Straight thoughts 181

The decision of the Supreme Court of Canada “not to hear” the case of Donald David Spratt against the “bubble zone” confirms the attitude of lower courts, both in Ontario and in British Columbia.

Since the Supreme Court members are mostly appointed liberals, the decision is not surprising.

Years ago the Supreme Court decided to ignore an even more important case: Whether the unborn is a human being. There was no reaction in Government and no media outrage. Why not to leave things as they are?

Former Prime Minister Chretien was convinced that there is “social peace” on abortion and the current PM certainly does not need a reason to shake his precarious hold on power. Thus, there is no pressure from government.

The media did not report the latest march for life in Ottawa, with 13,000 participants, so they will gladly miss the opportunity to publicize the irresponsibility of the courts with respect to pro-lifers.

Unions are allowed to protest in front of factories. So-called anti-poverty groups are allowed to protest, even if their demonstrations often erupt in violence. Environmentalists, homosexuals, Tamils and all other minority groups are allowed freedom of speech anywhere, and rightly so, but pro-life citizens are treated as second class.

It does not matter that Canada is the only nation in the world without a law regulating abortion.

It does not matter that the Charter protects freedom of speech.

It does not matter what the majority wants.

It does not matter that pro-lifers are protesting places where preborn babies are slaughtered by the thousands.

The damage done by successive irresponsible governments to the fabric of our nation will have an impact for many more years, but our determination to establish a culture of life cannot be shaken.

Government misconduct, crisis and patch up.

Ontario’s chief coroner, Dr. James Young, resigned this week.

Dr. Young was not doing his work. He was not actively overseeing the operations of the office. He had a Deputy coroner, Dr. Jim Cairns, who also was not actively supervising the various cases involving serious allegations, people being accused of murder and spending time in jail. Dr. Charles Smith, was the person actually doing the work.

The problem is that Dr. Smith was doing sloppy work to say the least. The misconduct lasted over a decade, until last Monday, when the crisis exploded in the face of the Ontario government. Dr. Young resigned, will not practice medicine again and will probably face more charges. Dr. Cairns is also facing charges. Dr. Smith has been exposed.

Would such a situation be allowed to develop in private industry? Could a person in charge of a company operation, and a manager reporting to him be allowed to draw salaries for over a decade without performing real work?

A private company would make sure that a person does work appropriate with his experience.

In the public sector however, things work differently.

In 2005 Dr. Young had reached the pinnacle of his 23 year career in public service. As Ontario’s chief coroner during 9/11, the SARS crisis, and other widely advertized events, he received the province’s highest honour: the Order of Ontario.

As incoming president of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, he was a respected figure in the international forensic scene.

Now that the many serious mistakes of the Office have been revealed, causing wrongful convictions, separations of families and a tragic series of incompetent decisions, with people seeking compensations for millions of dollars, what does the government do?

As Dr. Young resigned, Ontario’s government announced the formation of an “Oversight council” and a “Complaints committee.”

This is indicative of how people who trust the public sector think: The government chose to add more “overseers” (at our expense) instead of hiring the right people for the job.

We know that more than 5000 people are appointed by the Premier of Ontario for such posts and we know that most are political appointments.

How can we be so naive to expect these government appointees to do real work?

Straight thoughts 180

The moral struggle of man has been between a lifestyle of immediate gratification and narcissism, helped by innate selfishness, and a lifestyle that includes generous work for humanity helped by the innate sense of conscience.

The first lifestyle goes against natural law, family, religion, and any organized for of moral control. It is dismissive of history and has no hope for the future. It lives for “today”. It comes disguised as “love”, but a love that terminates life by abortion, and invites destruction, physical sickness and death.

The second learns to overcome selfishness, learns from history how to build a better future, with the intent of transmitting life, culture and property to the next generations. Its consequences are abundant life and prosperity.

What is “new” in this generation’s struggle is the attempt to elevate the first lifestyle to a “culture”, by changing the law, honouring the destruction of new life, destroying the family, enforcing a new religion, manipulating education and normalizing aberrant behaviour.
However, the consequences do not change.

What will help us defend our culture from destruction is the Truth.

Truth allows us to learn from history, expose evil and discriminate between right and wrong. Even more importantly, Truth “makes us free”.

Man is endowed by its creator with life and freedom. He naturally resists the chains of imposition. This time it is the dictatorship of a self-destructive lifestyle imposed on us as a culture. It has no natural foundation and it will not last for long.

Straight Thoughts 179

As reported by C-FAM in their “Friday Fax”, the “Good Club” met recently in New York City. The meeting included multi-billionaires David Rockefeller, Bill Gates, Ted Turner, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, and Warren Buffet. The purpose of the meeting was to coordinate their charitable giving.

However, when you look at what this anti-life, anti-Christian group decided to do… you get a different picture. They decided (contrary to reality) that overpopulation is a problem and that they need to spend billions of dollars on “population control”.

We have known for years that most industrialized countries suffer from under-population, with birth rates well below the 2.1 replacement level. The situation will be worse when other large countries in Asia will peak and then start declining within about a decade. Some countries who tried to reverse the trend by giving monetary incentives for newborn children, have found how difficult this is.

The real aim of these people is to promote abortion, contraception and sterilization in third world countries, practices carried out faithfully by international bodies and supported by the left, by abortion providers and possibly by other groups fearing the continuous immigration of non-Caucasians in industrialized countries.

Since the major media will probably not report this, we have the duty to inform our families and friends.

Happy mother's day!

I was thinking…

that some people do little things with great love and they are not “recognized” by this world.

The people who make history are often people who make great things, but with little love.

Choosing to bring a child to this world is contributing to God’s work of creation. Being a mother is in a category by itself: Mothers do great things with great love.

Happy mother’s day!

Straight thoughts 178

The torture debate

As in any other debate, we are spinning our wheels when talking about torture if the basic terms are not defined.
Currently there is no agreement about whom torture is applied to, or what the definition of "torture" is.

Let’s agree that we are talking about procedures applied to captured terrorists or voluntary combatants who attack us, not procedures applied to civilians or political prisoners.

The term "torture" recalls undignified acts committed by dictators to punish their opponents. Thus, people reject torture, and rightly so, as an attack to human dignity.
On the other side, is the stress caused by forced apnoea or sleep deprivation "torture"?

I would define torture this way: “Those means of applied force that do not respect the dignity of a human being and cause persistent or permanent physical harm to a captive person.”

However, this definition is not enough. To more clearly define a demarcation line between what constitutes “excessive force” and what does not, we have to add:

“Such means of torture would not be administered to our own troops”.

This second part of the definition would exclude “sleep depravation” and other techniques that are commonly administered to your own military personnel, for example, as means of training.

If we use a technique with our own troops, then it is not “excessive” and surely the same technique could be used to pressure captive terrorists for the purposes of collecting information.
On the other side, if we would NOT use a technique on your own troops, then this is a confirmation that such technique is excessive.

Having been military trained, I would gladly volunteer for supervised “water boarding” and would tolerate being grabbed by the collar and pushed against a soft wall, if this had the potential of saving another person’s life. Wouldn’t you?

Once we have a definition of torture (or excessive force) then the basic question can be answered:

Can we use any means of extracting information from a person, including torture, if the life of other people is at stake?

This is an old ethical question. The answer is No: The end does not justify the means.

Only when the terrorist is in the act of taking a human life, then the terrorist can be stopped by any means, as this falls under the ethical definition of “self defence”.

Straight thoughts 177

What did the G20 achieve in London?

On April 2, 2009 the G20 issued the expected Declaration document, summarizing the substance of the agreement achieved at the London Summit. Although the wording of any document prepared by a committee is less important than the actions actually taken by the individual countries, the wording of the document usually discloses a trend.

Unfortunately, the governments of the G20 nations display a trend towards more regulation and less open, free market competition. Obviously these governments believe that they can improve the economy. Many of us think that entrepreneurs in a free market can do better than governments.

The wording of the 2009 document differs from the previous G20 declaration in the following respects:

The opening paragraphs: 

2008: “We, the Leaders of the Group of Twenty, held an initial meeting in Washington on November 15, 2008, amid serious challenges to the world economy and financial markets. We are determined to enhance our cooperation and work together to restore global growth and achieve needed reforms in the world's financial systems.”

2009: “We, the Leaders of the G20, have taken, and will continue to take, action to strengthen regulation and supervision in line with the commitments we made in Washington to reform the regulation of the financial sector.”

The 2008 document mentions “open trade”. The 2009 does not.

The 2008 document mentions “open global economy”. The 2009 does not.

The 2008 document mentions “competition”. The 2009 does not.

The 2008 document mentions “free market”. The 2009 does not.

The 2008 document mentions “bank secrecy”. The 2009 does not.

The 2008 document includes: 

“Regulators must ensure that their actions support market discipline, avoid potentially adverse impacts on other countries, including regulatory arbitrage, and support competition, dynamism and innovation in the marketplace.” 

The 2009 document does not contain the idea of supporting the market, and does not contain any of the words: “competition”, “dynamism” or “innovation.”

The 2009 document introduces the “principles” of “pay and compensation” expecting the FSB to regulate the compensation structure in financial institutions. The 2008 does not use the word “pay” and uses the word “compensation” only in the following context: “Reviewing compensation practices as they relate to incentives for risk taking and innovation;”

The 2009 document introduces a Financial Stability Board (FSB) in addition to the Financial Stability Forum (FSF).

Four and a half months, and a new US president, apparently do make a difference.

Book announcement

My latest book is now available for FREE download in PDF form at:

http://tinyurl.com/ceuefh

The book title is:

Economic Optimalism
Marxism or Capitalism? I say Optimalism

Economic Optimalism represents the hope for a prosperous and just society.

The book explains as simply as possible, the concept of Economic Optimalism, a new approach to government, not to the right or the left, but based on facts, science, logic, experience and truth, for the optimal benefit of the governed.

Optimalism represents the hope for a more informed, resourceful, reality-controlled and efficient government to allow for a prosperous and just society.
It can help reduce the struggle between “left” and “right” by stabilizing and optimizing budget figures.
- For the “left”, optimalism guarantees the highest possible funding for social programs and a required level of investment in government.
- For the “right”, optimalism guarantees the lowest possible taxation level and a limit to the growth of government.

The book also touches on some very recent economic issues, such as the effect of governments stimulating the economy.

Happy reading!

Straight Thoughts 176

Surprise, surprise: GLB people say that their lifestyle is unhealthy and has serious consequences.

As the “gay” XTRA news organization put it: “A group of six Canadian queers
is taking on homophobia in Canada's healthcare system by filing a complaint with
the Canadian Human Rights Commission.”

Gens Hellquist, one of the complainants is the executive director of the Canadian Rainbow Health Coalition. The other five are representatives from major Canadian cities: Toronto, Vancouver, Saskatoon, St. John’s and Montreal.

The GLB community has a dilemma: Presenting the homosexual lifestyle as acceptable for our youth and, at the same time, complaining to the government for special healthcare services for them.

The GLB leadership now provided us with the results of their own research. We do not necessarily believe their exact figures (in some cases they are even worse), but the value of this research is that these figures cannot be easily disputed by homosexual activists.

What they claim:

Life expectancy of gay/bisexual men in Canada is 20 years less than the average; that is 55 years.

GLB people commit suicide at rates from 2 to 13.9 times more often than average.

GLB people have smoking rates 1.3 to 3 times higher than average.

GLB people have rates of alcoholism 1.4 to 7 times higher than average.

GLB people have rates of illicit drug use 1.6 to 19 times higher than average.

GLB people show rates of depression 1.8 to 3 times higher than average.

Gay and bisexual men (MSM) comprise 76.1% of AIDS cases.

Gay and bisexual men (MSM) comprise 54% of new HIV infections each year.

If one uses Statistics Canada figure of 1.7% of GLB becoming infected, that is 26 times higher than average.

GLB people are at a higher risk for some cancers as a result of their sexual orientation.

For the exact quotes, please see the highlighted areas on pages
3 and 4 of the HRC complaint.

Click here for the whole original HRC complaint document.

By-election results disastrous for Tory

The by-election results for the March 5, 2009 by-election in the riding of Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock show big victory for the Liberal candidate and a big loss for the PCs (John Tory) and the NDP (going from 11.92% in 2007 to 5.98% and ranking only fourth, behind the Green party).

All the parties represented in the by-election, with the exception of the Liberal and the FCP, saw their percentages decrease with respect to the 2007 election, as people voted for (or against) the perceived winner. This important by-election also attracted two independents and a Libertarian candidate.

We thank our candidate, Jake Pothaar, for a job well done. The FCP did not "cause" the defeat of John Tory, but his defeat is an indication of Mr. Tory's liberal stand on many issues. After losing his own riding in two successive elections, John Tory's leadership of the Progressive Conservative party of Ontario is now in serious doubt.

Whenever conservatives federally or provincially, run a "light liberal" candidate (a.k.a. a "red tory" candidate) the electorate consistently chooses the real liberal candidate. Why should they not?

The PC party should stick to its TRUE "traditional liberal" roots, which expressed the values of life, freedom and ownership of property. While there is little chance for the PC to reform itself, the Family Coalition party is the only party in Ontario expressing those values. Please help other conservatives to discover the FCP as the alternative.

The non-humanist faith

Some “humanist” leaders, including some radio talk show hosts and many TV commentators, believe as a matter of faith that a baby conceived in the mother’s womb is not a human being until some undetermined time before birth. Even their name is inconsistent: they should be called “non-humanists”.

Their proposition of faith seems to have more popular success than the position of major religion leaders on life issues.

Major religious leaders are often criticized for “imposing their faith” on others. However, in the last fifty years, their moral leadership advocating the protection of human life has been found to match the current scientific knowledge about the unborn: They are human (46 chromosomes) and living (growing within the mother’s body with an independent brain, heart, circulation system, etc.).

We are witnessing an inversion of roles: the “humanists” are non-humanists by faith, while the main religious leaders are the real humanists, promoting scientific knowledge and the paramount value of all human life.

Because of the success of the non-humanist faith, some doctors get away with the Hippocratic Oath (literally get away with murder) and many politicians and judges can avoid exercising their duty: The first duty of government is protecting the lives of its citizen.

Those people, who attack religious leaders for their “arrogance” in opposing public programs for “reproductive choice” around the world, condone the current abortion holocaust because of their faith in “non-humanism”. While they are horrified by the thought of young mothers who could die from botched abortions, they blindly go along with the large scale extermination of their daughters by abortion. They are comparable to the middle ages fanatics, who burnt at the stake “witches” (or condoned their killing) because they “believed” in witchcraft.

Exposing the scientific ignorance of these non-humanists is the first step towards a more informed, less violent and more just society.

Straight Thoughts 174

University students display pictures of aborted babies, the product of Henry Morgentaler’s lifetime work.

They are ostracized and threatened with fines for showing what he does.

He is awarded the Order of Canada for doing what they show.

The inconsistency of a lie.

The disregard of Truth.

The elimination of Freedom.

The fall of higher education.

The indoctrination of the masses.

The collapse of Canadian honour.

All, the result of our assent to leftist ideology, denying our inalienable gifts from God: Life and freedom.

Indeed, denying God himself.