which have been in place for years.

Bill C-484 simply takes that foundation and bridges the gap between conception and birth, making it a criminal offence to kill or harm a wanted unborn child at any point in a pregnancy without the permission of the mother. It's nothing new, and it has no ability to affect abortion since all three laws hinge on the mother's consent (or lack thereof). Fifteen pregnant women have been brutally murdered since 2004, five of them this year. This is a much needed amendment and I fully support it.

-- Sarah Sonne, Guelph

2010-03-12T19:07:00.000-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO HAVE A BABY
by Sarah Sonne
The Toronto Star, June 9 2008

Letter to the Editor Re:Pro-lifers, not women's shelters, love Bill C-484, June 6 2008

In defending "women's rights," Antonia Zerbisias is actually limiting choices for women. To say that Bill C-484 is anti-woman and anti-choice, or that "women's interests are not paramount," is illogical and unfounded. Bill C-484 was created specifically to support women's interests in the protection of their unborn children. The act states, "This section does not apply in respect of conduct relating to the lawful termination of the pregnancy of the mother of the child to which the mother has consented."

The bill is not about abortion. It simply states that when a mother has chosen to carry her child to full term, the law supports that choice and will not allow someone to take that freedom away from her without consequences. We're not talking about a return to "coat hangers and knitting needles" here; we're talking about weapons being used to take a pregnancy away from a woman by force.

Bill C-484 does not change the definition of a human being, nor does it take any choice or rights away from women. It empowers a woman's choice to reproduce and it sends a clear message that violence against pregnant women is wrong by addressing the very thing that defines a pregnancy – her fetus.

The bill attempts to empower a victim of violence by validating her choices and freedom, yet it appears that its critics are concerned with everyone whom it does not apply to.

Find a woman whose pregnancy has ended because of violence and ask her how she feels.

Sarah Sonne, Vanier, Ont.

2010-03-12T18:46:00.000-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

LETTER TO THE EDITOR RE: A THREAT TO RIGHTS

by Sarah Sonne
The Kitchener Record, August 6, 2008

In her letter to the editor on July 29th, Elizabeth Clarke states that "The bill [C-484] would amend the Criminal Code to allow homicide charges to be laid in the death of a fetus when a pregnant woman is attacked."

Bill C-484 is not a fetal homicide law. In order to be considered as such, it would have to classify fetus' as victims of homicide under the Criminal Code. It is not attempting to do that. Rather, it would create a new offense with similar sentencing to homicide, without granting person hood to unborn children. America can have fetal homicide laws because they also have restrictions on abortion, Canada does not. Bill C-484 also includes three important clauses. It explicitly excludes abortion, acts of good faith, and any act or omission of an act by the pregnant woman. Therefore this law would only protect a certain class of unborn children who are killed or injured during an attack on a pregnant woman, without giving fetus' autonomy, or giving the law any jurisdiction to prosecute pregnant women.

If Ms. Clarke had actually studied Bill C-484, she would see that all of her fears have already been taken into consideration. But evidently, she did not.

Sarah Sonne

2010-03-12T17:57:00.000-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

MORE RIGHTS, MORE CHOICES FOR WOMEN

by Sarah Sonne

There is currently a private member's bill that has entered committee in Parliament. It is receiving a lot of attention, and a lot of confusion has surrounded what this bill is and what it is not.

It is Bill C-484, the Unborn Victims of Crime Act. If it becomes law, it would make it a separate offence to kill or harm a wanted fetus during an attack on the mother if the attacker knew or ought to have known that she was pregnant when she was attacked.

Violence against women rises dramatically during pregnancy. A pregnant woman is six times more likely to be abused than a woman who is not pregnant. This bill would protect and support pregnant women by clearly stating that she is not on her own in protecting her unborn child. It would fill in the gap that pregnant women currently experience by validating that they want to have their child, and that if they lose their pregnancy because of violence they will be mourning a death that is not recognized.

Canada claims to be a pro-choice nation, but it currently completely disregards the choice to be pregnant. Women have the right to choose to be a mother, or to have an abortion. But if she chooses to be a mother, the nine months leading up to the birth of her child are like a no-man's-land in the eyes of the law. While she gets ultrasounds, decorates her baby's room, picks names and clothes and reads book after book on pregnancy and mothering, she may not realize that her unborn child is not recognized by the law. The law does not consider an unborn child human until it has exited the womb alive. Until that moment the baby and the mother are considered one person, and all rights default to the mother. Except the right to consider her fetus a baby.

If a pregnant woman is attacked and she cannot protect her unborn child, she has no backup in the eyes of the law. Because Canada does not protect the choice to be pregnant, if pregnancy is taken away from her through violence, it is not recognized in the courts.

There have been cases in Canada where pregnant women have been specifically targeted because they were pregnant, even one case where a woman was stabbed in the abdomen with a sword, and yet no charges were laid in the death of her wanted child. If a woman is shot in the stomach for target practice, which has also happened, and she survives but her baby dies, the harshest penalty that can be laid is assault.

It doesn't matter that she has a room waiting for the moment she becomes a mother, it doesn't matter how much she considers her unborn baby her baby and not an extra body part. The fact she has lost part of her future is not recognized by the law because the unborn child isn't legally recognized.

Property is protected under the law. Possessions are protected under the law. Pets are protected under the law. None of these things are human, and yet it's not OK to attack them. It doesn't make sense that anything wanted can be destroyed without recognition. If Canada is truly pro-choice, it needs to facilitate all choices. It needs to empower women to keep their child.

It's simple; if a woman chooses to keep her child, that should be her right. And if Canada says she has that right, but does not recognize in court when that choice is taken away, then she really never had that right. Canada as it stands now, is saying women have the right to be a mother, but they are on their own while they are pregnant because we are pro-choice. There's no middle ground.

Bill C-484 is very clear in what it does and does not say. It deals specifically with a wanted pregnancy. It says if a woman wants her child, no one can violently take it away from her. It says if a woman is attacked and her unborn child dies, she has the right to consider her unborn child a victim. It validates her feelings that her unborn child is one of the most significant parts of her life while she is pregnant.

It gives women more rights and more choices. It is a pro-choice, pro-woman bill and needs to be applauded as such.

Sarah Sonne lives in Guelph.

2010-03-10T19:57:00.001-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:

ONE STEP CLOSER
by Amy Good

St. Catharine's Standard, November 18 2008

I wrote an article that was published on Sept 5th QUIT SPECULATING AND LOOK AT THE VALUE OF BILL C-484. The article was regarding Ken Epp's Bill to help protect pregnant women and their unborn children against acts of violence. After Harpers caucus pulled it's support of Bill C-484 I am very happy to hear that on Sat Nov 15th Resolution P-207 passed at the Conservative Policy Convention that was held in Winnipeg.

What this means is now it is policy for the Conservative Party to support bills that create a separate charge for the injury or death of an unborn child. As a young Canadian with many friends at that child bearing age (as well as myself), I am proud to say that we are moving closer to seeing laws to protect wanted unborn children.

