Mar 192013
 

Kari Simpson and Ron Gray shake their heads in disbelief at this one. As Clarissa Luluquisin of National Campus Life Network (NCLN.com) explains – with video – a talk by invited guest speaker MP Stephen Woodworth at the University of Waterloo was interrupted and then cancelled because of the incessant heckling and shouted profanities by a small group of young women clad as various parts of the female reproductive organs. Hopefully these girls will learn that this thug "debate" style makes them look even more ridiculous than their pink-banana-looking costumes, and that denying free speech and open dialogue exposes them as dictatorial bigots.

Mar 162013
 
Dear Robert A.,An important motion is set for its first hour of debate in the House of Commons on March 28, 2013. Motion 408 calls on Parliament to condemn the practice of sex-selective pregnancy termination. MP Mark Warawa introduced this Motion in September, 2012. After a second hour of debate later this Spring, M408 will be up for a vote in the House of Commons.Here is the full text of the Motion:“That the House condemn discrimination against females, occurring through sex-selective pregnancy termination.”

«Que la Chambre condamne la discrimination envers les femmes, notamment l’interruption voluntaire de la grossesse selon le sexe.» 

The Motion will not change the law regarding female fetuses or abortion, but it will raise the discussion on and off the Hill on the subject of gendercide.

Here’s how you can support Motion 408:

  1. Collect petitions (requested by MP Warawa).
    • download in English here ou en français ici
    • you need only 5 names per page
    • mail to MP Warawa (see address on petition)
    • read the petition rules to make sure yours count
  2. Write/Email/Fax Prime Minister Harper to voice your supportParliamentary Office
    House of Commons
    80 Wellington St
    Ottawa, Ontario
    K1A 0A2
    Tel: 613-992-4211
    613-992-4211 FREE
    Fax: 613-941-6900
    stephen.harper@parl.gc.ca
  3. Write to your member of Parliament.You can find information on how to contact your MP by inputting your postal code into the Parliament of Canada website.
  4. Participate in social media conversations about gendercide on Twitter by using the hashtags #protectgirls and #M408 to build support.

Canadian Physicians for Life has cooperated with a number of other organizations to look at sex-selective abortion beyond Motion 408. See the Defend Girls web site for more resources on this important issue, including an examination of gendercide in Canada. The articles and peer-reviewed studies will also be available on our own web site soon, for those of you who are pink-averse!

For more real-time news and articles, you can now follow CPL on Twitter: @CdnLifeDocs, and you can find us on Facebook.

Let us know which issues you are following, and consider writing your own op ed for the next instalment of our publication, Vital Signs.Sincerely,KC McLean-D’Août
Administrator, Canadian Physicians for Life

womens-wrongs

Feb 162013
 

A letter in response to Bushwhackers embarrass PM, by Mark Bonokoski

It’s remarkable that a national editorial writer would submit his two-year-old child’s article as his own. OK, that’s probably not what Sun Media’s national editorial writer Mark Bonokoski did. His child probably would have written something far more intelligent than what Bonoski himself churned out for February 9. He was writing about the move by three MPs to write a letter to the RCMP to investigate the deaths of born alive babies as possible homicides. One can’t help but wonder if he had a personal agenda, such as personal affection for the Prime Minister and strong empathy for the terrible anxiety that a weak and sickly man like Stephen Harper must be dealing with in the dark hours of the night when everybody else is peacefully sleeping!! Note that Bonokoski’s article is dated February 9, a week after the RCMP letter was made public, giving time to read and consider the other material that has been published on the controversy.

Bonokoski actually suggested that Harper should have kicked these 3 MPs out of caucus. These were the reasons he gave: “backstabbing, stupidity and the abuse of their perceived power.” A person should be kicked out of a caucus over stupidity? What pathetic totalitarian sympathies a person must have to advocate such an anti-democratic view! Bonokoski’s attitude toward caucus discipline sounds almost Stalinesque.

We’re commenting on Bonokoski’s column because of the entertainment value of its rank stupidity. It doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously, and this for one reason alone. He – even as a supposed conservative (he notes that he once ran as a Canadian Alliance candidate) – claims still a week after the incident that it is all about investigating and criminalizing abortion. This is what he writes: “If they knew anything about the law, and they clearly don’t, they would know there is no section in the Criminal Code of Canada dealing with abortion. Abortion is not a crime in this country, and therefore nothing for the RCMP to possibly investigate.”

