Peter Baklinski

,

‘Workers should not be forced to pay dues’: MP Poilievre campaigns for compulsory union dues opt out

Peter Baklinski
Peter Baklinski
Image

OTTAWA, September 6, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – After a Canadian federal union financially helped a Quebec separatist party win a minority government on Tuesday, a Conservative MP has initiated a push for legislation that would allow public servants to opt out of paying union dues when the union acts contrary to their beliefs or convictions.

The move has sparked excitement among pro-life and pro-family union workers whose compulsory dues support their trade unions’ social and political activism, even if it runs contrary to their beliefs or religious convictions.

Nepean-Carleton MP Pierre Poilievre told the Ottawa Citizen that, while he accepts the results of the election, he “can’t accept a union representing public servants” that “forcefully takes money out of the pockets of Canada’s public servants to support parties that want to break up the country.”

“How can it be in the interests of public servants to support the breakup of Canada?” asked Poilievre.

The Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) financially supported candidates running for Québec solidaire and the Parti Québécois.

Stephen J. Gray, a retired unionized seaman who exposes the political and social activism of Canada’s large trade unions, told LifeSiteNews.com that compulsory union dues force much of Canada’s workforce to “finance and support abortion, same-sex marriage, and many other socialist ideologies that are completely unrelated to the workplace.”

MP Poilievre, a Catholic who is rated “pro-life” by Campaign Life Coalition, told the Ottawa Citizen that in his own riding there are many disgruntled unionized workers who despise being forced by their unions to indirectly support radical causes and political campaigns through mandatory dues.

“Workers have the right to unionize, but they don’t have an obligation to unionize,” he said. “So, the law should not force them against their will to pay dues for causes they don’t support.”

Canada’s compulsory union dues were the handiwork of appointed judge Mr. Justice Ivan C. Rand —  who was called a progressive socialist by Paul Martin Sr, a Liberal cabinet member at the time. In 1946, Rand introduced the formula as part of an arbitration decision to end an autoworkers’ strike.

Click ‘like’ if you want to END ABORTION!

Under Rand’s formula, workers are free to refrain from joining a union, but they are nevertheless forced to pay union fees that can subsequently be used arbitrarily by union bosses.

Larry Brown, national secretary-treasurer of the National Union of Provincial Government Employees (NUPGE) indicated just how arbitrarily the union treasury can be used when he wrote in 1991 that NUPGE is “involved in matters which have to do with the social direction of Canada and not just issues at the bargaining table.”

The major trade unions in Canada, including CAW, CEP, USW, OPSEU, OECTA, PSAC, and CUPE, are known for their unabashed political and social activism for anti-life and anti-traditional-family positions that include the blatant endorsement and promotion of abortion and homosexual ‘marriage’.

Earlier this summer Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) used pro-life members’ dues to fund pro-abortion rallies across the country against the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform’s New Abortion Caravan, which traveled from Vancouver to Ottawa displaying graphic images of aborted children.

The CAW demonstration was also staged to protest Conservative MP Steve Woodworth’s Motion 312 in the House of Commons, which called for Parliament to establish a special committee to consider when human life begins. Pro-life union members counter demonstrated to protest their union’s decision to wade into the abortion debate.

The president of Canada’s private sector union CEP Dave Coles told Canada NewsWire in April that “CEP and many other unions have been at the forefront of the fight to ensure a woman has a right to choose and that governments don’t turn back the clock on reproductive rights. And we intend to keep up the pressure.”

Ontario’s powerful Catholic teachers’ union (OECTA) levied a $60 fee from its 45,000 members in 2011 to build a $3 million war chest with which they successfully helped to defeat the province’s Progressive Conservative party in the October 6th provincial election.

While teachers refused to comment publicly on OECTA’s activities out of fear of retaliation, one teacher, under condition of anonymity, told LifeSiteNews.com at the time that he was dismayed to have money forcibly seized from him for a “campaign that I don’t really agree with in the first place.”