2010-03-10T19:55:00.001-08:00

VIOLENCE AGAINST PREGNANT WOMEN:
I'M PROTECTED NOW

by Sarah Sonne
Winnipeg Sun, November 19 2008

Re: Conservative policy convention. I am writing to commend the Conservative party for passing Resolution P-207 (protecting pregnant women) at their policy convention this past weekend. Passing legislation that recognizes the injury or death of an unborn child during an attack on a pregnant woman is something that will secure my vote for, and trust in, the Conservative party.

I am looking forward to the day when I can be pregnant and know that my decision to keep my child is respected and my unborn child is fully protected. Thank you for listening to my voice, and the voice of many other young women, and making it party policy to protect us in the way we, as young and pregnant women, want to be protected and not compromising to appease a demographic that is not, and does not want to be, pregnant.

Sarah Sonne
Vanier, Ont.

2010-03-10T19:48:00.001-08:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS
September 25 2005

Mr. Myron Thompsoon (Wild Rose, CPC):

"Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure to meet a group of young people called MY Canada, or Motivated Young People for a Strong Canada.

My Canada is meant to serve as a banner for all young Christians in Canada, between the ages of 15 and 35, who are committed to being a voice for truth and justice in our nation. They are not representing a denominaion or a special interest group. Their mission is to engage with leaders to let them know they exist and what their heart is for our nation as well as to motivated and mobilize young Canadians so they too will become leaders themselves one day.

They recognize that the voice of the younger generation particularly those who hold fast to traditional standards of morality is pretty much absent. One of the reasons this exists is because the federal leaders have told them how the younger generation things. My Canada is here to say they want their voices to be factored into the equation.

I would invite all members to come and meet with these future leaders at a breakfast meeting this Thursday at 8:00am in Room 200 West Block. It will be well worth their time. Welcome to the House, MY Canada."

[Applause and standing ovation by many members in the House of Commons]

2010-03-10T19:32:00.000-08:00

MYC MAG SWITCHES TO BLOG FORMAT! - NOTICE: OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS WE HAVE HAD A VOLUNTEER WRITERS TEAM THAT HAS BEEN WRITING ARTICLES ON A VARIETY OF TOPICS. SOME OF THESE ARTICLES HAVE BEEN FOR OUR PERSONAL SITE, OTHERS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO NATIONAL NEWS OUTLETS AND HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED. UP UNTIL NOW (MARCH 2010) WE HAVE POSTED THESE ARTICLES ON OUR MYC WEB MAGAZINE. AS OF THIS MONTH WE ARE GOING TO BE TRANSITIONING TO A BLOG FORMAT. THE NEXT SEVERAL (MANY!) POSTS WILL BE RETROACTIVE POSTS OF ARTICLES THAT HAVE BEEN WRITTEN ON A VARIETY OF TOPICS IN THE LAST YEARS. WE HOPE YOU ENJOY THEM AND THAT THEY ARE A SOURCE OF GREAT INFORMATION FOR YOU.

DISCLAIMER: The views in these articles are the views of the writers, not necessarily the official views of the MY Canada Association. Our writers are free to share their perspectives openly.

2009-05-12T14:16:00.000-07:00

One of our members, Joshua James Harlan Fry, a 19 year old from New Brunswick, wrote this article for the 40th anniversary of abortion being legalized in Canada. On May 14th, 1969, abortion was legalized in Canada under certain conditions. In 1988, abortion was decriminalized completely, striking its reference out of the Criminal Code, leaving Canada with no laws or restrictions on abortion. We hope to see many of you on Parliament Hill on Thursday for the National March For Life. The theme this year is "Exodus 2009: A Future Without Abortion."

Just something I have been asking myself over and over again... and it's really gotten to me. People, and sadly the laws, say that a child in the womb is not a person until it's either born, or X days have passed.
This, too me, makes no sense. It brings back haunting images from times and wars past when people attacked others because they didn't look the same, or because they were different.

Take a look at all the genocides going on in the world today. Out of hate, out of dislike for differences. Take a look at slavery in the past of African Americans. They looked different, so they were less then human, was a defense many people used. And yes this extends into World War II, into Nazi Germany. The people whom were being attacked and killed were considered less then human. They were considered weak and useless. They were not considered human by those laws.

Now let me ask you something and please bear with me until the end of this little rant, please. We, as humans, all have a few things in common. For one thing we are all different. No two humans are the very, exact, same. Even identical twins are different in some way. We have different sizes, different hair, eyes, noses, ears and skin tone. Each and every single one of our finger prints are, in fact, unique.

Now let me ask you something else. How many chromosomes do you have?
Forty-Six (46).
Now let me ask you this next question. How many chromosomes does a child in the womb have? Forty-Six (46).

So now let me ask you what makes us so different from a child in the womb then? They have the same amount of chromosomes as every other human being on earth. They have the same building blocks that we have had and we still do have. We are no different, at the very base of it, then the child in that womb.

Take a look at a pine tree seed. It's smaller then the fully grown tree, it's still a tree. It's got the material it needs to be a tree. It's never going to be anything else but a tree. It's a tree. You can look at a child in the womb the exact same way. It may not look like a fully grown human, but it's still a human.

I find it sick that people would think of children in the womb as not human at all. How does this work out, then? Did we suddenly change when we were born? Did we morph into being a human? We, from the very beginning of conception, are human. We don't suddenly change to being human once we are out of the womb or at a certain date. We are human.
You cannot say that while I was in my mothers womb that I was not a
human, because I am a human now. You cannot say I am less then human when I still have the same amount of chromosomes as I did when I was in my mothers womb.

You were never anything else but a human being. You were a human being inside the womb, you were a human being when you were born, when you first learned how to ride a bike, when you first looked at the stars, when you took your first breath. You were human. You were a part of this species here on earth when you where conceived, and you are still a human being now. What gives you the right to tell someone who will be a
human being, who will look up at the stars, someone who has the same amount of chromosomes as you, a born human being, that they are not a human? You were not some other being while you were in the womb, you were not just a blob of cells, you were not something less then human.

You were, and are, a human being. The only difference is that you made it out alive.

God Bless You Whoever You Are,

Joshua J.H. Fry

2008-11-29T20:37:00.000-08:00

2008-11-29T20:35:00.000-08:00

2008-11-29T12:58:00.000-08:00

Go to our FaceBook Group as well and see more posts.

2008-11-29T12:51:00.000-08:00

Our Director (Faytene Kryskow)'s Speech To Our Parliamentarians At Our 2008 Parliamentary Reception:

Good Evening! If you have not already heard it from one of our young people we want to begin by say a big WELCOME to all our of our Parliamentarians! (Applause and whooting). We appreciate you and we thank you for taking time out of your busy schedules to be with us this evening. We really hope it will be a refreshing time, a tasty time and a fun time for you as you connect, heart to heart, with young people that have come from both far and near to honour you. That is what this night is for. It is our way of saying thank you to our Parliamentarians for their tireless service both to their constituents and to all Canadians. Plainly put: we think you are awesome! After these brief remarks we will encourage you to continue to eat, mix, mingle, dance and enjoy the amazing company in this room! Stay as long as you want to!

