Politics
Goal: $45,000. Donations received: $30,262.
Tuesday January 17, 2006
E-mail
Print- Conservative Leader Harper Vows to Shut Down Abortion Debate in Canada's Parliament
- Who Are the Pro-Life, Pro-Marriage Canadian Election Candidates?
- New Poll Reveals Overwhelming Majority of Americans Want Greater Abortion Restrictions
- Morgentaler Warns Voters against Conservatives to Ensure Abortion Remains Legal
- 2005 Communications to PM Reveal Traditional Marriage Topped Canadians' Concerns
- Family of Slain Canadian Teen and Unborn Child Petitions for Unborn Victims of Violence Act
- RCMP Demotes Officer for Seeking Nomination as Pro-Marriage Conservative
- US Supreme Court Upholds Oregon Physician Assisted Suicide Law
- UK to Force State-Funded Faith-Based Schools to Admit Students of Other Religions
- Raelian UFO Cult offers Disgraced Korean Cloner a Job
- UK Moves Closer to Legalized Brothels
- Beaches-East York Riding Report - Only One Pro-life, Pro-Traditional Marriage Candidate
Conservative Leader Harper Vows to Shut Down Abortion Debate in Canada's Parliament
Says, "I'll use whatever influence I have in Parliament to be sure that such a matter doesn't come to a vote,"
TODAY'S HEADLINES
By John-Henry Westen
MONTREAL, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Conservative Leader Stephen Harper has continued to bow to media and other pressures to suppress social conservatives within his party. After the Globe and Mail featured abortionist Henry Morgentaler warning voters against the Conservatives, Harper went further than he ever has before in support of abortion. He vowed, similar to Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin, to stifle debate on the issue if it is raised in Parliament.
"The Conservative government won't be initiating or supporting abortion legislation, and I'll use whatever influence I have in Parliament to be sure that such a matter doesn't come to a vote," Harper told reporters in Quebec today, according to a CBC report. "I will use whatever influence I have to keep that off of the agenda, and I don't see any likelihood of that in the next Parliament," he said.
Harper's newly hardened position unilaterally rejects and renders meaningless resolution P-90 which was passed by the party grassroots at last year's Conservative policy convention.
That resolution, which supposedly marked the Conservatives as a democratic contrast to the Liberals, and which is official party policy, stated,
A Conservative government will restore democratic accountability in the House of Commons by allowing free votes. A Conservative government will make all votes free, except for the budget and main estimates. On issues of moral conscience, such as abortion, the definition of marriage and euthanasia, the party acknowledges the diversity of deeply held personal convictions among individual party members and the right of Members of Parliament to adopt positions in consultation with their constituents and to vote freely.
By blocking any opportunity, even on private members' bills, to vote on the abortion issue, the supposed freedom of Conservatives to vote their conscience cannot even be exercised.
Social conservatives were already miffed at Harper for assigning them back of the bus status on same sex 'marriage' by revealing that he would not use the notwithstanding clause "on that issue" but leave its use open for other matters. (see coverage http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/dec/05121606.html )
Jim Hughes, National President of Campaign Life Coalition commented to LifeSiteNews.com about Harper's remarks saying, "It appears that he intends to go back on his promise to allow private members legislation to come before the house for a free vote. We were at least hoping for openness compared to the Liberals but it seems to be the same old, same old."
Hughes added that this news about Harper "does, however, support our policy of urging Canadians to vote for pro-life candidates in all the parties. When there are a sufficient number of them in the House to support each other on these issues, it will become harder for the leaders to ride rough shod over the MPs' obligation to do what is right and best for Canada instead of what the leaders order them to do".
In related news, the Conservatives will not even rule out continuing the Liberal government initiated move to force provinces to pay for abortions at private abortion centers, such as Morgentaler's private abortuaries. The Telegraph Journal reports that Conservative Party health critic Steven Fletcher said he'd give an opinion on the matter the day after the election.
Back to TopWho Are the Pro-Life, Pro-Marriage Canadian Election Candidates?
Informed voting can only take place if voters are made aware of the CLC election database
By Steve Jalsevac
January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Campaign Life Coalition leaders, after completing a huge effort to evaluate the life and marriage positions of candidates for this election, are concerned many voters will still cast an uninformed ballot unless they become aware of the information on CLC's Election 2006 web page.
To this end, although CLC has accumulated the information for its supporters, it is encouraging those supporters to ask church pastors and other organization leaders to promote the availability and Internet address of the CLC Election 2006 page.
