Are you the publisher? Claim or contact us about this channel


Embed this content in your HTML

Search

Report adult content:

click to rate:

Account: (login)

More Channels


Channel Catalog


Channel Description:

Please visit WWW.TANYAGRANICALLEN.COM for the latest from Tanya Granic Allen.

older | 1 | (Page 2) | 3 | newer

    0 0

    This morning, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) ordered a new trial for a woman who claims she delivered a stillborn in 2006. It is alleged the woman gave birth, then proceeded to wrap the baby's body in blankets, put it in a plastic bag and leave it at her apartment building where it was discovered by the superintendent. I'm pretty sure this isn't what is meant by "respect for the dead". All madness aside, this lady was acquitted until today when the SCC ordered a retrial. Score one for the SCC!

    Part of what the SCC discussed was the reliance of the (lower) Court of Appeal on the “chance of life” standard from R. v. Berriman (1854), 6 Cox C.C. 388, to conclude that a fetus becomes a child "when the fetus has reached a stage when, but for some external event or circumstance, it would likely have been born alive." In the Berriman ruling, it is required that the fetus “might have been born alive”, relying upon a "likelihood."

    Such vagueness could have been dealt with in a swifter fashion in the failed Motion 312 of MP Stephen Woodworth which was controversially and unceremoniously voted down in the House of Parliment seven months ago. Woodworth's motion sought to discover "what medical evidence exists to demonstrate that a child is or is not a human being before the moment of complete birth?" Apparently, our politicians and some outspoken Canadians prefer the vagueness of the "chance of life" standard from a 19th century court case which predates the inventions of pasteurization, sewing machines, and the rubber tire, rather than looking toward contemporary medical knowledge realized through inventions such as the sonogram and functional MRIs.


    My perennial problem with the Supreme Court of Canada is that they are incredibly scared of any infringement on the lack of abortion law in this country. I laud the SCC efforts to make obvious the "unconstitutionally vague" law regarding babies "that were likely have been born alive". But how does this logic work? If the mother had said that she had meant to abort the baby but hadn't gotten around to it, would that mean that the baby was likely to be born dead? Aren't all babies in their mother's womb, babies which are likely to be born alive? Well at least until someone kills them? When will the Supreme Court stop discriminating against gestationally younger babies stop avoiding any discussion of the dreaded "A" word?

    Score zero for the SCC, score zero for babies likely to be born dead.






    0 0
  • 05/11/13--15:52: Tanya in the National Post

  • 0 0

    It's been a very busy last few weeks. I had the privilege of attending the March for Life in Ottawa- what a spectacular turnout upwards of 25,000! According to my contacts on the Hill, the March for Life is the biggest and best organized event every year. Take that, lefties! And speaking of lefties, peruse the photo collection below of some of my favourite captioned counter-protester (read rabid pro-abortionist) pics. As they say, "haters gonna hate!"

    Here we have some pro-choicer trying to profit off the March for Life by collecting donations.


    Not sure why the Viva La Vulva sign is necessary. Perhaps she's taking pointers from the man wearing a vagina costume who accosted MP Stephen Woodworth.

    Whose life are you fighting for??? The over 100,000 babies killed by abortion each year, and the scores of women who die from abortion complications as well!

    This sign is obtuse. Children are never punishments. Hence why pro-lifers don't wan't them killed.

    Oops. I cut off the lady wearing the nun costume holding this sign which really delivers the full effect. What does the sign even mean? It's like saying I heart gas chambers. Ridiculous!

    This sign is confusing. I believe it is the parents of the unborn child who put the "us" in uterus.

    No access to abortion = torture? Try selling that to the Muslim women who have had their faces burned with acid by their husbands. I doubt they'd agree.

    This is probably the stupidest sign I've seen in a while. Please people...try to at least make some sense!!!

    No comment. And what's with the jingle bells on the coat hanger.

    Thank God the Avengers came to save the day from insipid pro-choicers!

    0 0

    As you've most likely heard, Dr. Henry Morgentaler died on Wednesday from a heart attack at age 90. Immediately, pro-abortion advocates starting lauding him, as pro-lifers continued to pray for him. Some pro-lifers prayed "may he rest in peace," to the chagrin of some others. I can understand how people would be annoyed with Dr. Morgentaler who was infamously considered the "father of abortion" in Canada. However, after my lifetime of arms-length experience with Dr. Morgentaler, it is my hope that after his tumultuous and brutal life, that somewhere he may find peace.