Also in just a moment, I am going to call up a couple of our young people to share a brief word with you, but before I do, let me honour those of you that might be a little new to the MY Canada Association by giving you a quick introduction to who we are and why we are here this week. For those of you that are familiar with us – we are so excited to bring a good report to you regarding the growth and effectiveness of the organization since our last Parliamentary Reception, a year ago. Many of you have been a deep encouragement to us as you have given us advice and coaching about how we, as young Canadians, can apply ourselves in helping to shape Canada for future generations. As the director of MY Canada I want to say that in SO many ways, the good report I am about to bring is in honour of you and your great input!

The MY Canada Association began in 2005 when a group of young adults from Vancouver received a deep conviction that it was time for a non-partisan voice to begin to emerge from the young generation in Canada and engage in meaningful dialogue with our national leaders. Canada had the young Liberals and the young Conservatives, young new democrats but what about simply the YOUNG CANADIANS who were willing to work with every party and who were passionate to see Canada strong for generations to come? At this same time, there were several voices both in national media and voices coming from this very Hill who would say blanket statements like, “The youth of the nation believe this, or young Canadians believe that…” Often these blanket statements were very socially liberal, at times extremist and very digressive from the founding principles that have made Canada great in so many ways. Without getting into all the semantics of these statements and their ideologies we simply felt that more often than not these blanket statements made of the next generation did not represent us. At the same time we realized that we were not doing our job! If this was the perception of young Canadians, we must not have been engaging in the awesome system of democracy in an effective way. We were not ‘showing up’ and that needed to change. I think we would all agree that with the lowest voter turn out in recent Canadian history just occurring in this past election, there is a need for young Canadians to SHOW UP. So off we went, and here we still are.

In 3 short years the MYCanada Association has grown to a membership and on-line network size of 30,000 with a strong internet presence. Along with this we have established a house office here in Ottawa where young adults can come for a 3 month internship to learn how they can be effective forces for positive change in Canada on a variety of fronts. Some of these young people have gotten so hooked that they have become long termers. We currently have 5 full time workers who have decided to dedicate this season of their life to the work of MY Canada.

Over this past year our leadership has traveled from coast to coast speaking and motivating Canadians in a variety of forums. We have personally hosted 5 events (a conference and 4 rallies) which, we realized just last night have had an accumulative attendance of over 11,000 people. These events have stretched across the nation we have hosted them in St. Hubert (Quebec), Nunavut (Iqaluit), Edmonton, Toronto and Saint John’s NB. We are excited to say that we are also ramping up for a very big year in 09 with perhaps our largest events yet coming in St. John’s and Vancouver.

Along with this, we mobilized, enthusiastically into elections all across Canada. We are so happy to see the SMILING faces of many MPs that we helped get elected in this reception tonight. It was our joy, privilege and honour and we are so glad to see your faces on this Hill. We had a lot of fun knocking on your doors, especially when people would change their vote simply because they said we were young and good looking – we’ll take it for ya!

Finally, a major and growing emphasis of the organization this past year has been media. As director of MY Canada I have been on national television at least once a week bringing a report from Parliament Hill to our viewership and beyond. Along with this we have been on several national talk shows – one of our favourite being a special feature with Radio Canada in Quebec. We are hooked on the camera – just some of you (admit it). Along with broadcasting media, our young people are watching national papers ever day and writing multiple op-eds a week under their own names. You are likely reading our words much more often than you realize.

We are growing every week and loving ever minute of it! Our nation is great and it is great to be able to contribute to her building in these and other ways. We count it a privilege and an honour to be right here, right now. We also want to say that we are committed. We are committed to working in any and every way that we can to support you as you bring forth legislation on issues that we are excited about.

A big hats off to Chris Warkentin for getting his Crystal-Meth bill passed, to Ed Fast for his internet pornography bill, to Joy Smith for her tireless work regarding human trafficking and the recent success of her motion at the Conservative Policy Convention (we can’t wait to see what comes out of that!), to Ken Epp for trumpeting women’s rights and protecting pregnant women through his work on the Unborn Victims of Crime Bill (WE LOVE IT and were so excited when this resolution passed at the Conservative Policy Convention a couple weeks ago), hats off for John McKay for his poverty bill that received royal assent, for the many AMAZING MPs that spoke out on behalf of Canadians opposing the controversial appointment to Henry Morgentaler to the Order of Canada, for Members from every party that supported raising the age of Sexual Protection. In our language we want to say, YOU GUYS ROCK!

It was a joy to work along side of you, speaking to committees and lobbying MPs to see these pieces passed. My first of 2 messages to you tonight is that we want to remind you that we are COMMITTED, I will repeat, COMMITTED to bringing our time, voice, network, technical ability, graphic design ability and whatever we can to the table to support other amazing legislation like this that you will undoubtly bring forth in the 40th Parliament. As we have said in previous years, we will say it again, “We are here and we are here to stay.” This is our Canada and we are taking responsibility for her. We truly want to see her strong for generations to come and we are committed to walking shoulder to shoulder encouraging our Parliamentarians as you seek to do the same. Our goal will either be to build our names and our organizations or our nations – I know, as I look around this room, that it is truly full of nation builders.

By the way (we will put in this plug) if you are looking for admiistraative staff, we do have a roster of amazing young people who have told us that they would be humbled by an opportunity to work in a Member’s office. If you are in a jam, feel free to let us know and we will get some great young people to contact you. Our heart is to serve. We know that as you are strenthened, in every way (which clearly includes good staff around you), Canada will be stronger – and if you have not caught on, we are all about that!

As the MYCanada director my second and last message to you is this: PLEASE, for the sake of this nation and future generations stand strong for the things that matter – family, safety, life, health and stewarding our great nation’s natural resources nation well. Continue to be men and women of courage. Canada needs it. Young people are hungering for it. Many of you have touched, trumpeted and prevailed against the injustices of our day but there is much left to do. To draw just one illustratiuon – the fact that Canada is the ONLY Western nation that has no laws on life for the unborn, in our assessment, is not a tribute to our progress but cowardice.

We have noticed, in the history books, there are really only 2 sets of names you read about: the outstandingly evil and the outstandingly, courageous, principled. Those who had no cause and lived lives of apathy and timidity are rarely remembered and rarely mentioned. We believe, in many ways, we are in a window of time where Canada is calling for men and women of fervent passion to rise with a cause beyond our pocketbooks.

William Wilberforce said once, ““If to be feelingly alive to the sufferings of my fellow-creatures is to be a fanatic, I am one of the most incurable fanatics ever permitted to be at large.”

Where are the Wilberforces of our nation and of our time? The ones that will work for a cause of righteousness, mercy or justice until it is the standard in society.