The easiest way to guide voters to the information that compares all the candidates positions (where it is available), say CLC organizers, is to tell pro-life, pro-family voters to go to http://www.lifesite.net. A prominent link on the LifeSite home page takes viewers to the Election 2006 webpage.
As well, CLC notes, churches and other organizations would not be in violation of any election laws by printing out and distributing to members the single riding reports available from the provincial sections of the CLC candidate evaluations, or any of the several LifeSiteNews Riding Reports. The riding reports do not advocate one candidate or party over another but simply state the positions of all the major party candidates.
Mary Ellen Douglas, national organizer for Campaign Life Coalition, states it has been disheartening in recent elections how relatively few churches advised members about the availability of CLC's crucial voting information - information that is not available anywhere else.
Douglas said it is beyond her to understand why any of these organizations, that have strong principles in favour of life and marriage, would not do everything at this crucial time to direct their members to CLC's information about the candidates' stands on those very principles.
Douglas notes that not only are the unborn and the institution of marriage under attack, but "the freedoms of conscience and religion are in serious and immediate danger of being taken away from Canadians if they do not now elect candidates who will defend those freedoms."
"In other words", says Douglas, "it is in their own serious self interest for churches and other life and marriage appreciating communities to spread the word about the CLC Candidate Evaluations."
See the CLC Election 2006 web page and Candidate Evaluations at
http://www.campaignlifecoalition.com/elections/federal2006/index.html
New Poll Reveals Overwhelming Majority of Americans Want Greater Abortion Restrictions
By Terry Vanderheyden
VANCOUVER, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A new poll conducted by Angus Reid for CBS News has revealed that the overwhelming majority of Americans would like to see greater restrictions placed on abortion.
Thirty-three percent of respondents said that abortion should be permitted only in cases such as rape, incest and to save the woman’s life; 17% said abortion should be allowed to save a woman’s life; 5% said abortion should not be permitted at all, while 15% said abortion should be permitted, but subject to greater restrictions than it is now. In total, 70% of respondents favour greater restrictions. Only 27% said that abortion’s availability should remain unchanged – permitted in all cases.
Angus-Reid interviewed 1,151 American adults by telephone, between January 4 and January 8.
Morgentaler Warns Voters against Conservatives to Ensure Abortion Remains Legal
By Terry Vanderheyden
MONTREAL, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Abortion campaigner Henry Morgentaler warned voters Monday not to vote Conservative if they want to see abortion remain legal in Canada.
“I don’t trust the Conservative party and I don’t think women in Canada or people who love women in this country should trust the Conservative party as far as abortion rights are concerned,” he said, as reported by the Canadian Press. Morgentaler’s comments appeared on the front page of the Globe and Mail national newspaper.
Morgentaler described Conservative Leader Steven Harper’s pledge to keep abortion legal as a “tactical manoeuvre, a good manoeuvre,” to help him get elected. “Maybe he’ll do this for a year or two,” he added, warning that the issue will likely emerge in the form of a private members bill. “There might be a private member’s bill that the government could accept. Then they’ll push it through there,” he said.
“There are many people in the higher echelons of the Conservative party who are terribly anti-choice,” Morgentaler cautioned. “The front rank of the Conservative Party is chock full of people who are violently opposed to the rights of abortion, like Stockwell Day and similar guys, who will put pressure on Mr. Harper to reopen the issue.”
Morgentaler called for “a commitment from all the parties that they will not touch the abortion issue and that they will not re-criminalize abortion.”
Campaign Life Coalition National President Jim Hughes told LifeSiteNews.com that he was compelled to laugh when he saw the comments. “Morgentaler loves to get his face in the media,” he said. “His comments won’t have any impact whatsoever” on voters, however, Hughes emphasized. “He’s reached the point where people dismiss him every time he opens his mouth.”
Morgentaler spoke to the media after testifying at a class-action lawsuit launched in Quebec that seeks to force the province to pay for abortions committed in private clinics. He told a Quebec Superior Court judge that for the province to not pay for private abortions would be “criminal.”
2005 Communications to PM Reveal Traditional Marriage Topped Canadians' Concerns
By Gudrun Schultz
OTTAWA, Ontario, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Canadians expressed more concern over the redefinition of marriage than over any other issue, in communications sent to Prime Minister Paul Martin in 2005.
An analysis of letters, emails and phone calls sent to Martin over the course of the year shows a significant effort on the part of the Canadian public to express opposition to changing the traditional definition of marriage. The Canadian Press obtained the information through an access to information request.
"An overwhelming majority of callers was opposed to a redefinition of traditional marriage," says an analysis of 880 phone calls about same-sex received in January last year. "Some called for a referendum on the matter."
More than ten percent of all communications sent to the Prime Minister were on the topic of same-sex marriage. Even without the inclusion of form letters and duplicated emails, opposition to the redefinition of marriage was expressed in a majority of personally written communications.
Most of the letters and phone calls were sent during the winter and spring months of last year, as Bill C-38, the bill to redefine marriage was under way in the House. 5,755 individually written items were sent during February alone.
"This topic continues to dominate all others," says a monthly analysis. "The majority of letters seem to be part of an organized letter-writing campaign by various churches."
Conservative party leader Stephen Harper has said his government would revisit the legislation on same-sex ‘marriage’ if elected, and he would allow a free vote in his caucus. He is the only party leader to offer this.
Family of Slain Canadian Teen and Unborn Child Petitions for Unborn Victims of Violence Act
By Terry Vanderheyden
OTTAWA, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The family of a slain teen and her unborn child has launched a petition for the creation of a law to protect unborn victims of violence.
In association with the pro-life group LifeCanada, the family of Olivia Talbot, who was 27 weeks pregnant when she was shot to death at her home in Alberta in November, has launched the petition on line.
“Even though Olivia was in her third trimester of pregnancy, no charges were laid in the death of her unborn child,” LifeCanada explained in a release. “Since Canadian law does not recognize the child in the womb as a person, he or she has no rights until birth.”
LifeCanada revealed results of a Focus Canada poll they commissioned, conducted in October by Environics Research. The poll found that 64% of Canadian women support legal protection of unborn children before birth. “For the fourth year in a row, we see that the majority of Canadians do not support the existing situation in Canada in which there is no legal protection for babies in the womb,” said Joanne Byfield, president of LifeCanada.
“There is no legal protection for unborn babies at any stage, even for those who are injured or killed in the course of a violent crime,” Byfield added. “Canadians should insist that their government’s respect the wishes of the voters and provide some protection for babies in the womb. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms includes the right to life. If we deny it to these most vulnerable human beings, it is a very fragile and arbitrary right.”
Petitions are not accepted during an election campaign. LifeCanada urges that completed petition sheets be held until after the election and then sent to the newly elected MPs.
See the Unborn Victims of Violence Petition at: http://www.lifecanada.org/html/organization/UVV%20petition.pdf
View all findings of the LifeCanada poll at:
http://www.lifecanada.org/html/resources/polling/Media%20Release_November2005.pd...
RCMP Demotes Officer for Seeking Nomination as Pro-Marriage Conservative
Pro-traditional marriage campaign literature alleged by RCMP to be “hate literature”
By Hilary White
OTTAWA, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Ottawa Citizen reports that the RCMP has demoted an officer for his political affiliation and support of marriage. When Constable Peter Merrifield sought and lost the Conservative nomination in Barrie, Ontario, his superiors removed him from his position as a counter-terrorism agent. The RCMP said it “would be in the best interest of the RCMP ... if he was assigned to other duties, not related to politics.”
Merrifield told colleagues that his superiors had alleged that his campaign brochure, because it expressed a defence of traditional marriage, constituted “hate literature.”
In October Merrifield was told that his defence of marriage placed him in conflict of interest for his job with the RCMP’s threat assessment unit. The unit tracks threats to foreign and domestic government officials, visiting dignitaries, VIPs, federal politicians and the Prime Minister.
"His political aspirations," wrote his superior, Superintendant Marc Proulx, "have been made very public and any incident with a VIP could bring questions to the TA (threat assessment) and ultimately place the RCMP ... in a position of potential or perceived conflict of interest."
The Citizen says that although Merrifield had declined to comment, that he had told colleagues that he wanted to run for office to expose “what's really happening on the street.”
Merrfield, a former businessman who gave up a lucrative career for public service in the RCMP, distinguished himself in his RCMP service by improving the system in which he worked in the threat assessment unit. Merrifield received a commendation for having caught a man who threatened US President Bush and Paul Martin. The Citizen says he was praised for his "tireless ambition.”
Merrifield’s performance evaluation said that he had mentored fellow officers and displayed natural leadership qualities. “Const. Merrifield is a forward thinking individual who seeks innovation and solutions to resolve operational requirements.”
Merrifield will be transferred to the customs unit, which mainly tracks illegal cigarettes and alcohol.