    I was a young, 8 year-old girl when I first heard the name "Henry Morgentaler." My family later explained that he was a doctor who killed babies -an abortionist. I was told to pray for his conversion every day during the family Rosary; and so I did. Later on in life, when I was fortunate enough to work within the pro-life movement here in Canada, I recall learning more about this Morgentaler. The more I read, the more I felt sorry for the man. He just didn't look like a man who was at peace.

    When I looked at a news photo of Morgentaler, what I saw was a man who looked hardened. From what I read, it seems that Henry Morgentaler spent most of his life fighting. He had a tough childhood, he was imprisoned in Dachau during WWII, he fought for "abortion rights" for most of his professional life, and fought the unborn in their mother's womb as his living. He was a king-pin in championing death in Canada. He was always fighting something or someone.

    When I was in grade 10, I made a class presentation on abortion, and in doing the research I further delved into the subject and Morgentaler. I couldn't fathom how a man who killed babies and profited off their deaths could have a peaceful life. How does he sleep at night? How does a doctor who takes the Hippocratic Oath, which expressly condemns abortion, turn around, break his promise and start killing babies? How awful is your life that you must champion abortion and make a living killing defenseless, innocent babies?

    Perhaps, one could say, I was having a Justin Trudeau moment as I wanted to know what would cause a man to want to make a living killing babies. What were the "root causes?" In the end I knew better; it doesn't matter why he killed, it matters that he did kill. And kill many he did.

    In my twenties, I was horrified to learn that my Alma Mater was giving an honourary doctorate to Dr. Morgentaler. I took the day off work to go to the university and peacefully protest the ceremony. I was ashamed of my school, and someone needed to represent the victims of Morgentaler's "honourable" career. My sister took a public stance as a university Senator and demanded the university listen to its students and not award Morgentaler. When the university ignored her and the student populus, she resigned her seat in protest.

    When Canada bestowed on Morgentaler its highest civilian honour, the Order of Canada, I was again ashamed. Many previous honourees returned their medals to the government in protest.

    I suppose you could say I was hoping Dr. Morgentaler would turn out like Dr. Bernard Nathanson, and have a radical conversion from abortionist to pro-life champion. It didn't happen. However, I found comfort in reading the Campaign Life Coalition press release about how Dr. Morgentaler softened his pro-abortion stance and voiced opposition to late-term abortions. Perhaps all those prayers were taking effect.

    I know this blog entry is a departure from my usual pieces, but a man has died. He died with a lot of blood on his hands, and as far as I know, without a confession. I can't help but feel overwhelmingly sick and uneasy about that. I believe in the Final Judgment, and somehow Morgentaler missed the memo about murder being an atrocious thing.

    I will continue to pray for Henry Morgentaler. I hope that wherever he is, he now realizes that the babies he killed were real humans who just wanted the chance to live and breathe just as he did. I hope he realizes that just like he was discriminated against during WWII in the concentration camps, he too discriminated against a class of human beings - the unborn. I hope he realizes that we are all accountable for our actions, and every action has a consequence. I hope that after his brutal and violent life, Henry Morgentaler may finally find peace in some capacity.

    0 0

    It's an honour to be featured in such a fine publication.


    0 0

    For the past several months, I have been keeping a close eye on Croatia and the issue of sex education. Actually, sexual education was never an issue in Croatia, until the current government decided to make it an issue.


    To fill you in, although I was born in Canada, I am of Croatian descent; this is where the "Granic" in my last name comes from. My father is a Croatian immigrant who came to Canada in the sixties as part of the Croatian Diaspora because life was brutal under the oppressive, Serbian communists.

    Since I grew up during the time of the Balkan War, albeit very far away, I understood at a very young age concepts like genocide, ethnic-cleansing, and mass graves. I have several relatives who fought in the front-lines, some of whom died, including one who was blown up by stepping on a land mine. These men died fighting for freedom for their country, and a hope for a better future for their children.

    In Croatia, being Croatian and being Catholic are synonymous; you destroy one, you destroy the other. Hence why part of the Serbian Army strategy during the war was to destroy the Catholic Church and its Croatian followers. Growing up, I understood that priests were killed and nuns were raped simply because they were Catholic and Croatian. Dozens of Catholic churches in Croatia and Bosnia were destroyed by the Serbian Army. The silver lining in all of this was that by the time the war ended, Croatia would once again be free and democratic and could celebrate its Catholic faith freely.
    So, you can imagine my disgust when I started hearing about the Centre-Left (read ex-commie) Croatian government pushing radical, sexual-education in the country's schools, a country whose population is 90% Catholic.  It's hasn't been twenty years since the war ended and clearly some of the commie allegiances die hard, if at all. After all, radical sex-education is very much contra Catholic Church teaching, so wouldn't it be very communist to attack the Church from within the school system?