Be men and women of courage.
Do the right thing – if you don’t know what the right thing is, ask us and we will give you our perspective on a variety of issues.
Be the solution, be the righteous instigators of our time.
Stare evil in the face and say, “Not in my Canada.”
Don’t hold back.
You have been given the keys to this nation, in this moment of time.
Your timidity, excuses, or apathy, could cost future generations everything.
Your courage could deliver masses.

Why am I being so forthright? It is because I can feel the DNA of history shapers in the room who have the power to move mountains with words.

Mr. Trudeau – may I be so bold as to say, Justin, your name means Justice. How interesting that a young man with this name would be given the favour of tabling the first Private Member’s Bill. As you consider what to bring forward, our hope is that it would set standard of true and pure justice. Make the wrong things right. If you need some ideas of what to bring forward, we have a few and would love to share them with you. We are looking forward to the first chance we get to sit and share, heart to heart, with you and other new faces to the house.

Beloved Parliamentarians, Divine Providence has ordained that the well being of Canadians has been entrusted to you. The decisions you make will mentor, shape and in so many ways set the climate of this nation. Look in our eyes, listen to our voices, remember our faces – in them see the faces of your children and grandchildren.

For their sake and ours, leave this nation, better than you found it. We believe, we honour you, we appreciat you and want to say again that our hope is that togethere we will build a strong Canada for generations to come.

On that note, I would like to call up a couple of our young people to share their dream for this awesome nation they will inherit.

2008-09-08T17:21:00.000-07:00

On Sunday, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper requested from the Goveror General that the 39th Parliament be dissolved and Canada would enter into Its 40th Election - the third in four years. this is the perfect oppertunity for the church to rise up and vote for righteousness, life and morality issues. Much was accomplished over the last two years through the minority Conservative government - i.e. raising the age of sexual consent from 14 to 16, clear support fro Israel from Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and the apology for Residencial Schools to the First Nations peoples of Canada, but much more still needs to be accomplished. We need a government that will bring in legislation that would protect pregnant woman and their unborn children from violence, ensuring religious and free speech rights are not overturned by out of control Human Rights Commissions and the protection of our most vulnerable of citizens - unborn children in the womb.

Voting is an important tool that we as Christians have been given to help guild, steward and disciple our nation in righteousness and justice. We have a responsibility to not only pray but to show up on October 14th and vote for a righteous government. I encourage you to find out about the candidates in your area, what their policies and platforms are on key moral issues facing our nation and the world today. When you find a good candidate help them on their campaigns, gather your friends and family and encourage them to do the same thing, do your part to ensure that the 40th Parliament has seats filled with men and women who will stand for righteousness, justice and life. One of my favorite quotes from Faytene is "The greatest act of intercession was not a prayer but an action" Do your part in intercession and act.

2008-08-18T17:45:00.000-07:00

Hello blogging world!

My name is Tamara Crampton, and I have been an intern with Faytene since January 19th 2006. However, it is now my time to leave our nations capital and move to Edmonton. As my time in Ottawa comes to a close, I have been thinking of all the things that I have learnt and experienced as an intern.

Before moving to Ottawa, i had no grid for politics, did care about politics, probably couldnt have told you who was the Prime Minister let alone who my member of parliament was. Then God ransomed my heart for the nation at TheCRY 2006 and I knew that I had to do something more. So i moved to the heart of the nation (Ottawa) where I was changed for ever!

Some of my favorite stories from my time as an itern:

One day, I had this urge to go to McDonalds (which is not something i normally crave) but I had a feeling we should go. So we pull in and initally i wanted to go through the drive through but had a feeling we should go inside, so we go inside and there are all these men in suits and little walkie talkie things in their ears. We were both super crious as to what was going on, and we were just chatting to each other and the guy in front of us says, "The Prime Minister is here". Ashley and I were shocked when from around the corner comes, yes the Prime Minister. So Ashley and I sat down near the PM and prayed for him from our booth. So funny!

What I have picked up as an intern:

One of the things that I picked up interning here was that members of parliament are just men and women who are simply doing their job. I came to a realization that so many (myself included) just bashed these men and women not having an understanding that if we are not speaking they only hear one side of the story and their job is to represent the people and so if only one side is speaking they are going to represent what they are hearing. I began to have a huge appreciation for the nations leaders. I also realized there are many who have a heart for God and are doing their best to see God come to Canada.

I also began to see that being a voice in the nation isnt all that hard, all you have to do really is show up. Some of my favorite times are being on Josiah teams. For those who dont know a Josiah team is when we have young men and women from all over Canada come to Ottawa and we meet with MP's and Senator's to talk to them about the issues we feel are affecting us in the nation. Its amazing to sit with the people that are shaping and changing our nation everyday and we get to share with them the issues on our heart. It's tangible changing the nation stuff and I love it. I love it because you dont have to be a genius or even know a lot about politics (if you know me you would know that I am not much of a political kid) but you just have to have a heart for Canada and our generation and you are set!

I am going to miss this beautiful city and the fact that I can see the Peace Tower whenever want, but I am excited to see what God is going to do with my life in the future. I just want to say thank you to everyone who has stood with me in the past season of my life. Who knows what the future holds only God and thank the Lord he knows and I dont.

Tamara Crampton

2008-08-07T15:05:00.000-07:00

Don't Be Fooled: The Truth Behind Bill C-543

Most of you reading this are probably aware of Bill C-484, the Unborn Victims of Crime Act (if not, see blog post below). However, you may not be aware of Bill C-543, a bill which claims to be a better, "less controversial" alternative to C-484. Don't be fooled, you savvy reader, and here's why:

- Bill C-543, brought forward by Liberal MP Brent St. Denis, is simply a counter-bill made solely for the purpose of detracting support from Bill C-484.

- To understand Bill C-543, let's look at Canada’s legal system. When sentencing, judges are permitted to consider “aggravating circumstances”. These are facts or situations that a judge thinks should make the offender more guilty, and therefore deserve a longer sentence.

- All Bill C-543 does is specify that pregnancy can be used as an aggravating factor. However, pregnancy can already be used as an aggravating factor. So basically this brings ZERO change to the legal system. Absolutely nothing new. So why does Bill C-543 even bother?

- Basically, those who oppose Bill C-484 believe that it will recriminalize abortion by making the fetus a "person". This is not true at all. They also believe that the bill will be used against pregnant women. This is false; the goal of the bill is to protect pregnant women. So, all C-484's opponents want to do is bring down the bill, which is the purpose of Bill C-543.

- If that's not enough, you should know that Mr. St. Denis has already introduced a Private Members Bill this Parliament. Basically, that means that Bill C-543 cannot come up for debate in this current government (or Parliament), so it has no chance of being passed.

In summary, don't be deceived into thinking both bills do the same thing. Bill C-543 does nothing new to protect women's rights, whereas Bill C-484 is making real progress. Lets not halt progress; lets expose the truth behind Bill C-543.

You can:

- Write letters to the editor; you would think that Bill C-543 would be easily exposed, but no one has pointed out its obvious flaws.