The last decade has seen OECTA promoting bizarre sex conferences featuring talks on drag queens and sex toys, using their own conferences to feature leading dissident Catholics and abortion supporters, promoting the agenda of homosexual activists through acceptance of gay/straight alliances, and intervening in a court proceeding against a Catholic school which was being sued by a male student for refusing to permit him to bring his gay ‘boyfriend’ to the school prom.

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.

In 2008, Susan Comstock, an employee of the Treasury Board of Canada and a member of PSAC, lost her case before the Federal Court of Appeal in which she sought to divert her union dues because of her conscientious objection to her union’s advocacy of same-sex ‘marriage’ and policy against “heterosexism.”

Comstock had argued that PSAC’s support of the homosexual political agenda violated her right to freedom of religion and freedom of conscience. She had proposed to divert her union dues, about $800 a year, to charity.

Comstock’s lawyer, Phil Horgan, head of the Catholic Civil Rights League of Canada, called the decision against his client “chilling” in its implications for religious expression in Canada.

In 2003, Canada’s largest union, Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), lobbied in favor of homosexual “marriage” before the Justice Committee in the House of Commons. At that time, Judy Darcy, national president of CUPE, told Members of Parliament that his organization had “spoken up for same-sex marriage, and we think it’s about time the federal government made it legal.”

Gray argues that the country’s trade unions have “no business” forcing their members to pay dues that support social ideologies and political parties.

“Union members in Canada, whether they’re pro-life, pro-abortion, or neutral on the issue, should have their dues used only for collective bargaining. That is the reason why unions first got their mandate,” he said. “But union bosses have transgressed from their mandate and use compulsory union dues, not only for abortion, but for all kinds of issues unrelated to the work place.”

“Union members are perfectly capable of making their own social, moral, and political decisions on all these issues that are outside of the work place. It’s unbelievable for the union bosses to be making these decisions, it smacks of dictatorship,” he stated.

Gray pointed out the hypocrisy of trade unions that support the killing of baby’s by legal abortion.

“Unions say they ‘speak up for the little guy.’ Well, surely the littlest guy is an innocent child in a mother’s womb. These unions, by supporting ‘choice’ — which is really killing by choice — are supporting babies being torn apart and being poisoned and sucked out of their mothers by abortion. And these are the same unions who are supposed to ‘speak out for the little guy’? It’s total hypocrisy.”

“As for the trade unions that promote same-sex ‘marriage’, again, it’s really none of their business since union members are perfectly capable of making up their own minds on social issues and don’t need to be hand-held by undemocratic union bosses.”


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus

Medical staff arrested in India after accidentally aborting baby at 8 months

Thaddeus Baklinski Thaddeus Baklinski Follow Thaddeus
By Thaddeus Baklinski

A doctor and a nurse at a prominent private hospital in India have been arrested after they allegedly administered abortion drugs to a eight-months pregnant woman accidentally, resulting in the death of her unborn child.

"We have immediately registered a case and arrested the doctor, whose negligent act has caused this," said South Jammu Superintendent of Police Rahul Malik, according to the Hindustan Times.

The woman's husband, Rakesh Sharma, told the paper that the doctor mistook Shruti Sharma for another patient who was scheduled for an abortion at the JK Medicity Hospital in Jammu on Friday afternoon.

Shruti had gone to the hospital after her gynecologist advised a routine medical examination to safeguard her and her baby's health.

Rakesh alleged that the doctor gave his wife the abortion pills without consulting her medical records. “Doctors and paramedical staff instead of administering glucose, gave her abortion medicine, which was actually meant for another patient,” he said.

"It is the worst case of negligence. I feel strongly that such hospitals should be closed. If this has happened to me today, tomorrow it can happen to any body else," Rakesh said.

While the JK Medicity's administration said it has launched an inquiry into the incident, a report from the Jagran Post stated that the district government has revoked the hospital's license.

"Jammu and Kashmir Government has ordered sealing of the private clinic after suspension of its license to operate in the wake of the incident," said Minister for Health and Medical Education Taj Mohiuddin according to the report.