Contact RCMP to express your concerns:
RCMP Headquarters
1200 Vanier Parkway
Ottawa, ON K1A 0R2
General Inquiries: 613-993-7267
US Supreme Court Upholds Oregon Physician Assisted Suicide Law
By Hilary White
WASHINGTON, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The US Supreme Court has voted 6-3 to support the Oregon legislation that allows physician-assisted suicide. Euthanasia opponents fear that the door is now open for other states to allow euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. The court ruled that the federal Controlled Substances Act does not allow the U.S. Attorney General to prohibit doctors from prescribing regulated drugs for use in physician-assisted suicide.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority decision against Attorney General John Ashcroft who brought the suit against the Oregon government saying that under the Controlled Substances Act, prescription drugs could not be prescribed to take life.
Justice Kennedy wrote, that the “authority claimed by the Attorney General is both beyond his expertise and incongruous with the statutory purposes and design.”
Concerned Women for America (CWA), the largest public policy women's organization in the US, responded, “The Attorney General did not act without consultation when he issued his ruling that assisting suicide is not a ‘legitimate medical purpose,’” said Jan LaRue, CWA's chief counsel. LaRue said the ruling is inconsistent: “Marijuana is a Schedule I drug that may not be prescribed.”
“Congress' determination is based on the ethical rules of every medical association, including the American Medical Association and the Oregon Medical Association, which both opposed the Oregon law,” La Rue said.
Justice Antonin Scalia in the minority, dissenting view, wrote, “If the term 'legitimate medical purpose' has any meaning, it surely excludes the prescription of drugs to produce death.”
The recently confirmed Chief Justice, John Roberts, was also in the dissenting minority in the decision in this, his first ethics case.
The Liberty Counsel, a nonprofit litigation, education and policy group, said the ruling further undermines the legal protection of the sanctity of life.
Mathew D. Staver, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel, said, "When a physician participates in a person's suicide by administering controlled substances, the line between healer and executioner is blurred, and the sanctity of life is lost. America should not become like Sweden, where patients wonder whether a physician with a syringe brings life or death.”
Since controlled substances are regulated under federal law, permitting such drugs to be used to end life compels all Americans to indirectly become complicit in euthanasia,” Staver said.
Proponents of the Oregon law claim that a series of “safeguards,” similar to those in place in the Netherlands, protect vulnerable patients. The law requires that patients be in the final six months of terminal illness, must make two oral requests and one written request to die, separated by a two-week period and be “mentally competent” to make the decision. The diagnosis must be confirmed by two doctors and the lethal prescription of drugs must be prescribed by a doctor and administered by patients themselves.
Since the law has been enacted, most of those who have killed themselves have been cancer patients. A recent Dutch study has shown, contrary to the euthanasia advocate’s claims, that patients requesting euthanasia or PAS are four times more likely to be depressed than those who do not request to die.
Majority ruling text:
http://scotus.ap.org/scotus/04-623p.zo.pdf
Minority dissenting opinion by Scalia:
http://scotus.ap.org/scotus/04-623p.zd.pdf
Transcript of the arguments:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/04-623.pdf
UK to Force State-Funded Faith-Based Schools to Admit Students of Other Religions
By Gudrun Schultz
UNITED KINGDOM, London, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Faith-based schools in the UK will no longer be able to limit their students to those of a particular religion.
The British government is introducing an amendment to the proposed Equality Bill today that will remove the power to determine school access based on religious affiliation from religious schools that receive state funding.
Faith-based schools have been receiving increasing government support over the last five years. According to an article in the Guardian in 2001, faith schools consistently achieve better classroom results. Although surveys indicate over 45% of England’s population claims no religious belief, there are 160 applications for every available place in a Christian classroom.
Despite this, opponents of religious schools say they contribute to divisions in society and lead to discrimination. The vast majority of faith schools are Christian. Out of 7,000 schools, 6,955 are Christian. 36 are Jewish, five Muslim and two Sikh.
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, has said in the past he would not want large numbers of Catholic children attending Muslim schools, although he welcomed the presence of Jewish and Muslim children in Catholic schools.
Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor said that while he welcomed dialogue between the faiths, “fundamentally the creed of Islam is totally diverse from the creed of Christianity.”
Speaking on the state of the Church in the UK, Cardinal O’Connor said Christianity has been "all but eliminated" as a source of moral guidance in people's lives, and people are largely “indifferent” to Christian values and the Church.
"In our countries in Britain today, especially in England and Wales, Christianity, as [sic] a backdrop to people's lives and moral decisions - and to the government, the social life of the country - has now almost been vanquished," the Archbishop said.
Raelian UFO Cult offers Disgraced Korean Cloner a Job
By Hilary White
GENEVA, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Korean newspaper Chosun Ilbo is reporting that a “US biotech firm” has offered the disgraced Korean cloning researcher, Dr. Hwang Woo Suk, a job. The firm, Clonaid, has been discredited as a sham associated with “Raelians”, a UFO cult that claims humans were planted on Earth by benevolent extraterrestrials.
The cult’s spokesman, Brigitte Boisselier, writing on Clonaid’s website, accuses “religious powers,” for Hwang’s downfall saying it was engineered and that his research results were tampered with. “We also believe that…he has been discredited as he wasn't in line with what the political and religious powers of this world wanted regarding the cloning technology,” Boisselier writes.
The UFO cult made headlines when its leader, a former French sports journalist who calls himself “Rael,” appeared at a US congressional hearing on cloning. He claims that Jesus, the Buddha, and other religious figures were actually cloned by extraterrestrials and living in “UFOland.” Rael, whose real name is Claude Vorilhon, maintains that cloning will create a paradise where people will live forever.
Hwang, a former Catholic, has indeed been vigorously opposed by the Korean Catholic Church that supports stem cell research that does not involve the creating and killing of human clones. In October 2005, the Archdiocese of Seoul said it would provide 10 billion won (US$9.6 million) for ethical adult stem cell research.
The falsification of cloning reports should make Hwang an ideal candidate for Clonaid and the Raelians who, in 2002, were claiming to have created cloned children and implanted them in female volunteers for gestation. The hoax was exposed when no children or verifiable data were ever produced.
Hwang, however, is unlikely to join the organization. In June 2005, referring to the creation of cloned children for “reproductive purposes, Hwang told an interviewer, “Cloning a human being is nonsense. Briefly, it is not ethical, it is not safe at all, and it’s technically impossible.”
The characterization of the Raelians in the Korean press as a legitimate scientific research organization is not shared by the US State Department that is aware of its anti-Catholic propaganda activities. In its report on religious intolerance for 2003, the State Department noted, “The Raelian Church of Canada, an officially recognized religion in Quebec, had targeted Quebec high schools as part of its ongoing campaign to persuade Roman Catholics to renounce their faith.”
Visit the Realian website:
http://www.rael.org/
Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Cloners in State of Complete Moral Disconnect
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/jun/05060809.html
UK Moves Closer to Legalized Brothels
By Gudrun Schultz
UNITED KINGDOM, London, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The UK is changing the definition of what constitutes a brothel, in order to allow more prostitutes to work from the same location. The Government is introducing legislation that will allow up to three women to work from the same address, in an effort to increase safety for sex trade workers.
The strategy document, which applies to England and Wales, said: "At present only one person may work as a prostitute – more than that…and the premises are classed in case law as a brothel.”
"This runs counter to advice that women should not work alone in the interest of safety. The Government will make proposals for an amendment to the definition of a brothel so two or three individuals may work together." (Scotsman)
The government is expected to officially reject an earlier proposal to openly legalize brothels.
Countries such as Australia and Germany, that have legalized prostitution in an attempt to minimize the social problems associated with the sex trade, such as drug use, have found these laws to have the opposite effect. In Australia, one study found prostitution rates exploded after legalization, with organized crime involvement a growing problem.
England’s Home Office estimates 80,000 people work in the sex trade, four out of five of them women, more than half under the age of 25. Many sex trade workers are young women brought in illegally from overseas, in particular from Eastern Europe.
See related LifeSiteNews coverage:
Germany Rethinks Legalized Prostitution
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/may/05051301.html
New Zealand Legalizes Prostitution
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2003/jun/03062504.html
Beaches-East York Riding Report - Only One Pro-life, Pro-Traditional Marriage Candidate
TORONTO, January 17, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – At least one independent election-watching website, electionprediction.org, is calling Toronto’s Beaches-East York “too close to call” as Liberal incumbent MP Maria Minna takes on Peter Conroy of the Conservative Party and Marilyn Churley of the NDP as other front-runners.
Voter concerns over life and family issues, as well as over various scandals that have plagued the Liberal Party, may injure Minna. She has been an ardent supporter of same-sex “marriage” and was dropped from cabinet in 2002 after being accused of breaking election laws.
Peter Conroy is the only Beaches-East York candidate supporting the traditional definition of marriage and human life at all stages. He describes himself as “a strong advocate of conservative principles.” In a speech at the Conservative nomination meeting on May 14, 2005, Conroy also made it clear that, “I support the traditional definition of marriage. That marriage is the union of one man and one woman.”
See the Complete Beaches-East York Riding Report at
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jan/060117a.html
MORE NEWS: 
LifeSiteNews.com Home Page Last 10 Days Archives Special Reports
Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.