- Tell everyone you know about this, so that they don't support Bill C-543 without knowing its true and deceptive purpose.

Thanks so much for responding to this call to action. You are being a righteous nation changer.

- Jonathan -

2008-08-01T17:05:00.000-07:00

Bill C-484 by Sarah

Just a quick note to let everyone know what's new with Bill C-484 (The Unborn Victims of Crime Act). For anyone who hasn't heard, Bill C-484 is a Private Member's Bill sponsored by Ken Epp, and it passed second reading on March 5, 2008. It would amend the Criminal Code by creating a new offense, so that anyone who attacks a pregnant woman and kills or injures her unborn child would be charged not only with an offense against the woman, but an offense against the unborn child. THIS IS HUGE. And, it's just common sense.

If I was pregnant, having baby showers and decorating a nursery, picking out baby names and putting money aside for diapers and baby clothes, and on the way to my car late at night some person jumped me with a knife and stabbed my stomach and killed my baby, I would be horrified to find out that s/he couldn't be charged with taking my baby away from me.

But, right now, in Canada, the only charge that could be laid would be aggravated assault. At least 15 pregnant women have made the headlines for being severely attacked since 2004, and only 2 of those women survived. One of them was stabbed multiple times with a sword in the stomach; she survived but her baby did not. The person who did it was only charged with assault. Another woman was beaten to death for refusing to have an abortion. This is a very real situation.

We already instinctively know that a woman who is expecting considers her unborn child to be extremely valuable. And yet, we don't reflect that in the law, because babies are invisible until they are born alive. To me, that's ridiculous. They aren't invisible in the natural; everyone knows when a woman is getting ready to birth and you can't tell that woman that she's not carrying a life inside of her. But the law does all the time.

Needless to say, I became very excited about Ken Epp's bill after I recovered from my shock that this was not already law. The bill doesn't attempt to make unborn children recognizable persons under the law (that would outlaw abortion because you can't kill people; hence C-484 creates an entirely new offense instead of adding unborn children to the list of homicide victims) but it would be the first bill that gives any protection to unborn children in the past 20 years.

The bill is currently in the Justice Committee awaiting debate and then third reading. As part of a campaign to ask Members of Parliament to support this bill, we have postcards on our website that can be downloaded and printed to mail to your MP.

We also have a 3 minute informational video plus mini-poster that is available for churches or other groups to promote awareness on Bill C-484.

AND, there is an on-line petition that is collecting signatures in support of Bill C-484, to be presented to Ken Epp in the fall. Please sign it! Unofficial polls cannot be tabled in Parliament, but they can actually have more influence, especially when they get media coverage.

Go here to sign the petition:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/BillC484/signatures.html

2008-07-28T08:57:00.000-07:00

Hey everyone!

There is something that has been burning on my heart the last couple of weeks , and I thought I would share my thoughts with you! If you were unaware, Faytene is hosting a massive prayer event on Parliament Hill this August 23rd and I think that everyone in Canada should attend!! Not should attend, must attend!

The reason I say this is because, I feel, we are in one of the most crucial times this nation has ever seen. James Goll recently released a prophetic word that we are in a three year window of mercy and if we seize this moment, it will shift us into a 10 year window of mercy.

We know that prayer is one of the most effective tools we have and we know that prayer changes and shifts atmosphere's and nations. Many times throughout the bible God used men and women has intercessors to shift the impending doom upon their people and their nation. What if Esther said to herself, well someone else can do this, I don't think I am called to this. If she did this, a whole nation, a whole people group would have been wiped off the planet. What if God is calling you to come to TheCRY and your one prayer, your one voice was the one that would shift things and abortion would see the end of its days.

I continueally think of "Horton Hears A Who" by Dr.Zusus where little jojo who was playing with his yoyo was the only one not speaking up, and yet he was the one who let out one "yelp" that saved his entire community from being destroyed. We need to be like the sons of Issachar who know the times and the seasons, and we are in a season of mass prayer and fasting that will shift nations.

I want to share with you what I felt back in 2006 when TheCRY was being held. I was living in BC at the time, and i was 21 years old and an intern at my church when I heard about TheCRY and something rose in my spirit that said I had to be in Ottawa for this event. I didnt know why but I couldn't drop the feeling that I had to be there. So I asked everyone in my church if they wanted to come with me and no one wanted to come with me. So eventually, my youth pastor and I joined another church from Chilliwack BC and we headed out to TheCRY. I always had a love for Canada, and I always loved prayer, but after TheCRY things inside of me shifted and I have never been the same since that day.

So this is it, if you love your nation, if you love this generation, if you just love Jesus, you need to be at TheCRY! Money is not a limit, time is not a limit, the only limit is how much you want to see this nation change. Join us on August
23rd in Jacques Cartier Parc/Parliament Hill for a history making, nation shaking good time.

- Tamara Crampton

2008-07-27T16:54:00.000-07:00

What is Operation MOCO? by Sarah

With the exception of people who may have been out of the country for the past month, most Canadians are aware that Henry Morgentaler was awarded with the Order of Canada on July 1st, 2008 (Canada Day). The Order of Canada is the highest honour that a civilian can get in Canada- so basically, if you are made a Member of the Order, Canada is giving you a huge stamp of approval for the things you have contributed to culture or society in Canada.

If you don't know who Morgentaler is, let me briefly explain what all the fuss is about. Back in the 1960s, Morgentaler was thrown in jail for performing illegal abortions. His case went all the way to the Supreme Court, where the judges there found that a certain section of the Criminal Code that required women to have a panel of doctors approve their abortion was unconstitutional and it was struck down. The Supreme Court then told Parliament that they were responsible for creating a new CONSTITUIONAL law restricting abortions.

The problem was, Parliament never did it.

And so, by an unfortunate accident, and by breaking the law, Morgentaler got all restrictions taken off of abortions.

This means a 12 year old girl can get an abortion without her parent's knowing, and without anyone explaining to her what an abortion is, or what it could possibly do to her (make her suicidal, depressed, have nightmares, make her infertile, cause cancer, etc.) It is ridiculous to think that a girl who is not allowed to vote, drink, drive, consent to sexual activity or get a body piercing or tattoo can make an informed "choice" about abortion. She can't even go on a FIELD TRIP without her parent's consent.

Nonetheless, for some reason this accident in the judicial process has been credited to Morgentaler as a "life time contribution to health care and women's rights" and he will be presented with the Order in the next coming months if the Governor General does not change her mind and revoke the decision to award him.

Not only that, but the Nomination Committee had to break a bunch of rules to award him. First, they went to democratic vote instead of unanimous consent to silence the voices in their committee who were opposed to honouring a mass murderer. Second, they considered him when they previously rejected other nominees such as Margaret Somerville for being "too controversial" because of her conservative views on same-sex marriage. Third, when word had gotten out in the spring of 2008 that they might be considering his nomination there was such an outcry from Canada that there was an announcement from the Governor General's office that he was not and would not be on the nomination list. Basically, they lied.

And so 4MY Canada has launched Operation MOCO; Morgentaler Order of Canada Outcry. Last week the LARGEST touchtone telephone poll in the HISTORY OF CANADA found that 56% of Canadians do NOT agree with Morgentaler's Order of Canada.

The game plan for Operation MOCO is to write, call, email, or send a postcard every other day to the Nomination Committee, the Governor General, the Prime Minister, and your Member of Parliament UNTIL the Order is revoked. Visit 4mycanada.ca/MOCO.html to find the contact information for the MOCO target list.

Since the beginning of July, 9 Members of the Order of Canada have returned their Order in protest. This has NEVER happened in the history of the Order. No one has ever returned their order voluntarily. And for the first time in decades, the abortion debate is back on the table in Canada... even making the cover of Maclean's magazine.

Now is the time to make your voice heard! The abortion debate is now open and if we seize this moment with persistence, we WILL see abortion laws changed in Canada. 60% of Canadians want restrictions on abortion, and 56% of Canadians do not think Morgentaler is a hero.

We actually are a majority. It's time to let Parliament know it.

Annnnd... exciting news! MOCO is on facebook and is over 15,500 members! Come find us :) Search "Oppose Morgentaler's Order of Canada" and stay up-to-date on Operation MOCO and other initiatives that are raising a voice against Morgentaler's Order.

2008-07-27T14:04:00.000-07:00

Hey,

I'm Jonathan, another one of the new interns this summer. If you are here reading this, good job! It means that you are actively involved in getting informed and changing the nation. That's awesome, and I encourage you to keep up to date with all the MyCanada initiatives, such as Operation M.O.C.O, the postcard campaigns, and talking to your local MPs about some of the bills and issues that concern you. Tell all your friends, the more people involved, the better.

I think that it is so easy to not do anything, especially when the summer ends and life gets back to normal. But it is so great that you are on here, right now, getting involved. Think about the current state of our world today. Cool? Not really. But we could change all of society's junk. Seriously. Think about what would happen if everyone who cared about injustice and about all the filth that's around us today took a stand and did something. We would literally change the nation. You wanna see change? Make it happen. Get together with people you know, and get involved in some way. Definitely attend The CRY, for starters. But don't just whine about how hard life can be in this society, how hard it is to stay pure, complain about endless problems, etc. It can always be like that, or, through a generation which takes a stand, it can never be like that again!

Bless you guys and thanks for your prayers,

Jonathan

2008-07-25T10:48:00.001-07:00

Hey There,

My name is Amy and I am a 4 My Canada intern. It is awesome to be here, and I am learning how important it is to pay attention to what is happening in our Government. I must admit I never really paid to much attention to the Government before.

I would like to encourage anyone that hasn't paid much attention to our Government because they didn't understand or see the importance of it to visit our website www.4mycanada.com. Get informed with what is happening in our country. If there is something that is happening in Canada, a certain bill that sparks some fire in you, do something with that. All the information is on the website on how you can have a voice. Let's not take our democracy for granted, use the voice that you have been given.

If we all work together Canada can continue to be the Best Canada it can be!!

Amy

2008-07-25T09:06:00.000-07:00

Hi there. My name is Sven, and I am a MY Canada intern.

As a 21 year old young man, I feel that I carry the voice and the heart of the young men of Canada. I want to express simply, that as young men, we do have a say on the issue of abortion in Canada. I also want to say, that we do care about this issue, even though it seems like guys up until this point, have stood in the shadows of the Life Issue. The Issue of Life is no longer a Women's issue.

I would like to encourage all the men, young and old alike, to actively and practically get involved with this issue, that is by no means dead. I feel that this fight for Life will not be won, unless or until men step up and take their STAND.

Honorable Women of Canada, please forgive us.

2008-07-24T08:35:00.000-07:00

As you can see from the dates on the posts below, we have not kept this blog super active. (This is because we send most of our updates out through our mass eblasts, see http://4mycanada.ca/E-mailArchive.html for the archives.) But, GOOD NEWS, we are going to make this blog active again throughout the rest of this summer!

This is our awesome summer team. Faytene (Picture Above: red-T on the bottom left) and the six interns that have joined us. They are amazing and so we have asked them to post some 'thoughts' on this blog throughout the rest of the summer. Stay tuned to hear, from their perspective, what is happening in the capital of Canada and throughout the nation.

2007-12-14T13:59:00.000-08:00

2007-12-03T07:54:00.000-08:00

2007-12-03T07:21:00.000-08:00

2007-12-02T21:34:00.000-08:00

Pictures from the Josiah Team, Nov. 25-30th - Meetings with MPs and Senators

2007-08-27T16:42:00.001-07:00

Polite Canadian
Robin-Lee Pereda
August 23rd, 2007

They say I’m a polite Canadian-
Let me tell you some reasons why.
I give a friendly smile to my neighbor
and directions to a passer by.
I help with the highway cleanup,
Into the recycling bin it goes.
Helping to save the environment-
There’s holes in the ozone you know!

They say I’m a polite Canadian,
but there’s a price I’ve paid.
Too often my voice hasn’t been heard,
so from our nation’s roots we’ve strayed.
Our founders had the ten commandments
posted proudly on their walls.
Now our children barely know them
Have they heard of them at all?

They say I’m a polite Canadian,
but I question if it’s true…
I’ve sat back too long & watched-
now it’s time I got a clue.
A melting pot of all Nations
they say that we’ve become.
But lets not forget our foundations-
The righteous roots from which we come.

They say I’m a polite Canadian,
so I suppose that’s my excuse why
I haven’t bothered to take a stand-
instead I watch the innocent die.
Murder shows up in so many ways.
Abortion- legal & on demand.
Pop! Bang! Shoot another one.
Pedophiles killing innocence in our land.

They say I’m a polite Canadian.
I guess what should I care
if they re-write the dictionary-
just a few changes here & there.
Like the word marriage-
which used to mean a man & wife.
Beside “discipline” let’s erase spanking-
you'll scar your kids for life.

They say I’m a polite Canadian
so I think it’s about time
that I stand & take back ownership
of this great nation I claim as mine.
It’s time to put those 10 commandments
back into their rightful place.
Let’s get on our face to repent before God-
seek His wisdom & His grace.

They say I’m a polite Canadian.
Today I take a vow.
A watchman for this nation I’ll be,
though I may stand against the crowd.
Pushing on for righteousness & truth
my song will ever be
resounding from the east to west
“Oh Canada, I stand on guard for thee!”

2007-07-18T20:54:00.001-07:00

There has been tons of other activity this summer as well - sorry - we often forget to blog it :). A group of hard cores in Coquitlam had a 7 night prayer siege leading up to the CALL -- it was a powerful time. The CALL itself was also huge. You can get a fuller report in our e-mail archives on the site. Here are a couple picts from it. Powerful

2007-07-18T20:51:00.000-07:00

We love it! People are rising up all across the nation to connect with local MPs/MLAs to share their hearts with them on the issues they care about. We often foget to take our cameras but this time we didn't. This is the Vancouver team after a great heart-to-heart with Penny Priddy in the Lower Mainland of Vancouver.

Go hard guys!! .... and keep going

4MYC Leadership Team

2007-04-25T21:53:00.000-07:00

This is a very 'interesting' e-mail that we just got in from one of our members. I am amazed these days at how many young women have been coming up to me and telling me of disturbing experiences they have had that are similar to this. Very recently I had a young woman share with me that when she found out she was pregnant, she was in her doctor's office and he presented to her the 'choice' of abortion. She told him that she did not want to go that route. He proceeded to agressively council her to abort her pregnancy. She again explained that she wanted to keep the baby. After this he referred her to a psychiatrist who proceeded to 'pressure her' to have an abortion. I was amazed. This girl is level headed and has her head screwed on right. Her testimony (and a few others like it that have been shared with me since) give pretty strong evidence that the pro-choice stance is not always one that is encouraging our young women to make their own choices....wow.

Here is the e-mail we just got....

"I wanted to share something with you about my experience surrounding the abortion I had. I am not going to explain too much.. just what is in my heart as relevant to share with you.

When I was in the pre-op room I know that I heard the still small voice of my conscience. I also know that something was trying to speak to me during the time I found out that I was pregnant and the day I went to the hospital. I had a gut feeling I should not go through with it. Anyway, when I tried to tell my "friend" that I wanted to change my mind she did the opposite than support me. She went to get the nurse and they gave me something to sedate me. ( Ahh.. I hate this part of it the most - please forgive me). I tried to tell the nurse but I wasn't strong enough to stand up to both of them. I took the drugs and was so whacked out by the time of the abortion that I could not even think straight, never mind resist even though I did not want to do it.

I want people to know what I went through so they know how to pray and to find strength and ecouragment not to do it.

I am very sorry that I had the abortion and that I did not stand up to them when they drugged me up." Cindy (Grimsby, Ontario)

2007-04-08T22:16:00.000-07:00

Here are some more amazing e-mails from youth in our network sent their MP about C-22:

Dear Mr. Goodyear

I am 15 years old and concerned that the age of consent is still 14. I ask you to support Bill C-22 and raise the age of consent to 16. This will give some protection to the youth who are vulnerable to sexual exploitation from so many different sides. Also, it will give protection to all other kids of that age.

Thank you for your consideration on this issue.

Sincerely,

Louisa

*******

Dear Mr. Goodyear;

I was recently at a youth conference and the issue of raising the age of consent was talked about. I think that it is important that the age of consent be raised. Supporting Bill C-22 is critical. It will help ensure that many more kids at risk are protected from sexual predators and will make for a stronger Canada in the future.

Thank you for all the good work that you are doing as our representative in Parliament.

Respectfully,

Tereza

2007-04-05T15:49:00.000-07:00

Here are some e-mails that were sent into MPs from youth that were present at the Justice Committee when Faytene presented regarding C-22. They are powerful. They just cc'd us on them so we wanted to share them with you too!

"The age of consent is 14 right now, and I'm 14, and some of the people there said that all people around my age have sex. That's not true, because my friends wear purity rings, and some of us made a commitment to abstain from sex. I know that's not everyone but those people in there, didn't think of people like me and my friends.

I can vote at 18 and have sex at 14. Let's say you were running for Prime Minister or something, and I had sex, what would be more effective to this country? My vote? Or my sex life? I think that the age should be higher, from 14 to 16 is good and all but let's raise our standards a little higher, and say 18." - Maddy

"I am 13 years old and will be turning 14 next month so this meeting pertains to me and I would like to share my opinion with you. I want the age for consentual sex to be raised from 14 to 16. I don't think that trying to give children more education about sex in school will make that much of a difference in whether they have healthy sex with someone or not. I know that for me personally I learned about sex from my parents and from different books, not from school. Most kids don't even listen in school when they are being taught about sex because it is really awkward for both them and the teacher.
Until I attended this meeting I did not know anything really about the age of consent or even that there was one. The reason why most kids don't tell adults or even their friends about having sex is not because they think that they will get in trouble with the law. It is because they feel enbarassed and shameful about what they did." - Raelynne

2007-03-29T10:34:00.000-07:00

AGE OF SEXUAL CONSENT

We have been getting some very powerful e-mails in from a bunch regarding C-22 (raising the age of sexual consent from 14 to 16). This one is extremely powerful and we wanted to share it with you too. -- 4MYC Team

"...Heres what I would like to say to our Federal government concerning Bill C-22.....As a 17 year old Canadian, I believe that Bill C-22 is very important to protect the youth of our nation. I find it sad to think that when I walk through my halls at high school, most students aren’t really protected of sexual predators under currant Canadian legislature. I can easily admit that at the age of 14, I probably could’ve been easily been manipulated or pressured, especially with the internet opening tons of new doors to sexual predators. When I was 14, a friend of mine who was already 15 at the time, spoke to a man a couple times in a chat room. However things didn’t end there, this man then stalked her and one day attempted to abduct her. Fortunately, there were people near by and she managed to get away. This hurts it’s me know to think, that this man could have raped my friend and probably could’ve gotten away with it. My friend was 15 but wasn’t really more mature then me but unlike me, she wouldn’t have been protect under current legislature. So basically I am pleading that the government to increase the age of sexual consent to 16, so that I can walk through my halls at school and know that at least half of the students are protect of sexual predators."

2007-02-08T13:43:00.000-08:00

PICTURES FROM SIEGE OTTAWA CONFERENCE -6-

2007-02-08T13:40:00.000-08:00

PICTURES FROM SIEGE OTTAWA CONFERENCE -5-

2007-02-08T13:38:00.000-08:00

PICTURES FROM SIEGE OTTAWA CONFERENCE -4-

2007-02-08T13:35:00.000-08:00

PICTURES FROM SIEGE OTTAWA CONFERENCE -3-

2007-02-08T10:24:00.000-08:00

PICTURES FROM SIEGE OTTAWA CONFERENCE -2-

2007-02-08T10:20:00.000-08:00

PICTURES FROM SIEGE OTTAWA CONFERENCE -1-

2006-12-07T22:15:00.000-08:00

This is a quote from an e-mail we received from a Member of Parliament earlier today....so encouraging!

"Faytene,

Thanks for the great work your group is doing. You need to know that your presence here on the Hill did have a huge impact on MPs - some of whom were unsure of where young people of Canada stood on this issue.

Your thoughtful, caring presentation was a welcome addition in helping us speak up for Canada's Youth!!

I will be praying that many MPs who might have otherwise voted to disregard this important issue -- will now reconsider their postion and vote to allow full and open debate -- taking into consideration the rights of children...."

2006-12-01T17:45:00.000-08:00

I get your weekly or sometimes daily e-mails on what is going on in our nation, thank-you for that. But last week or so I got an e-mail titled "Get equipped in Vancouver" I thought "hey I live in Vancouver!" So last weekend two of my friends and I (because my mom wouldn't let me travel on the skytrain alone) went to Navigating the faith/political interface. Wow it was amazing, the knowledge and insight I received there. Thank-you so much for informing me about it. Sure I was the youngest person there (very scary), but wow, I can't say enough... it was the best weekend of my life. In the middle of one of the sessions (maybe 6hrs into the 11 that we were in sessions for) my friend Jen turned to me and said, "Alicia, we can change Canada." and it's true. Thank-you for helping us in that effort.

-Alicia Hunt

2006-11-09T21:43:00.000-08:00

This speech was made by the Minister of Veterans Affairs, the Hon. Greg Thompson last week in the House of Commons. We wanted to post it here in honour of our Veterans. Happy Rememberance Day!

*******

Mr. Speaker, a number of weeks ago the prime minister said that military service is the highest form of public service.

We are reminded of that in this House every day. It is because our Veterans have served that we can serve here in this chamber. Our Veterans are why we have a free and democratic country. It's as simple as that.

We are the direct beneficiaries of their great sacrifices and achievements, and it's why I feel honoured and humbled to rise in this House -- on the eve of Veterans Week.

Our men and women in uniform forged this nation's identity on the distant battlefields of a past century. In the two Great Wars, in the Korean War, in military operations and on Peacekeeping missions around the world, our soldiers have made Canada proud. They've made us proud.

Mr. Speaker, no one in this House needs to be convinced about that, about the honour and accomplishments of our Veterans and their modern-day colleagues. When you look around this House, you see the Poppies proudly on display. Our Veterans unite us as few things can.

Regardless of our political stripes, or where we come from, I believe we all agree that our men and women in uniform are the best in the world. They are the best trained, the most professional and the most disciplined. And they have always committed themselves - 100 per cent - to the mission.

But, Mr. Speaker, we know that our freedom is not free. It never has been free. The freedoms that we often take for granted have come with a heavy price for our country. For our families. For all of us here.

We have lost too many of our best young men and women.

As our famous war poet, John McCrae wrote, with every fallen soldier we have lost a Canadian who "loved and was loved."

Mr. Speaker, we know this. And we feel it deeply - in our hearts, and in our souls. We realize that this great country we've inherited was built by ordinary men and women who did extraordinary things.

They did it for their country. They did it for each other. They did it for you and for me. And, of course, more than anything, they did it at great sacrifice to themselves.

We understand this. We understand that our Veterans willingly stood in the face of oppression and tyranny to protect the values that all Canadians still cherish: Freedom. Democracy. The rule of Law.

That's what we must never forget. And we must remain committed to sharing this legacy with future generations.

It is this Torch of Remembrance that we raise so proudly each Veterans Week. This year, the theme could not be more fitting: "Share The Story."

Not only are we encouraging our Veterans to share their stories, we are urging Canadians -- Canadians in every region of this country -- to take the time to listen.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, there are many stories to be told, and there are many more that have gone untold -- one for each of our honoured Veterans.

I would like to share with you one of those untold stories. This past summer, while I was standing on the shores of Normandy with my eldest son, he began telling me about his grandfather's experience - "my father-in-law's experience" -- during the D-Day landing some 50 years ago.

Mr. Speaker, I stood there fascinated as I listened to my son. I was curious about the details, about the painful, brutal facts my father-in-law had rarely shared with anyone.

And I asked my son why I didn't know this story. "Why had Grand-dad not told me any of this?"

My son simply looked at me and replied: "Because you didn't ask."

Mr. Speaker, I know now that it is time to ask. It is time to listen. It is time to learn from soldiers like Harold Roderick.

Those of us who have never served, never worn the Canadian uniform, we need to take the time to understand - before "time slips away."

We need only look outside, at the last few autumn leaves clinging to their branches. With the slightest rustle of a breeze, they could be gone by dusk.

We realize this. We realize there are only three known surviving Canadian Veterans left from the First World War. We need to learn the stories of these remarkable men - all of them now well past 100 years old. I've had the privilege to meet them, and they are as dedicated to Canada today as they were when they wore the uniform. They are also our last living links to our Greatest Generation. We can't allow their stories to be lost in history, or to go untold.

Otherwise, we can only guess at what our Veterans have endured for us, what they have achieved for you and me.

We can only wonder at the emotions captured in those grainy old films and black-and-white pictures, in those scenes of Canadian soldiers marching down our Main Streets, or waving goodbye from ships pulling out to sea.

We've seen the photographs of soldiers in the departing troop trains. Their faces, through the train windows, are a mixture of sadness and excitement. Their arms reaching out for one last touch of a loved one. Sadly, for so many, it would be the final touch. Those images, their lives, still touch us today.

We cannot bear witness to these individual stories without asking ourselves if we -- if you and I, Mr. Speaker -- would have responded the same way our Veterans did.

If we had walked in their shoes, would we have had their courage?

Where did they find the strength to leave behind their loved ones and their own dreams, and walk straight into harm's way?

And as we seek the answers to these difficult questions, we must also pause to think about our men and women in uniform today. Brave Canadians still serving around the world, in such troubled spots as Afghanistan. They, as those who came before them, know the threats we face today are real, and the cause is just.

And just as in decades gone by, our men and women in uniform should know they have earned the thanks, and they have earned the praise, of a grateful nation. Today. Forever.

Mr. Speaker, in a few days, we will all leave this place, and return to our ridings, to the people we represent. There, we will gather, in our largest cities and smallest villages, side by side, to lay wreaths and to remember.

And in those moments of deep silence, we will renew our pledge to honour, always, the men and women who have given us so much, who have given us their very best.

Lest We Forget.

Thank You, Mr. Speaker.

2006-11-02T10:27:00.000-08:00

This is the poem/gift that we gave to all the Members of Parliament during the Siege 4 week. In case you can't read the poem here it is in text:

When all is said and done -
When the last vote has been cast -
When the last statement has
been made - When everyone
has returned to the place from
where they came - When all I
have to look at is the face in the
mirror and the face of the
Amighty - May my conscience be
clean and sure - That I have left
this nation better than I found
it - When party politics pull - When
all that sways the soul of man comes
crashing in - May my conscience be
clean, knowing, before self and before
God -That I have stood and having
done all to stand - Cast my vote and -
Made my statement, knowing, this is
not my land -- KNOWING -- I have
been given a trust from God
and my fellow Canadian --
KNOWING -- I have been handed
an inheritance from generations
past -- KNOWING -- I will hand
this nation to my children and
theirs -- KNOWING -- I am
accountable to all of the
above - Past, future and the
Eternal One - When all is
said and done - May I not
merely net the empty
accolades of man -
But the privilege of
knowing, before self
and before God ,
that I have left this
nation better
than I found it.

Our Prayer for the Members/Senators:
May God grant you great wisdom, strength and grace to make choices for this nation that will lead to nothing but LIFE for generations to come. Thank you for your service to our nation and future generations. -- Presented with appreciation from MY Canada (Motivated Young People for a Strong Canada)

2006-10-30T22:38:00.000-08:00

Siege 4 Photos