National media have reported that the incident has brought illegal abortion practices in India to the attention of both the public and government officials.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

According to the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, abortion is legal in India up to 20 weeks. However, the opinion of a second doctor is required if the pregnancy is past its 12th week, and abortion-inducing drugs such as mifepristone and misoprostol are allowed only by prescription up until the seventh week of pregnancy.

Moreover, abortions can be performed only in government licensed medical institutions by registered abortionists.

Indian Express reported that the accused in the incident, Dr Amarjeet Singh, practices ayurvedic medicine (traditional Hindu medicine) and is "unsuitable for carrying out abortions."

A video posted by IndiaTV shows the parents surrounded by family members and relatives at a protest outside the JK Medicity hospital where the group is demanding punishment for those involved in the death of the child.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Queen James Bible
Kirsten Andersen Kirsten Andersen Follow Kirsten

,

News editor fired for criticizing ‘gay Bible’, files complaint

Kirsten Andersen Kirsten Andersen Follow Kirsten
By Kirsten Anderson

The former editor-in-chief of Iowa’s Newton Daily News has filed a religious discrimination complaint after he was fired over a post on his private blog criticizing the pro-gay Queen James Bible.

The Bible revision was produced by homosexual activists who claim to have edited the eight most commonly cited verses against homosexual behavior “in a way that makes homophobic interpretations impossible.”

On his private blog, which has since been deactivated, Bob Eschliman wrote in April that “the LGBTQXYZ crowd and the Gaystapo” are trying to reword the Bible “to make their sinful nature ‘right with God.’”

After public outcry from homosexual activists, Shaw Media, which owns the paper, fired him on May 6.

In a statement the day of his firing, Shaw Media President John Rung said Eschliman’s “airing of [his opinion] compromised the reputation of this newspaper and his ability to lead it.”

“There will be some who will criticize our action, and mistakenly cite Mr. Eschliman’s First Amendment rights as a reason he should continue on as editor of the Newton Daily News,” Rung said.  “As previously stated, he has a right to voice his opinion. And we have a right to select an editor who we believe best represents our company and best serves the interests of our readers.”

Rung said the company has a duty “to advocate for the communities we serve” and that “to be effective advocates, we must be able to represent the entire community fairly.”

Eschliman, who has been writing professionally since 1998 and became editor-in-chief of the Newton Daily News in 2012, says that the company was aware of his personal blog when he was hired and never indicated it would be a problem for him to continue sharing his personal political and religious views.

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

In his religious discrimination complaint against the company, filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), he says that he believes he was singled out for termination because of his Christian views concerning homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.”

“As a lifelong writer, I have maintained a personal blog on the Internet with some personal thoughts and writings,” Eschliman wrote. “Newton Daily News, my employer, never had a policy prohibiting personal blogging, Twitter, Facebook, or any other social media. In fact, my employer encouraged us to engage in social media on a personal level and I am aware of several employees of Newton Daily News who continue to blog and are still employed with Shaw Media.”

“There is no question that I was fired for holding and talking about my sincerely held religious beliefs on my personal blog during my off-duty time from the comfort of my own home,” Eschliman wrote. “Shaw Media directly discriminated against me because of my religious beliefs and my identity as an evangelical Christian who believes in Holy Scripture and the Biblical view of marriage.

“Moreover, Shaw Media announced that not only were they firing me based upon my religious beliefs, but that they would not hire or allow anyone to work at Shaw Media who holds religious beliefs similar to mine, which would include an automatic denial of any accommodation of those who share my sincerely held religious beliefs,” he added.

Neither Shaw Media nor the Newton Daily News have been willing to provide further comment to the press on the matter, citing pending litigation.

Matthew Whitaker, an attorney with Liberty Institute who is assisting Eschliman with his complaint, said the law is on his client’s side.

“No one should be fired for simply expressing his religious beliefs,” Whitaker said in a statement. “In America, it is against the law to fire an employee for expressing a religious belief in public.  This kind of religious intolerance by an employer has no place in today’s welcoming workforce.”