    So, what is the impetus? Why must Croatia ram through this controversial sex-ed program? Are they feeling pressure from the EU which they will officially join on July 1, 2013? Is the EU forcing Croatia to liberalize its long-held values to be like the rest of its member-states? I wouldn't be surprised. During my time monitoring meetings and lobbying at the UN, I saw first-hand how aspiring members of the EU are bullied into adopting liberal social policies. If the same is true, the Croatian government should assert the cultural sovereignty for which blood was shed, and not sell its soul to be accepted by the "prosperous" EU community.

    Exactly what is so controversial about the sexual-education being forced upon Croatians? For starters, it is agenda driven and selective. It teaches masturbation, contraception, homosexuality, and doesn't teach abstinence. All of this goes against Catholic Church teaching and long-held Croatian societal values. Keep in mind, Croatia received the green light from the Council of Europe for its abstinence-based sex-ed a few years back. After-all, abstinence is truly the best way to practice "safe-sex." Also, there was zero parental consultation in the process; usurping parental right in the education of children will and should never be taken lightly. Furthermore, the program is Kinsey-based. Kinsey was an American researcher who conducted illegal sexual experimentation on several hundred young children, including infants as young as five months old. Kinsey hired several alleged pedophiles to molest children for his experiments. Kinsey-based sexual "education" programs are based on fraudulent findings, and therefore should never be accepted as legitimate. (God help the little children who were victimized by this sicko's so-called research. Click on the white image. It is a sample record of this abuse, and is taken from Dr. Judith Reisman's investigations into Kinsey's activities.)


    Dr. Aleksander Stulhofer, father of radical Croatian Sex-Ed Program
    I am thrilled by the outcry against the government's attempt to thwart the Church and parental rights. Parents across the country rallied together against this program. The Croatian Bishops voiced their opinions strongly and loudly. The esteemed Dr. Judith Reisman felt compelled to come to Croatia after respected Croatian journalist, Karoline Vidovic-Kristo, was fired for airing a segment exploring the Kinsey Institute and t's namesakes' method of research. Dr. Reisman, a child advocate and founder of the anti-Kinsey movement, sought to expose the perils of this radical sex-education. Interestingly, it was discovered that the head of the government commission which created the sex-ed program, was Dr. Aleksandar Stulhofer, who had completed his studies at the Kinsey Institute and had co-authored a book titled Sexuality and Gender in Post-Communist Eastern Europe and Russia. Post-communist? Dr. Stulhofer, you are still promoting communism in Europe!

    Dr. Judith Reisman and Karolina Vidovic-Kristo

    Thankfully, Croatian courts suspended the program because of constitutional loopholes and because the government failed to consult with the parents prior the programs introduction. I'm certain that the courts felt the heat from the enormous public outrage over this program. In what is seen as a parallel issue, pro-family activists in Croatia collected upwards of 710,000 signatures demanding a referendum to support the traditional definition of marriage. All that in a two-week period. Not too shabby for a country with a population of only 4.2 million. If only Catholics in Canada (with 10 times the population) could organize to the same-degree when the government tries to usurp Church teaching in the school system.

    However, I'm still in shock that something like this is going on in Croatia. A country which just recently fought so hard and lost so many lives in the name of democracy and freedom seems now headed in the wrong direction, so soon. Will the Croatian people wake up and realize that their beloved country is being hijacked by communist ideologues? The blood has barely dried yet we are so quick to throw away our hard-fought ideals? What was all the blood shed for, if not to protect the Croatian culture and society, which is intertwined with Catholic beliefs? Wake-up Croatia! Guard your children from the secularists and teach your children your values. Don't let the Communists back in. Even though we are thousands of miles away, the Diaspora stands united with you.

    Bog i Hrvati!


     PS: Click the Facebook and Twitter logos below to share this post with other Croatians online.

    0 0


    0 0


    In my role as spokeswoman for Campaign Life Coalition, I was asked to appear on a live TV debate and call-in show. Check-out the video below as I explain the pro-life position and debunk some of the misconceptions surrounding abortion in Canada. Thanks to Rogers TV Misssissauga and Peel for having me on the panel.


    0 0

    Thanks to Michael Coren for hosting me on The Arena, his program on Sun News Network. In this clip, we discuss some of the morally charged  issues found in the week's headlines including: "Sexting" by teachers, "Slut shaming" in Sweeden, leftist Sex-Ed in catholic Croatia, and Obama endorsing pro-abortion mob tactics.



    Congratulations to Michael on being recently named "Columnist of the Year" by the Catholic Press Association, and thanks for your fine journalism! For those of you who don't already subscribe to Sun News Network, get on it!


    0 0

    I just read the best news of the day: After the nonsense of two weeks prior, the Texas House of Representatives passed its bill banning abortion. This is the same bill that was infamously filibustered by Senator Wendy Davis when it was first introduced in the Senate as Texas SB 5. It's a shame the bill only bans abortion after 20 weeks, but hey, at least some Texan babies will be saved.  This bill seeks to:

    • ban abortions after 20 weeks (from the current 24 week limit)
    • force abortion clinics to meet basic health and safety standards (irony not intended)
    • require all abortion clinics to meet the same health and safety regulations as an ambulatory surgical center
    • require a doctor providing abortions to secure admitting privileges at a hospital
    • require a doctor to personally administer the abortion-inducing drugs to the patient
    Texas Senator Wendy Davis
    Though this bill obviously does not go far enough, this is a significant victory for Texas considering the recent developments and history surrounding this bill's passage. You may have heard the word "champion" alongside the name "Wendy Davis" in the always objective news lately. State Senator Wendy Davis is an elected official responsible for representing her constituents and residents of Texas. Instead of letting democracy take its course, and letting the vote on this bill rightfully occur, Sen. Davis chose to disrupt the proceedings by literally standing and speaking for 12 straight hours. To what end? The majority of Americans support a 20 week abortion, and I suspect the majority is much higher in conservative-leaning Texas. The final House vote on the bill was 96-49 in favour of the ban, which lends further credence to this argument. Rather that serving democracy and the residents of Texas, Sen. Davis has become yet another shining example of the behaviours and roots of the pro-choice movement, shunning grassroots activism and citizen voices in favour of the extreme and unpopular views of the radical elite. I suppose such maneuvering habits die hard; you see, Roe v. Wade, the case which legalized abortion on demand in the USA, started in Dallas County, Texas, before making its way to the Supreme Court of the United States. Abortion in the United States was decided by the court system, and ultimately by appointed Supreme Court judges, not by democratically elected representatives. 

    During the final moments of Davis's filibuster, a violent mob of rabid activists besieged the Senate chambers and delayed the democratic vote on this abortion bill (in addition to other bills). I'm certain when the Founding Fathers crafted the Bill of Rights and Constitution, it wasn't an invitation to reduce democracy to whomever shouts the loudest. Moreover, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and Adam Smith, some of the key crafters of the rights enjoyed by Americans, would be horrified to see a sitting president endorse mob rule, just as President Barack Obama was quick to do.
    As I've written before here and here, the Left eschews democracy and instead relies upon vulgarity and bullying to achieve its sordid goals. Apparently, this applies to its sitting presidents too.
    Pro-Abortion screaming "Hail Satan!" and "F--- the Church!"
    (photo from jillstanek.com)
    A final note on this cacophony of insanity:  Sen. Davis decried the bill limiting abortion as "inhumane." Sen. Davis, please indulge us as to how this bill is inhumane. Some babies will be spared death; is that inhumanity? Please, don't worry: the Left will still be able to kill their babies, just not after five months. Many beating hearts will still be stopped, and the future of America will still be aborted. So please, Sen. Davis, and your mob, stop the rhetoric, stop the hate, and stop trampling on democracy. You still have your precious abortion.

    Sound-off below, and "share" via your favourite social medium!

    0 0
  • 07/21/13--19:09: Obama and Trayvon
  • I was going to sit this one out. Truly. I was perfectly contented live tweeting the verdict and the aftermath. Everybody has an opinion on the George Zimmerman trial, so why add yet another? I was going to let this one go, until yesterday, when the President weighed in on the matter...again.

    Last I checked, the judiciary is independent from the White House. So why is Obama entering the foray? Because he is half black? Are the NAACP are calling in favours for campaign support? Are the Black Panthers, who were so effective in "campaigning" for Obama, coming home to roost?

    

    Black Panthers outside a Philadelphia poling station in 2008  cnn.com
    What I find most odious, is not that Obama has chosen to weigh in on the verdict, but the manner in which he does. He racially personalizes Trayvon. With last year's pre-trial comment "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon", Obama attaches himself to the victim because of they are both black. Yesterday's comment, "Trayvon Martin could've been me 35 years ago" is yet another way the President is personally relating to the victim by race. It's like saying shooting Trayvon, is like shooting the President, because they are both black.


    I've had the privilege of visiting the Birmingham Civil Rights Institute and partaking in the Birmingham Civil Rights Tour. What a historically and culturally rich experience for this Canadian girl. I definitely walked away from that visit with a sense of gladness that America came through those times for the better.

    However, when I hear of cases like Trayvon's being exploited because of race, I cringe. I would hope that racial discrimination is nearly non-existent. However with Democratic policies like affirmative action, and now with President commenting on a trial verdict because Trayvon Martin was black, it appears that this administration fans the fires of racial discrimination. How can the President on one hand decry racial discrimination when supporting affirmative action which discriminates against race among others things?

    Sometimes I feel like I'm living in 1962 watching James Meredith at Ole Miss. I wonder how he feels about the current racial discrimination? He was pretty clear about it in an interview in 2002 when he said "Nothing could be more insulting to me than the concept of civil rights. It means perpetual second-class citizenship for me and my kind."

    That pretty much sums it up.





    0 0

    Today, Toronto Public Health (TPH) has directed its syringes toward Jenny McCarthy and her new gig on the somewhat popular US talk show The View. Why? As several news outlets have high-lighted in the past few days, it is believed that Jenny McCarthy is against vaccines.


    McCarthy, whose son is autistic, actually isn't anti-vaccine (see video clip below); she simply doesn't agree with the schedule. It's her personal opinion. After all, the US government has actually settled cases with autistic children and admitted that vaccines didn't cause autism, but "resulted" in it.


    So why all the fuss? Are people who have opinions not allowed to have jobs in the media? Not according to Toronto Public Health. Perhaps TPH is only after Jenny McCarthy because they disagree with her opinion. Did Toronto Public Health ever go after other co-hosts on The View? What about Joy Behar who never ceases to impose her unclean mouth onto America? No.

    I find their motto ironic.
    Regardless of your opinion on vaccines, it is ridiculous that a Canadian, municipal, publically funded entity intervene on US entertainment matters. Doesn't TPH have more important and jurisdictionally appropriate matters to deal with like mal-nourished, inner-city kids or rabid raccoons terrorizing the residents? Clearly not since they are full-force going after a TV network and a Playboy model.

    Speaking of Playboy, if TPH really wants to promote health and pursue Jenny McCarthy, why not go after the more obvious angle, which is her repeated nude Playboy centerfolds. Where is the TPH on exploiting women, and women's mental health? I'm certainly disturbed when I hear of women being objectified by going nude just to have men ogle them. What kind of role-modeling is that for our young Toronto girls? Why doesn't the TPH voice a concern over that issue, and perhaps launch a campaign to ban Playboy in Toronto?
    So I sit here, an embarrassed Torontonian, that Toronto Public Health is needling Ms. McCarthy for her opinions (which incidentally TPH is incorrectly paraphrasing). Ironically, the City of Toronto, under jurisdiction from the Province of Ontario, allows for children to be exempt from vaccinations if their parents so choose.

    So good luck Ms. McCarthy- knock 'em dead. But please, do keep your clothes on.

    0 0

    Thanks to Michael Coren of Sun News Network for hosting me for this week's edition of Moral Maze. Check-out the video below where we discuss the legalization of abortion in the Republic of Ireland, pedophiles arguing for the same rights as homosexuals, pornography in American military bases, and a quick shout-out to my Maltese heritage.

    On a separate note, I wish Sun News Network all the best as they continue to exist in a foolishly regulated environment following the CRTC ruling denying mandatory distribution of the network.

    0 0
  • 08/13/13--17:48: Gay Lovers Terrorize School
  • Did any of you catch this news story on Friday? This has to be one of the most appalling things I've read all week. Considering the news week we've had, that is saying a lot. However, LifesiteNews never fails to cover the stories which other media outlets seldom touch. Thank God for them!

    It is with great disgust and outrage that I comment on this news story. Here we have an Ontario Catholic School principal, Jacques Perron, who violated not only his office, but also betrayed the trust and conscience of each student within those school walls.

    The stupidity starts with Mr. Perron hiring two of his gay lovers to work at the school. How is this possible?! Does the school board not have (or enforce) rules against hiring people with whom you're sexually involved? Clearly not. Also, how is it possible to have TWO lovers? At the risk of diminishing the immorality of the situation, isn't it reckless to have both your lovers working beside one another? I mean, what if they find out? Did jealous fights breakout in the staff lunchroom?

    One of the lovers, Pierre Grondin, was hired to be a part-time custodian. Mr. Grodin's list of sexual offences is long. According to the LifeSiteNews article, "Grondin exposed himself to male students in the classroom and in a hotel while on a school trip, sexually abused an intellectually-challenged male student several times a week for a number of years, and sexually abused two sisters while filming them." Truly wrong, immoral, and illegal behavior. I hope this pervert is rotting in jail somewhere for this.

    What is further disturbing, is that this reign of terror went on for several years with neither consequence nor action. Perron’s defense lawyer even admitted that the principal used “willful ignorance” to “overlook” the actions of his homosexual lover. Why was he so willfully ignorant? Was Mr. Perron desperate to have his lover with him at work that he felt he must protect him? Is Mr. Perron's conscience so dead that he couldn't event see black from white when his lover sexually abused his students? Or was Mr. Perron too busy sexually harassing, like when he asked a teacher returning from the bathroom if she had masturbated?

    Staff at the school were terrified of Mr. Perron because he fostered a climate of intimidation, manipulation, retaliation, threats and criticism. Where was the upholding of Catholic teaching and beliefs? Allegedly the school was completely stripped of Catholic spirituality and replaced with...access to pornographic websites! (During Perron's reign, religion classes were suspended and porn was accessible in the school)

    Mr. Perron betrayed his students and his office the moment he decided to cover-up his lover's sexual abuse of students. Mr. Perron hijacked a Catholic High School and imposed his sexually-charged agenda on to staff and students. Hundreds (if not thousands) of innocent students have been exposed to sexual abuse and tyranny. Where were the checks and balances from the school board? Why was an openly active homosexual allowed to be a principal of a Catholic school in the first place?

    Oh, and what was the punishment for Mr. Perron? He loses his teaching license for 5 years. Only 5 Years! Talk about using a feather to swat a fly.

    Need more salt for the wound? Perron has the gall to declare "I feel like a victim" and plans to appeal the decision.

    0 0
  • 08/19/13--19:22: Brotherhood of Hate
  • Me: How are you? Is your family in Egypt OK?
    Coptic Friend: My cousin, his wife, and twin babies were brutally attacked last week by the Muslim Brotherhood who saw his wife getting out of the car to take the kids to the doctor. Her hair was uncovered and that's how they realized she's a Christian.
    Me: Of course I'll pray. This is inhumane.

    Inhumane. Yes, that is the word I shall use to describe what is happening in Egypt because there is no humanity with what is going on over there. Over 50 churches destroyed. Hundreds killed. Thousands injured. By whom? The army? The government? Oh no, as news sources will report, it is the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) who are carrying out the violence.
    

    The remains of  the Church of St. Michael the Archangel in Gizeh  from www.france24.com

    I have written about the Coptic plight in Egypt before, and my heart goes out to all of these strong people who live their lives in daily fear of being killed because they are Christian. As a half-Croat, my ancestral countrymen can relate to the ethnic cleansing and religious persecution. So when I hear news reports of Churches being burned, or 10yr old Jessica Boulos being shot in the chest on her way home from Bible class, you bet I get fired up.
    
    Muslim Brotherhood soldiers


    I'm disgusted to think just a year ago Obama hailed this group as pro-democracy and moderate. Boy, did he get that one wrong! I'm certain even little Jessica Boulos knew better. The Muslim Brotherhood is not a moderate, pro-democratic organization. When their political leader/puppet Morsi was removed from office (after 22 million Muslim and Christian Egyptians demanded this), the MB responded by burning Churches and going on a killing spree. Like inhuman beings. Like savages.

    So please, let's call a spade a spade and see the Muslim Brotherhood for what it is: a hate group which seeks to ethnically cleanse any non-Muslims from Egypt.

    Me: When will the hate stop?
    Coptic Friend: They won't stop until every last one of us is dead.




















    0 0
  • 09/06/13--08:08: Banning the Fleurdelisé
  • Dear Québec:

    I knew you'd pull a stunt like this sooner or later.

    I was so disappointed to read about your government's recently proposed ban. You are a province with such a rich history and culture, all rooted in Catholicism, that I was perplexed by your irrational move to ban wearing Crucifixes, among other religious symbols, by public employees.

    Québec, why does the Crucifix upset you? Are you resentful toward the French Catholics who settled you? Do you loathe having so many architecturally beautiful Churches that the thought of a government employee wearing a Crucifix makes you red with rage?

    How embarrassed I am for you, a province whose majority populous identifies as Catholic. Here in Canada we pride ourselves on the "virtues" of tolerance and respect yet you, dear Québec, want to trample on the right of the individual to wear a Cross.

    Well Québec, if you want to eliminate all religious symbols from the public square and promote secularism, start with banning your flag, the Fleurdelisé. That's right- ban the Quebéc flag! The flag's symbolism supports the rich Catholic tradition with the blue symbolizing heaven and honouring the Virgin Mary, the white fleurs-de-lis symbolizing purity, and the cross representing the cross of Christ. In fact, its direct predecessor, the Carillon, was created by a Catholic parish Priest and at one point included the Sacred Heart of Jesus at the center.

    The Carillon

    Québec, while you're banning your flag in the name of secularism, also ban the jersey of the Québec Nordiques. This beloved hockey jersey is a threat to secularism as it is entirely based on the Fleurdelisé.
    Québec Nordiques Jersey
    Don't forget to melt your beloved Bonhomme and thaw the Winter Carnival, which is rooted in Catholicism, as it is historically celebrated the two weeks prior to Mardi Gras, yet another traditional Catholic event as Mardi Gras precedes Ash Wednesday and Lent.
    
    Bonhomme
    Furthermore, you'll have to rename the dozens of cities, towns, villages and hamlets named after Catholic Saints. You can't claim to recognize secularism if you allow towns to bear such overtly religious names.

    Québec, if you truly want to succeed in recognizing secularism, then please don't forget to stop promoting tourism to famous landmarks like St. Anne de Beaupré, Notre Dame Cathedral, or the Oratory of St. Joseph. In fact, why revel in the honour of being the birthplace of Canada's first male and female Saints at all?
    
    St. Joseph's Oratory, Montreal
    Also, don't forget to cancel St. John Baptiste Day. After all, if Crucifixes are not allowed to be worn by public employees, why should you allow a Catholic public holiday? Here's an idea- how about you stop celebrating religious-based, public holidays alltogether including Christmas, Easter, and St. Stephen's Day (Boxing Day). Get rid of it all!

    Now what do you have left, dear Québec? Nothing! You have successfully gutted your history and culture in honour of secularism. Congratulations! Welcome to voidsville.

    0 0
  • 09/11/13--11:29: Just Ban Masks!
  • Yesterday's revelation of Quebec's Charter of Values has me confused. Small crosses are OK, but not large ones? Star of David earrings are kosher, but not a yarmulke? The Crucifix in the Assembly is safe, but ban the hijab? And all in the name of promoting secularism?
    

    The top row depicts what is allowed, followed by what is not allowed in the Charter
    To reiterate my earlier position, if Quebec truly wants to secularize itself, then it must do away with ALL religious references, essentially gutting the history and traditions of the province. However, I suspect that this charter of values has very little to do with secularism, and a lot to do with public masks, aka the niqab and burka.

    I believe in religious freedom. I have no issue with religious dress and accessory like the turban or the yarmulke, or even with a head veil. People can wear whatever head covering they like, and style their hair with whatever accessories. I cringe when I see people with tattoo sleeves, but I suppose they have a right to brand their body. Yes, these are all acceptable. What I do take issue with is the niqab and burka because they are masks which cover the face.

    The Burka
    I don't believe people should dress like ninjas when going for an afternoon stroll. I don't believe that people should dress like bank robbers when going to vote. I don't believe in forcing women to wear a niqab because she is man's property and must be hidden, or a woman choosing to wear it to keep her identity from others. If you choose to live among people, then truly live among people. Don't hide behind a mask.

    The Niqab
     
    My daughter loves wearing a spider-man mask, but I forbid her from wearing it out in public. I explain to her that we need to show respect to our fellow citizens and that is why we show our faces. She is free to wear it in our home. If women love the burka so much, why don't they stick to wearing it in the privacy of their homes? Why only wear it in public? Ditto for all the Anonymous people. Stop hiding, and show your faces. If you like wearing your mask so much, do it in the privacy of your home.

    The "Anonymous" mask
    So Quebec, instead of banning Crucifixes, Stars of David, and Turbans, why don't you just ban what you really want to, ALL face masks, including the niqab and the burka.

    
    



    0 0
  • 09/17/13--19:44: Natalia
  • (This blog entry is going to be one of those cathartic exercises, and it's a time like this for which I'm really grateful to be able to have this outlet.)

    I think I just survived the most jarring moment of my life thus far. Today I was driving a friend to an appointment at a hospital. As she was readying herself to exit the car, I noticed a woman being escorted out of the building by two hospital security guards.

    A few minutes later, I departed the hospital drop off zone and prepared to turn the corner onto a busy street. A few yards from the corner was the same woman, this time alone, and she was attempting to "j-walk" across the busy city road. I could tell immediately that she was not a well person: she crossed the road without attention, her shoulders were shrugged, she had a listless gaze.

    At that moment, I realized that there was no reason for this woman to be crossing the road. At the other side was just a chain-link fence guarding a cliff with the train tracks below. I had an awful feeling about what was about to occur. I started to freak-out. I immediately "u-turned" my car, threw on my flashers and got out. By this point, the woman, who I could see now was in her twenties, proceeded to grab the fence with her hands and look downward to the tracks. She then started raising a leg to mount the four-foot tall barrier. I immediately ran to her and yelled for her to stop. I begged her to please get away form the fence and that she didn't have to do that. She just turned to me and started weeping. I put my arm around her shoulders and walked away with her.

    I then escorted this woman into my car. I suppose since we were in the middle of the road, I felt this was a safest place for her. I was so shocked by what just happened. It was surreal- as if I were watching a movie. I asked the girl if she wanted to go back to the hospital. She replied, "They just discharged me." I asked her name. "My name is Natalia" (this is not her real name.)

    As I "u-turned" again, thinking I was going to just send her back to the hospital. I noticed the two same security guards who escorted Natalia out, were standing on the sidewalk staring at me. I pulled up, rolled down my window and asked them to explain to me why they were just standing there? They said the doctor ordered this patient discharged. Discharged?? Clearly she is a risk to herself. The said they were following orders. I was so angry with their response. By chance, a pedestrian who witnessed the entire suicide attempt was walking past the security guards when he heard their responses. I could tell he was disgusted with their reply. Well, seeing as the hospital just let her go, I didn't feel comfortable bringing her back there. The poor woman was weeping and she just tried to kill herself. So I did what any daughter of European parents would do- invite her home for some food.

    Just to be clear, Natalia was clearly mentally ill. Her conversation was erratic, she would zone out and draw a blank look, she seemed lost.  At one point while we were driving, I started to worry about whether inviting her over was a good idea. I had two of my kids napping inside the house, and a babysitter keeping watch. However, after what had just occurred, I was running on auto-pilot.

    When we arrived home, I made the wise decision to seat Natalia on our front Terrace. I  told her I would return with some water and food. As soon as I entered my front door I started sobbing uncontrollably. What happened to this woman? What would compel a person to take their own life? Why did I happen to be at the right place, at the right time to help her off the fence? How could I help her? I pulled it together and served her.

    In between sobs, she shared with me details of her life. She claimed her parents physically and sexually abused her. She even mentioned that she was forced to have an abortion a few years ago. It was all so devastatingly raw. I did all I could do- I hugged her and told her that she was safe here, and that I would pray for her all the days of my life. We laughed, shared a few jokes, talked about life. As ridiculous as this may sound, I made her pinky-swear (old childhood habit) that she would never attempt to take her own life again- no matter how bad things were.

    At this point, I knew that there was nothing else I could do. Natalia needed help, professional help. Should I take her back to the hospital? How could I as they were the ones who just discharged her. So I called the hospital, explained the situation,  and they told me to come to emergency. I explained to Natalia that it may be best to go back to the hospital, and that I would accompany and support her all they way through.

    When we arrived at emergency, she was triaged and the two of us were escorted into "Crisis Care". Behind the bulletproof glass in this special unit, I recognized a security officer as one of the pair who initially escorted Natalia out, and then watched her from across the street. I rather forcefully demanded to know what was going to happen to Natalia. "Are you family?". "No, I'm just the girl who pulled her off a fence". "Well then you have to leave immediately."

    I was then escorted outside by the head nurse who tried her best to explain the situation to me, without giving me confidential info. Essentially, they knew Natalia very well, and this behavior isn't new. She was prone to violent behavior and has been in "The System". I wasn't sure if this information was supposed to make me feel better or worse. If these people knew that she has repeatedly tried to take her life, bluffing or not, why was she discharged? Is this protocol? Last I checked, suicide isn't one of those times where you call one's bluff.

    There was really nothing left to do, but to go home and make sense of what just happened. I thanked the nurse and walked away. I had so many questions. Is this how "The System" works? Is this how the mentally ill are handled? Was Natalia ill because of the abuse she may have suffered? Was she experiencing Post-Abortion Syndrome? Frankly, I don't care if Natalia was bluffing or not- if someone is threatening to kill themselves, they are ill. Period. She should not have been discharged. I understand there are laws and limits on how long the hospital can keep someone against their will, but where is the compassion for the patient in these regulations? How many other Natalias are out there? Is there really no place for "these people" to live? Natalia is a human being, a wounded person who needs a lot of care and support- is there no place for her to go?

    I'm not sure what will happen to Natalia. I will probably never see her again. However, I will never, ever forget what happened today, even after I recover from the shock.

    Please keep her in your prayers.


    0 0



    This is last week's segment from the Moral Maze segment on The Arena. Just a note, Linda Gibbons' real age is late sixties-I goofed. Sorry Linda!

    0 0

    Of course it's no surprise that I'm not for euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide; I will never support killing disabled, elderly, and terminally ill people. However, some of you may be surprised by my stance on porn (I can hear my libertarian friends groan as I write this.) I hope to flush out my arguments in a post shortly. Until then, enjoy the video!


older | 1 | (Page 2) | 3 | newer