The media rarely issues corrections, yet Canadian Press, which insinuated that the investigation being demanded was over abortion, issued a correction by the end of the first day of coverage. A week ago! It’s now been well established in the public square, even by critics, that the investigation being requested is over reports of born alive babies, not abortions. Yet, consistent with the worst caricatures of religious fundamentalists, Bonokoski has clearly made up his mind about this issue and so doesn’t want to be confused by the facts. Yet this is the specific point over which Bonokoski called the MPs “obviously stupid”. If this wasn’t so remarkably pathetic, it would be funny.

Bonokoski also says that it was outrageous for the MPs to exercise their own initiative in sending a letter to the RCMP. He talks about them getting their letter “past the PMO’s firewall” and he calls it “bushwhacking” of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The PM once had a much-criticized reputation of having an iron grip on his caucus. That reputation has eased up in the last year or two, but Bonokoski seems to be approving of the worst caricature of Stalinesque heavy-handedness that was ever imagined by Harper. Conservatives can be thankful that a goon like Bonokoski never infiltrated the ranks of the Conservative caucus as a sitting MP. Voters can also be thankful because Bonokoski is a coward and an ignoramus when it comes to knowing what he has the freedom to do as a Member of Canada’s Parliament and as a representative of his constituents.

Bonokoski also accused these MPs of “the abuse of their perceived power.” He writes: ” backbench MPs should not be using their elected position to call upon our federal police force to chase their tail over personal agendas, especially when their claims of crimes being committed are based entirely on their incredible ignorance of the law.”

First, Bonokoski should have more confidence in the RCMP as having more intelligence than he himself possesses. If these MPs are out of line, the national police force is fully capable of writing a letter back to them to tell them so, explaining why this is the case.

Second, Bonokoski demonstrates how abortion has fried his brain and turned him into a zombie. One of the favourite lines on abortion for cowards who don’t want to debate the issue in the political realm is to say that it’s an MP’s personal issue. In fact, every MP has both pro-life and pro-abortion constituents. If he’s pro-life, he will be better at representing his pro-life constituents on that issue. If he’s pro-abortion, he will do better at representing his pro-abortion candidates on the issue. Attempts to shut an MP up on the issue by accusing him of only championing a “personal agenda” are cowardly – and totalitarian because that assertion disenfranchises all the constituents who agree with the MP. Apparently the MP is not allowed to represent those constituents because he happens to share their view on the issue. Instead, he is supposed to represent the constituents who hold the opposing view. Only an illiterate would think that view was logical! Only a fool would consider it democratic!

Third, Bonokoski never explains what point of political protocol, law or the constitution he is using to defend his accusation that backbench MPs should not write such letters to the RCMP. This is probably just Bonokoski’s personal agenda.

Fourth, he says “… especially when their claims of crimes being committed are based entirely on their incredible ignorance of the law.” We’ve already addressed this point of embarrassing and gross ignorance on the part of Bonokoski himself.

On the matter of abortion, we see the utter cowardice of Bonokoski on display. He says that when he ran as a Canadian Alliance candidate, he was asked for his view on abortion, and his response was that: “Until I grow a uterus and am able to bear children, it is absolutely none of my business and certainly outside my emotional and psychological purview,” adding: “It’s not a cop-out. It’s a fact.”

That is actually one of the most despicable, pathetic and cowardly cop-outs that militant pro-aborts have come up with. Only the most insane feminists demand such a stance from men. It’s an utterly contemptible position for men to hold. Real men don’t abdicate their integrity or responsibility in that fashion.

Bonokoski also repeatedly states that the action of the MPs is foolish because the law is the law. For example, he writes: ” There is no question, however, that abortion remains a hot-button issue, driven primarily by the religious right. Fair enough. But it doesn’t change the law.”

Thanks for the enlightenment! But even if the controversy Bonokoski discusses had to do with abortion, the obvious fact is that you aren’t going to change the law without bold action, so simply stating that the law is the law, as though that was an argument against actions intended to challenge the law, is patently absurd, and just another example of how the matter of abortion fries pro-aborts’ brains and destroys their rationality.

~ Tim Bloedow

Feb 032013
 

HOUSE OF COMMONS
CANADA
Maurice Vellacott, MP
Saskatoon-Wanuskewin

January 23, 2013

RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson

RCMP National Headquarters
Headquarters Building
73 Leikin Drive
Ottawa, ON K1A 0R2

Dear Commissioner Paulson,

Recent public reports have revealed the possibility of numerous breaches of the Criminal Code – to be specific, homicides – in Canada which need to be investigated.

These killings appear to have started out as attempted abortions, but the babies were born alive. At the blog, Run With Life, you will learn: “From 2000 to 2009 in Canada, there were 491 abortions, of 20 weeks gestation and greater, that resulted in live births. This means that the aborted child died after it was born. These abortions are coded as P96.4 or ‘Termination of pregnancy, affecting fetus and newborn’” (http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/2012/10/late-term-abortions-statistics-born.html).

The data used to discover the existence of these possible murders is from Statistics Canada, CANSIM Table 102-0536, “Deaths by Cause, Chapter XVI, Certain conditions originating in the perinatal period” (http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?lang=eng&retrLang=eng&id=1020536&paSer=&pattern=&stByVal=1&p1=1&p2=-1&tabMode=dataTable&csid=).

According to the Criminal Code, a child is considered to be a human being and a person after proceeding fully from the mother’s womb, therefore, based on Section 223(2) of the Criminal Code, there should be 491 homicide investigations or prosecutions in connection with these deaths.

As you would know, Section 223(2) of the Criminal Code reads, “A person commits homicide when he causes injury to a child before or during its birth as a result of which the child dies after becoming a human being.” That is to say, anyone who interferes with a pregnancy such that the child dies after it is born alive due to that interference is guilty of homicide.

The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) has also reported 119 live birth abortions for the year 2010/2011 (http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/2012/12/update-live-birth-abortions-on-rise-in.html), which is an extremely troubling increase from previous years.

This increase indicates that the killing of Canadian children may continue to grow if these apparent crimes are not investigated, and the perpetrators prosecuted.

These incidents appear to be homicides. Therefore a thorough police investigation is required, and I am formally requesting you to pursue that. I can make several experts on this matter available to you in the course of your investigation, should you so desire.

These incidents that need investigating took place across Canada, making this a national investigation. Furthermore, in many of Canada’s province’s, the RCMP is the provincial police force. It, therefore, is the best police force in Canada to exercise the leadership necessary to investigate these serious charges.

I look forward to your expeditious confirmation that you have commenced an investigation.

Yours sincerely,

Maurice Vellacott,
Member of Parliament,
Saskatoon-Wanuskwein                   

Leon Benoit,
Member of Parliament,
Vegreville-Wainwright

Wladyslaw Lizon,
Member of Parliament,
Mississauga East-Cooksville

Dec 092012
 

Dear MP Sweet

I wish to be very clear about this Bill C-279 which will provide ‘special’ rights for transgendered persons.

I personally am acquainted with a transgendered adult for whom I hold high regard and compassion.

He was born with Klinefelter’s syndrome which occurs in the womb prior to birth and according to reading I have done, exists in between 0.1 to 0.2% of the population. Klinefelters syndrome results in males having an extra ‘x’ chromosome and often a very low rate of male hormones among other complications. A very discouraging condition without a doubt. I hold no malice toward those who suffer from this condition.

Having said that, I am a supporter of equal rights, not special rights.

Special rights not only create classes of people with special sets of rights, special rights also are often used to trump one worldview over another when conflicting worldviews collide. This trumping is often used by various human rights commissions to prosecute those who do not subscribe to commission worldview.

In the case of special rights for transgendered persons, Ontario passed Bill – 33 which is now being used to defend biological males to enter female washrooms with the very real potential to permit the same to enter female change rooms and shower facilities. According to the Ontario Human Rights Commission, biological males may enter female washrooms and do so with out question as questioning one about their actions would be against their human right. This special right opens the doors to sexual predators and other sexual deviants.

The right of biological males to enter their washroom of choice trumps the right of our grandmothers, mother, sisters, wives, daughters and granddaughters to be and feel safe in an area where disrobing is necessary.

Enough said. I urge you to not only vote against Bill C-279, but also to inform other MP’s why you are doing so.

Thank you

Jim Enos
President

Hamilton Wentworth Family Action Council
www.hamiltonfamilyaction.org

Nov 202012
 

Kari Simpson and Ron Gray interview Maurice Vellacott, MP for Saskatoon—Wanuskewin in the province of Saskatchewan, about his recent recommendation that Linda Gibbons and Mary Wagner receive Diamond Jubalee medals. Vellacott calls these women "heroines of humanity" for their brave and relentless opposition to baby-killing (Canada is now the only country in the world with no law addressing pre-born human rights). MP Vellacott also discusses his support for Canada's removal of diplomatic ties with Iran.

Nov 192012
 

Maurice Vellacott, MP for Saskatoon—Wanuskewin in the province of Saskatchewan, recently recommended that Linda Gibbons and Mary Wagner receive Diamond Jubalee medals. Minister Vellacott calls these women “heroines of humanity” for their brave and relentless opposition to baby-killing, a stance that has repeatedly landed them both in jail. You see, Canada is not only the only country in the world with no law addressing pre-born human rights, but to be pro-life is tantamount to being a criminal. Bravo Minister Vellacott for standing up for defenseless babies.

Oct 122012
 

Tune in to hear Kari Simpson explain why she wrote a letter to Prime Minister Harper lauding the recent vote by Rona Ambrose, Minister of Status for Women, to seek a scientific definition for when human life begins. Since when does seeking truth and clarification become an act of bravery? Since MP Ambrose’s vote, apparently, as she is now being vilified by certain special interest groups who benefit from ignorance and fear. How will the Prime Minister respond? Well, considering he voted against the motion, we’d suggest that his cowardice is showing.

Full Text of Kari Simpson’s Letter:

October 3, 2012

Re:      Bravo, Minister Ambrose!

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

My name is Kari Simpson; I am a civil, informed Canadian. I am the mother of four responsible, accomplished, and now adult children whom I raised as a single parent; the oldest was 12 when their father became ill and passed away. I am also delighted to proclaim that my eighth grandchild is due in March. And yes, as my children were taught, my grandchildren are also being educated about their democratic and civil responsibilities to protect life and liberty. This includes voting.

I am also CEO of WOW Multi-Media corporation; President of a national organization called Culture Guard; host of RoadKill Radio News, an influential current affairs program on RoadKill Radio.com; a commercial pilot; and a feared and respected child and family advocate—among other endeavours. I do not attribute my successes to affirmative action or feminist gains, but rather to having the good fortune of coming from a long line of individuals strongly committed to the family unit, and made up of strong men and women who deal in reality, work hard, live responsibly and respect those who deserve respect.

I would like to add my voice to counter the noise created by the gaggle of feminist squawk-boxers who willingly display their ineptitude and their challenged view of reality by falsely claiming to represent me, my three daughters, and numerous other female members of our extended family, in matters that affect Canadian women.

My family’s work history details the events involving my great-aunts running mines in The Pas, Manitoba; my grandmother working to finance my grandfather’s inventions—some events going back 100 years ago, long before silly women started burning their bras.  The women in my family have accomplished these noteworthy successes, like so many others, without assistance from the state, or being given an unfair advantage by government programs crafted to discriminate against men; and they have done so without murdering our unborn children, abdicating our responsibilities as mothers, or requiring others to pay for our career choice expenses — e.g., daycare.

I have watched with growing distain the verbal assaults being hurled at Minister Ambrose by self-absorbed, feeble-brained radical feminists—both male and female — who operate from a platform that seemingly provides blinders and affords only a flat-earth view. The out-dated rhetoric of yesteryear relied upon by these squawking ninnies is about as useful as the shrill shriek of a faulty brake-pad, just before a crash.

Minister Rona Ambrose deserves enormous credit for her willingness to assure Canadians that she and 90 other elected leaders don’t fear seeking a factual, foundational understanding of the scientific realities associated with the genesis of life. She deserves the applause that is growing louder as more and more Canadians become informed about this intelligent, independently-minded stateswoman, who had the integrity to vote in favour of Motion 312—a vote to establish the truth.

You can appreciate how intellectually pathetic those 203 members are who voted against seeking to explore the scientific facts about human life. There has been no moment in the history of Parliament that so fully demonstrates the sad state of the factually-challenged cowards who wimpily kow-tow to the squawk-box bullies and shrieking ninnies. I find it ridiculous—and concerning—that elected officials would publicly demonstrate their willingness to embrace ignorance on such an important issue, clearly acquiescing to the unjustified fear generated by the natter of a few cultural terrorists.

You are right, Mr. Prime Minister: we don’t need a debate; we need a solution to an obvious problem—a problem that allows innocent children to be slaughtered. Canadians deserve to be factually informed. This violent crime against our nation’s innocent, unborn sons and daughters, Canada’s most vulnerable citizens, must end.

Please extend my deep appreciation to Minister Ambrose for establishing a credible and respectable standard in political leadership—for both women and men. Minister Ambrose, by courageously standing in support of Motion 312, spoke for me, my daughters, and my granddaughters—and on behalf of the overwhelming majority of informed women (and men) who abide in truth, act responsibility and deal in reality—something her ill-informed critics, parroting the retro-rhetoric-of-yesteryear, fear.

Yours truly,

Kari Simpson
Host, RoadKill Radio News
RoadKillRadio.com
Email: karisimpson@telus.net
Tel:    (604) 514-1614
Fax:   (604) 514-1669

 

To:

Minister Rona Ambrose

The Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper
Office of the Prime Minister
House of Commons
Parliament Buildings
Fax 613-941-6900
e-mail: pm@pm.gc.ca                                             

Copied to:

Rona Ambrose
Minister Responsible for the Status of Women
House of Commons
Parliament Buildings
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
e-mail: rona.ambrose@parl.gc.ca

Sep 152012
 

The Canadian Medical Association has issued a statement—political, not medical—saying that a baby does not become a human being until after it is born.

Let’s parse that carefully. We’ll start with the organization making the statement: The Canadian Medical Association. Who are they?

Well, they’re actually an imitative branch-plant of the American Medical Association. It’s an example of the “Ooooh! They’ve got one! Let’s us have one, too!” syndrome.

But where did the AMA come from?

From the Rockefeller Foundation’s largesse. Here’s how:

In 1913, when a cabal of American Robber Barons drafted legislation for a graduated income tax—a policy espoused by Karl Marx, interestingly—they included a provision for tax-exempt charitable foundations. By keeping control of the shares they put into the foundations, they were able to exert influence on the stock market without appearing to violate the anti-trust laws. But the shares they retained would benefit from their advance knowledge of what they were going to do with their Foundation shares.

John D. Rockefeller wanted to split the income earned by the Rockefeller Foundation shares between rural education and medicine. Education was no problem: he just gave the money to rural school boards. He hired a guy to disburse the medical funds—but the guy he hired knew nothing about medicine. So he went to Leipzig, in Germany to find out what state-of-the-art medicine was doing there; as it turned out, Leipzig doctors were big on pharmaceuticals and surgery—two topics being taught at only one school in the USA: Johns-Hopkins. So Johns-Hopkins got the Rockefeller cash.

But it didn’t take long for the other universities to discover how to get on the gravy train: their curricula soon included pharmaceuticals and surgery. And that became the model for medical education in the USA.

Ironically, John D’s own personal physician was a homeopath—but homeopathy, like chiropractic, was excluded from the gravy train.

The graduates of the new allopathic medicine schools funded by Rockefeller became the founders of the AMA… and their pattern and policies were copied by the CMA.

So that’s the origin of the organization that now tells us a pre-born baby isn’t human.

I have a question for the CMA: if the parents are both human, the progeny is certainly not a rabbit. If the parents are both human, what IS the baby, if not human?

Am I putting down doctors? Not at all. They’re healers, and their training and compassion are important to us. But I am pointing out that their real expertise is confined to just one part of the healing arts. And within that part, there is a tiny—and, happily, a shrinking—number of doctors who are willing to be killers, instead of healers.

Thus the absurd CMA statement that pre-born babies aren’t human beings is merely a professional group’s attempt to protect a grisly billion-dollar-a year industry that enriches those few.

Parliament will soon decide whether to reconsider the 400-year-old criterion that undergirds that grisly industry. To many politicians, an organization like the CMA represents a convenient clumping together of potential votes; and when the opinion of such a group is falsely presented to them as being all on one side, it may seem to them to have weight… and that needs a counter-weight: your opinion.

This is an urgent time for you to act: visit, call or write your Member of Parliament and urge them to support Motion 312, by MP Stephen Woodworth, on September 21.

Woodworth wants Parliament to create a committee to review Section 223 of the Criminal Code, which says a child becomes a human being when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother.

Woodworth, quite correctly, argues: “If a child, five minutes before birth, can be defined as ‘not a human being’, then the question is: ‘Who’s next?’”

Don’t put this off: contact your Member of Parliament right away to make sure your opinion is heard. Best is to make an appointment to visit them at their constituency office; next-best is to phone them, and leave a message for them to call you back—then tell them this issue is important to you, and could influence your vote at the next election; If nothing else, write a letter (no postage needed), or send an e-mail. But make sure your MP knows your opinion.

Canadian-born comedian Mort Sahl used to quip, in the ’50s, that “The AMA is opposed to faith healing—or any other cure that is quick and inexpensive.” Don’t let the voice of a lobby group like that influence your Member of Parliament.

Remember: your voice matters.

Feb 142012
 

Member of Parliament Brian Storseth discusses his private members Bill C-304, which seeks to restore basic freedoms of speech to Canadians. If passed, this would curtail the severe abuses of the Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals throughout the country, which currently deny basic rights of freedom, legal representation, and prohibits “truth” as a defence.

RoadKill Radio News is hosted by Kari Simpson and Ron Gray, each of whom have faced such tribunals, and – a rarity – both of whom won their cases. This is an important act of restoring democracy. Bill C-304 will have second reading on February 15, 2012. Call your MP and demand they vote in favour of Bill C-304!

Feb 142012
 

Join Kari Simpson & Ron Gray

Starting at 4:30 pm Eastern, February 14, 2012

On

RoadKill Radio.com

Smart Canadians are CHEERING!

Maverick Member of Parliament BRIAN STORSETH joins Kari Simpson and Ron Gray and talks about his Private Member’s Bill C-304, a Bill which seeks to restore the fundamental freedoms of speech back to Canadians!  YAY!! If passed, this would curtail the severe abuses of the Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals throughout the country, entities which currently deny basic rights of freedom, legal representation, and prohibits “truth” as a defence to some Canadians.

Bill C-304 will have second reading today and be voted on February 15, 2012, call your MP and demand they vote in favour of Bill C-304!! Log on, listen and act!

Visit MP Brian Storseth’s website today and support Bill C-304!!  Click here

Important Show

WHERE: Listen/watch – http://www.roadkillradio.com

EMAIL THE SHOW: Roadkillradio@live.ca

Your Calls, Your Thoughts, Your Opinions, Your Outrage is welcome!

ALL SHOWS ARE ARCHIVED, LISTEN FOR FREE!!!

Mar 172011
 

Show #92 Part 1

Download Show #92 Part 1

7:30 – 8: 00 pm: JOHN CUMMINS, MP for Delta-Richmond East, talks about his decision to not run for the Conservatives in the next federal election and why he is seriously considering stepping into a leadership role within the provincial B.C. Conservatives. (click here for the Vancouver Sun story)

Mar 052011
 

Brian Rushfeldt was close to apoplectic when he was interviewed March 1 on RoadKill Radio. But the Executive Director of Canadian Family Action was still articulate, clear and very common-sensical about the outrageous testimony given by “expert” witnesses to a Senate Committee hearing on Bill C-54, legislation to require minimum mandatory sentences for pedophiles.

“They offered no evidence, only their own opinion,” said Rushfeldt.

He pointed out that one of the “expert” witnesses, Professor Hubert Van Gijseghem of the University of Montreal, who said that pedophilia is “just another sexual orientation”, had given similar ungrounded testimony before parliamentary committees before—always with a slant that supported the contention of pro-‘gay’ activists that in sexual matters, “anything goes.”

Rushfeldt pointed out that if pedophilia is “just another sexual orientation”, it cannot remain in the Criminal Code, since previous Supreme Court rulings and parliamentary inertia have allowed “sexual orientation” to become a protected category under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In 1981, when the Charter was being drafted, an MP named Jean Chétien—who would later be Prime Minister of a Liberal government that legalized same-sex “marriage” and allowed the protection of “sexual orientation” to become a protected category—said in a committee hearing, “That phrase (“sexual orientation”) doesn’t belong in any law, because nobody knows what it means!”

The term remains undefined in Canadian law.

If it is now re-defined to mean any activity involving anyone’s genitalia, pedophilia – one of the most odious offenses against innocent children – would be swept under the deformed Charter’s protection.

The change to the Charter, as listeners to RoadKill Radio have previously learned, was in fact unconstitutional: it was a ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada that changed the Charter; but since the Charter is entrenched in Canada’s Constitution, that means the SCOC was amending the Constitution from the bench. The Constitution, however, includes a carefully-written formula for its amendment—and the Supreme Court is nowhere mentioned.

The Constitution, in short, does not give the Supreme Court the power to do what it did. The court was acting ultra vires – beyond its powers.

Perhaps one day Canada will elect a Parliament that includes MPs with the courage to restrain the Supreme Court, and command it to get back into its limited constitutional role.

RKR co-host Terry O’Neill commented: “There was a time… when it was seen that there was one, common-sense, natural way of having sexual relations—and everything else was seen as deviant behaviour. We’ve now got an ‘expert’ talking about a society that would, in effect, ban heterosexual behaviour… he’s saying that pedophilia is just a sexual orientation.”

Brian Rushfeldt’s response: “The guy is an absolute nut-case!

“If anyone paid any attention to the foolishness of these professors—neither presented anything besides their opinions… somewhere that’s going to be argued in court: ‘It’s my sexual orientation, you cannot jail me for that!’

“It’s frightening to think we have professors in our universities who put forward these ideas… I challenged committee to require these people to bring forward some evidence; because they cannot.”

Said co-host Kari Simpson: “We’re ’way beyond half-way down the slippery slope. We saw that with the transgender bill: the NDP claims that sexual orientation is a fluid state, but they also claim it cannot be changed… The NDP is at it again: they’ve put forward a bill to legalize anal sex at 16.
Yet we’ve also had ‘gay’ activists wanting more money because of the medical consequences of homosexual ‘sex’. It’s utter nonsense!”

Rushfeldt said Bill C-54, which has passed through committee unchanged and will now come before the House of Commons for third reading, is “less than what we need, but better than what we’ve got.”

If it passes third reading in the House, Bill C-54 will go to the Senate; if there is an election before C-54 gets through the Senate, the bill will die on the Order Paper.

RKR staffers suggest that everyone write, phone, or e-mail your MP and ask them to support passage of this bill; then write, phone or e-mail the Senators from your province and require their support. Next phone, email or tell your family members and friends that they need to get involved in their democracy, protect children and the values of a civil society!
click here for RKR archived show
Click here for the Justice Committee transcripts
Click here for info on Joe Comartin’s Bill C-628, lowering age of consent for minors to practice sodomy

Feb 172011
 

Feb. 9, NDP MP Bill Siksay’s Private Member’s Bill C-389 passed third reading in the House of Commons 143 to 135.

While Prime Minister Harper and most of the Conservative caucus voted against the bill, six Conservatives stood to support it, including House Leader John Baird, Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon and Heritage Minister James Moore. The NDP and Bloc supported the bill unanimously, but seven Liberals opposed it. The bill adds “gender expression” and “gender identity” to the Criminal Code’s “hate crimes” Section 318(4).

Critics have called Siksay’s legislation “the bathroom bill” because it would allow people to choose their gender—and gain access to bathrooms and locker-rooms of whichever gender they choose.

NDP MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj has another private member’s bill in the works that would include “sex” in Section 318, and Bloc MP Nicole Demers’ Bill C-531 would do the same.

However, those bills, sitting far down on the order paper, are unlikely to be heard. “I’ve tried that three times, and every time it’s been knocked down by the Conservative caucus,” Wrzesnewskyj says.

Still, he adds, “sex” will almost certainly be subsequently “read into” the law by the Supreme Court now that Siskay’s Bill C-398 has passed.

The high court has consistently read “sexual orientation” into the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, even though such a change to the Charter—which is part of Canada’s Constitution—has never been ratified by Parliament. The legal process for amending the Constitution, which is specified right in the Constitution, doesn’t seem to matter to our Supreme Court.

Vancouver lawyer barbara findlay (who insists on lower-case spelling of her name) specializes in what she calls “queer and feminist issues”; she says, “It’s a conceptual confusion to suggest that if people are protected from discrimination on the basis of gender identity or gender expression, that somehow gives trans women ‘more rights’ than non-trans women.

“Among other things, it protects lesbian women who look ‘too butch,’ and it would protect gay men who are ‘too femme’,” findlay says.

Critics say it would also allow predatory men to claim “trans” status and use women’s facilities for voyeurism—or worse.

Many observers expect Siksay’s ‘bathroom bill’ to be squelched in the Tory-dominated Senate, although the Conservative Leader in the Upper House, Senator Marjorie LeBreton, says it will be a free vote. “I’m ambivalent about the bill,” she said. If an election is called before the bill is ready for Royal Assent, it would die on the order paper.

“It’s the worst-written bill I’ve ever read,” CFAC’s Nathan Cooper told RKR. “It’s about two terms—‘gender identity’ and ‘gender expression’—that have no definition.”

Click here to listen to RKR archived show

Feb 172011
 

From a report by blogger Karen Stephenson

http://www.suite101.com/content/gmo-exportability-bill-c-474-shot-down-in-canadian-parliament-a345789

Feb 10, 2011 — Bill C-474, a Private Member’s Bill introduced in November 2009 by Alex Atamenenko, NDP Agriculture Critic and MP for BC Southern Interior, called for an amendment to the federal Seeds Regulations Act to require “an analysis of potential harm to export markets” before federal permission for sale of any new GM (genetically modified) seed.
February 9, Atamenenko’s bill was voted down 178-98. All Conservative MPs voted against it, as did 40 of the 58 Liberals who voted.
In a Canadian Biotechnology Action Network press release, Maureen Bostock, who speaks for the National Farmers Union, stated, “It’s outrageous that instead of being at the vote in Ottawa, most Agriculture Committee members are actually in Guelph listening to the President of Monsanto Canada.”
Biotech industry tried to prevent debate
C-474 had gone further than any other Bill on genetic engineering, but last December the biotech industry attempted to prevent debate in the House of Commons; however, by an obscure parliamentary tactic the NDP secured a 5-hour debate that took place February 8. Such a debate on genetic engineering had never happened in the House of Commons before. Every MP who had concerns of their own or from their constituents presented them to the House.
Implications of C-474 defeat
Hamilton East MP Wayne Marston (NDP) asserted, “GM seeds will lead to economic disaster for our farmers.”
Jean Crowder, NDP MP for Nanaimo-Cowichan, said, “GE will destroy our export market” because our export markets do not want crops grown from GM seeds, which are considered “contaminated.” Canada’s flax exports collapsed because of GM flax seeds.
Peter Julian, NDP MP for Burnaby-New Westminster stated that “the purity of our seeds is fundamentally important.” He called C-474 a “simple piece of legislation” and was disappointed that “not a single Conservative member has responded to their constituents … they are only listening to the biotechnology industry.”
MPs who spoke shared concerns that if C-474 did not pass, Canada’s wheat and alfalfa exports will collapse just like flax.
Terry Wilson, founder of the Canadian Awareness Network, wrote in his blog, “We are seeing how Canadian politics work very clearly here. The multi-national corporations getting their way, and the Canadian people getting shafted.”
GM seeds burned
Kevin Proteau, founder of Locals Supporting Locals stated in a telephone interview with the blog Suite101, “Many Canadians are aware of the dangers of GM seeds and recognize that countries worldwide want nothing to do with crops grown from these seeds.”
Natural News reported on July 19, 2010, six months after the devastating earthquake, that 10,000 Haitian farmers marched in protest against Monsanto and burned hybrid corn seed. “A 200,000-member national coalition is encouraging Haiti farmers to burn all Monsanto seeds already distributed, and has called on the government to reject additional shipments.”

Click here to listen to RKR’s archived show on this topic