According to Whitaker, if the EEOC rules in Eschliman’s favor, Shaw Media could be forced to give him back pay, front pay, and a monetary settlement.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

If you find this filthy book in your home, burn it

Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon van Maren

I don’t believe in book-burnings, but for the 50 Shades of Grey Trilogy, I’ll make an exception. I prefer charred books to scarred people.

The 50 Shades of Grey Trilogy, for those of you living outside “civilization,” is a repulsive and poisonous stack of porn novels that celebrates the seduction and manipulation of an insecure girl by a powerful businessman who happens to like spending his recreational time engaging in what is now popularly known as “BDSM.” For those of you who are fortunate enough never to have heard of this glorification of sexual assault, the acronym stands for bondage, domination, sadism, and masochism. In 50 Shades of Grey, the man in question inflicts all sorts of pain on the girl, because he is a sadist, which used to be a bad thing. (How utterly confusing it is to see the “feminists” of Planned Parenthood and elsewhere celebrating this phenomenon—wasn’t domination something they sought to subvert? Didn’t bondage used to be something one wanted to be freed from? And sado-masochism—I could vomit.) And now this trash has been developed into a film, the trailer of which is all over Facebook.

50 Shades of Grey and the new “BDSM” phenomenon are nothing more than the celebration of pain, rape, and destruction.

A lot of people seem to be taken with these books, especially based on the number of people I’ve seen unashamedly reading it at airports. These porn novels are “hot,” many reviewers tell us confidently. Yes, hot as Hell and halfway there, I think.

Consider this, for just a moment: In a culture where broken families are often the norm, we have a generation of girls often growing up without fathers, never receiving the paternal love and affection that they need. Thus the famous “Daddy Issues” that so many comedy sitcoms repulsively mock, as if hurting girls seeking love and affection in all the wrong places is some sort of joke. Conversely, boys are also growing up without fathers, never having a positive male role model in the home to teach them how to treat women with love and respect. And what is teaching them how to treat girls? At an enormous rate, the answer is online pornography, which increasingly features vicious violence against girls and women. The average first exposure of boys to pornography is age eleven. It is an absolutely toxic mess—insecure and hurting girls seek love from boys who have been taught how to treat them by the most vicious of pornography.

Introduce into this situation a book, written by a woman, glorifying the idea that girls should expect or even enjoy pain and torture inside of a sexual relationship. How does a girl, insecure and unsure, know what to think? The culture around her now expects her not to need a safe relationship, but a “safe word” to employ in case her sadist partner gets a bit too carried away in the pain-making. Boys who might never have dreamed of asking a girl to subject herself to such pain and humiliation are now of course emboldened to request or even expect this fetishized sexual assault as a matter of course in a relationship. After all, much of pornography now features this degradation of girls and women, and a woman wrote a book celebrating such things. It might seem sadistic and rapey, but hey, sexual freedom has allowed us to celebrate “bondage” and sexual liberation has allowed us to liberate our darkest demons from the recesses of our skulls and allow them out to play in the bedroom. Boys used to get taught that they shouldn’t hit girls, but now the culture is telling them that it’s actually a turn-on.

I genuinely feel sorry for many teenage girls trying to navigate the new, pornified dating landscape. I genuinely feel sorry for the legions of fatherless boys, exposed to pornography before they even had a chance to realize what it was, enfolded by the tentacles of perverted sexual material before they even realize what, exactly, they are trifling with. It brings to mind something C.S. Lewis once wrote: “Wouldn't it be dreadful if some day in our own world, at home, men start going wild inside, like the animals here, and still look like men, so that you'd never know which were which.”

50 Shades of Grey and the new “BDSM” phenomenon are nothing more than the celebration of pain, rape, and destruction. Find out if the “sex educators” in your area are pushing this garbage, and speak out. Join campaigns to make sure that promotion of this filth isn’t being funded by your tax dollars. And if you find these books in your home, burn them.


Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook