Carleton U: Fascism 101

A freedom of speech debate has erupted at Carleton University over a student council proposal that would effectively shut down a campus group opposed to abortion. The controversial recommendation would deny student association funding and other types of support for campus activities linked to “anti-choice purposes.” It would also assert the association’s position to “respect and affirm a woman’s right to choose.”
“I think this is a dangerous and unproductive motion,” said petition organizer Garnett Genuis, who has so far enlisted the support of 150 students. “They’re bringing this forward in the name of being pro-choice. Yet in the grand scheme of things, they’re anti-choice. They’re against people having the choice to express opinions, the choice to hear alternate perspectives. This is the grand irony.” The Catholic Civil Rights League has denounced the proposal, which has started circulating on blogs that are conservative and call themselves “pro-life.”

Shawn Menard, president of Carleton’s students association, defended the proposed changes, saying they will be debated and likely amended to protect free speech before being put to a vote next week. (Source)

_______________

If anyone was duped into thinking that we could have a free society without a firm foundation in Judeo-Christian ethics, the Carleton Student’s University Association is proving this idea to be fictious. By their own standards of “freedom of speech” and “tolerance”, everyone is starting to realize that the left is not interested in those concepts when they are applied universally and liberally. They only apply, apparently, to those who agree with them. Free speech and tolerance? Sure thing. Just make sure that you stay within the boundaries that they set. But you have to wonder whether, in a rare moment of intelligent retrospection, they realize that under that standard, heck, Joseph Stalin would be considered a great democrat. As long as his peons smiled and laughed when he did, everything was just fine. If they didn’t, they would find themselves in a nice, cold cell somewhere in Siberia which is, in effect, what CUSA is relegating people to who don’t submit to their groupthink on moral issues.

The Universities of Canada, with Carleton blazing a path of leftisty thuggery and self righteousness, are showing themselves to be unconcerned with debating issues of relevance to the wider culture. Instead they cower to the demands of unbalanced feminists to suppress legitimate discussion. Does it not occur to them that once this principle of suppressing a legitimate debate happens once, it can happen again and again and again…involving many other issues. What’s next? Are Christian groups going to be targetted? Are self-professed Christians to be allowed to attend the University in the future? What about other religions? What about other causes that don’t fit the politically correct shoes of the champagne liberals at Carleton University?

As for the so-called “pro-choice” groups who initiated this whole disgrace, it is a clear sign of their own cowardice in not being able to defend their position. This whole broohaha was precipitated by a women’s group who became nervous that 200 students would actually want to hear the other side of the abortion debate. Ya know, something different from what the establishment rams down their throat 24 hours a day. Being cowards and thugs, they appealed to CUSA to clamp down on this dangerous freedom of speech idea. This shows that the pro-abortion side is desperate to hold on to their bankrupt morality being forced down the throats of Canadians and university students in particular. They know that as science reveals more and more about the humanity of the unborn, they don’t stand a chance when the cat is let out of the proverbial bag.

In a democracy, we believe that the truth of a proposition will eventually win over the hearts and minds of its citizens. Therefore if a culture is in error on a particular issue, democracy provides the means to effect change. On the other hand, totalitarianism, like the one being advanced by CUSA and Carleton University by extension, stops that change from ever taking place and therefore threatens the civilization itself because it cannot adjust to something which would otherwise be acknowledged to be objectively harmful to the person and to the culture. This is the reason why totalitarian regimes and cultures fall. They do not permit voices of reason to impact the culture and therefore correct their erroneous thinking. If CUSA is right about abortion, then it has nothing to fear. If it is wrong about abortion, it has everything to fear, including the very reason we have a university system.


The great irony in this whole sad episode is that universities, at least in modern times, have always been at the forefront of advancing freedom of speech and tolerance ideals. Carleton University, should this motion pass CUSA and not be revoked by the Administration, will officially be more repressive and intolerant than Canadian society at large. This ominous trend will eventually seep into Canada’s politics and start to relegate people of faith and life to second class citizens – not being able to hold office or participate in national debates on issues that mean something to them. And should the issue of abortion or other moral issues be the REASON why Canada is facing a serious moral, demographic, and cultural decline, the country will have cut off the only way to access a remedy for its ills: a healthy and respectful dialogue on the very issues which threaten Canada’s social and cultural institutions.

Carelton University and the other Universities who sanction such rank hypocrisy are precipitating the Canadian decline into full fledged moral dicatatorship. Democratic deficit at Carleton U? Oh please. That’s so yesterday!

They should be ashamed of themselves.

Bringing the state back into the bedrooms of the nation?

Bringing the state back into the bedrooms of the nation
Is freedom as important as equality?
By Kate Fraher, Researcher, Institute of Marriage and Family Canada

Canadians are well versed in the main argument in favour of redefining marriage, namely that broadening marriage to include same-sex couples grants equality, while taking nothing away from heterosexuals.

A compelling argument, not to be dismissed. But not discussed in the public square are the equally compelling arguments of Canada’s academics who oppose the redefinition of marriage.

Canadian professors premise their opposition to redefining marriage in three basic ways: There are those who believe redefining marriage eliminates biology as the basis for parenthood [1], those who believe any redefinition of marriage violates the right of children to know and be raised by their biological mother and father and finally, those more concerned with political freedom; once biology is eliminated as the basis for parenthood within marriage, the state begins to encroach on the rights of individuals.

[Cere] points to recent studies that have discovered inherent differences between the male and female brain, as well as studies that highlight the unique bond that exists between biological mothers and their infants, also known as maternal attachment [4]. These findings, he says, disprove claims that gender and sex are mere social construction and somehow culturally malleable [5]. Marriage is meant to address sexual difference by sustaining complex forms of social interdependency between men and women-not an easy task-and to ensure rights of children to their parents [6].



Cere and Canadian-born political scholar Dr. Seana Sugrue both agree that the redefinition of marriage by the state is a threat to political liberalism. They both cite John Locke, the father of political liberalism, who “recognized that the market and conjugal society require a measure of autonomy from overly zealous state regulation to function effectively” [12]. Sugrue and Cere agree that marriage, like the market, is a pre-political institution which operates on self-generated norms. When the state tries to dictate these norms, the normative structure of the institution collapses and political freedom is lost [13].

___________

It really does boggle the mind to know that the Canadian public could be so duped on the question of same-sex “marriage”. To believe that the redefinition of such a foundational institution as marriage would not have irreparable and destructive consequences on our society is incredibly short-sighted.

As parts of the excerpt of the article point out, children are the first victims of this new sexual utopia, followed shortly by a loss of freedom. The remarkable thing about it is that the secular liberal establishment would rather kiss away the freedoms they created for themselves over the past forty years rather than to fight for the legitimate exercise of the same.

The Abortion Questionnaire: The Last Frontier



Socon BlogBurst Contribution on
the CPC Refusal to Permit Candidates to Answer Abortion Questionnaire

To read more entries on this Blog Burst, click the index page here.
LONDON, ON, November 22, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – LifeSiteNews.com has learned that the Conservative Party of Canada is once again enforcing a policy barring its candidates from responding to questionnaires that would allow voters to cast an informed vote on issues of importance to them. The party policy is especially targeted at the controversial abortion issue. Despite denials by Conservative Party officials, the policy was in place during the last federal election in January and LifeSiteNews.com obtained a memo from party headquarters forbidding candidates to answer a pro-life questionnaire.

One of the issues that the Conservative Party ran on was to develop greater electoral transparency and accountability. So far, Harper’s government has done a good job, not only on meeting this objective but also implementing many other pro-family measures and policies. However, one of the disturbing points in his term has been his almost neurotic and paranoid fear of the abortion question. It is neurotic and paranoid because it does not reflect the reality of where Canadians stand on this issue. According to a recent Environics poll on the question, two thirds of Canadians want some restriction on abortion. Moreover, it cannot be argued that Stephen Harper is overly cautious on political issues, lest he overturn the proverbial political apple cart and lose the next election. He has shown that he can grow some blue testicals when the opportunity avails itself. Case in point: Canada’s controversial recent support for Israel in their conflict with the Palestinians. Nothing necessarily wrong with that, of course, but it is still nonetheless politically risky.

Given these two factors, social conservatives across the country are starting to wonder just what kind of deal Mr. Harper made with the devil to shut out the democratic process on the issue of abortion. Public sentiment is not the issue. The poll demonstrates that quite easily. In fact, that two thirds number has held for years now. Nor is his tolerance for pushing through on unpopular issues. Remember the Income Trust Tax changes? It’s not like he really cares about cozzying to seniors. This shows he is an idealogue on some issues. Good for him. Now it’s time for it to be good for us.

So what’s really going on here, Stephen? Something just doesn’t add up.

As my good friend, Suzanne, has written:

Barring candidates from answering questionnaires does nothing to develop greater electoral transparency and accountability. Candidates who have nothing to hide, hide nothing. People have the right to know what their candidates think on issue important to them, and candidates should be free to formalize their thoughts in written form so that their thoughts can be faithfully reproduced.

Now the conventional wisdom of Tory party drones is that they cannot bring up abortion because it would make the media even more hostile to the CPC than they normally are.

Really?

Then would one of these drones please explain to us why Mr. Harper has inaugurated the war with the Parliamentary press gallery? It doesn’t seem to me that Mr. Harper is concerned with media backlash when it concerns his own pet policies, but for some inexplicable reason, he turns from blue to yellow when it comes to standing up for basic free speech on the question of abortion.

Stephen, you’ve done a good job up until now. Don’t take us for granted. Let the democratic process play out in the Party and in the country at large. You’re a smart guy. If you can maneuver well on other complex political issues, you can do it for us on this one. We expect it. If not, look yonder south to the Republican Party, and what happened to them. It can happen here.

Remember the picture above, Stephen. Remember what cowardice you are displaying, Mr. Harper. Remember the Judgement. What the least you did for the least of my brethren, you did to me. Don’t forget it, Mr. Harper. We won’t.

To sound off, contact the Conservative Party here, and let them know that you are not very happy with their approach to this whole question.

Walmart Caves In

Wal-Mart: No More Corporate Contributions to Support Or Oppose Controversial Issues
By Peter J. Smith

BENTONVILLE, Arkansas, November 22, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Retail giant Wal-Mart announced Tuesday afternoon that the company will no longer use corporate money to “support or oppose highly controversial issues” such as homosexual activism. Wal-Mart had outraged pro-family groups for its financial support to homosexual activists, and for the recent promotion for sale of a graphic sex-ed manual promoting teen lesbianism, recalled shortly after a LifeSiteNews.com exposé.

“Wal-Mart will not make corporate contributions to support or oppose highly controversial issues unless they directly relate to our ability to serve our customers” the announcement stated, adding that Wal-Mart intends to adhere to the words of its founder Sam Walton: “Each Wal-Mart store should reflect the values of its customers and support the vision they hold for their community.”

The American Family Association sent out an Action Alert saying it was “pleased with this announcement” and asked its supporters to “send Wal-Mart a ‘Thank You’ for its statement.”
Previously the AFA encouraged its members to boycott Wal-Mart for the lucrative shopping days following Thanksgiving on account of Wal-Mart’s increasing involvement with activist homosexual organizations, such as joining the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and a recent $60,000 donation to the activist group Out & Equal.

“We believe that Wal-Mart will remain neutral in cultural battles,” the AFA declared, stating that in response to Wal-Mart it has decided to “cancel its efforts of encouraging people to not shop at Wal-Mart or Sam’s Club this Friday and Saturday.”

______________________

See Buckwheat? Things can change if we Christians actually start to think they can and move in an organized and deliberate fashion. Victory, however, is only possible when you STOP busying yourself with stupid things in life and start working for the culture of life and getting serious about stopping evil.

The Jackboots are Saddling Up

Hello

Just to give you all the heads up, Katy McIntyre, the CUSA VP of Student Services has proposed an amendment to the CUSA Constitution. The proposed amendment seeks to change CUSA’s position from one of neutrality, by declaring themselves a pro-choice governing body. The amendment will prevent any groups who are not pro-choice from obtaining club status and funding. The move is directly targeted at Carleton Lifeline, but if the proposed amendment is passed, it will also affect many Christian, Jewish, and Muslim groups on campus. McIntrye says CUSA will screen clubs to ensure that they are not”anti-choice”. The proposal was discussed this evening at the CUSA Council meeting. Nicholas and I were both present and able to ask a few questions. The motion to amend will be put forward at the council’s next meeting in earlyDecember. We will keep you up to date with developments, but in the meantime any words of wisdom, advice or prayers would be greatly appreciated.

– Sarah FletcherPresident of Carleton Lifeline

____________

Why not just ban all religions next? I mean, isn’t that what they are after anyhow? All religions of course except the religion of Moloch and the most holy sacrament of abortion. And all the Molochites say “Amen”.

Carleton University Bans Free Speech

Saw this yesterday:

Hey everyone, I wish I could send this email under better circumstances. Carleton University students Association has just put in a motion BANNING any group who is pro-life from campus. I just came back from the meeting in which this motion was tabled. They are sayign that we are against the Canadian constitution and are saying we violate safe space rules. So i guess everyone can have a safe space UNLESS you are pro-life. Well I guess the fight is on. This motion will be debated and voted on at the meeting next month. After our last crushing defeat at not getting status this shows their view to SURPRESS any view that does not agree with them. What I am emailing you about is this….Carleton Lifeline needs HELP!!! This is big as it is the only university who will espuse this view if it passes. We need all teh help we can get. We need a lawyer, support, lobbying not only the CUSA executive but the school administration aswell. We need to make it clear we will not go down easily and I am prepared to even no recognize the motion if it passes and continue on. Sarah Fletcher and I are ready for this fight. Any ideas, help, plans or contacts that you can give me to help woudl be so very much appreciated. This may set a precident for the rest of the provinces corrupt student unions to try the same thing to oppress teh views of pro-life students on campus. We all need your help!

– Thanks, Nicholas McLeod Treasurer, Carleton Lifeline

_______________________

This is all very predictable. When the left has no way of winning the argument, they simply resort to what they do best: stifling and muzzling dissent. We have seen it on the gay marriage front and we have seen it in many different ways on the abortion front.

Isn’t it telling that they would resort to this kind of thing? Let’s face it, if your position is the valid and correct one, why would you resort to this sort of thuggery, unless of course you feared that the truth of what an abortion is would eventually get out and the worship of Moloch would end.

Back in 2004, I warned about this in my speech to those assembled on Parliament Hill who were opposing Bill C-250, the so-called “hate crime” bill against gays:

My fellow Canadians, although these words are inscribed on the American Declaration of Independence, no truer or more timely message can be spoken of on Canadian soil. For there is now before us a rise of a veiled totalitarianism which is creeping into our beloved country, seeking to muzzle dissent and debate on vital issues to the prosperity and even survival of this great country.

Sex Toys for Kids

O. My.

We need a bigger cup for the filth to flow over.

Mother of two Karen Gallimore was searching for Christmas gifts for her two daughters, Laura 10, and Sarah, 11, when she came across the ‘toy’ Tesco has been forced to remove a pole-dancing kit from the toys and games section of its website after it was accused of “destroying children’s innocence”. The Tesco Direct site advertises the kit with the words, “Unleash the sex kitten inside…simply extend the Peekaboo pole inside the tube, slip on the sexy tunes and away you go! “Soon you’ll be flaunting it to the world and earning a fortune in Peekaboo Dance Dollars”. The £49.97 kit comprises a chrome pole extendible to 8ft 6ins, a ‘sexy dance garter’ and a DVD demonstrating suggestive dance moves. The kit, condemned as ‘extremely dangerous’ by family campaigners yesterday, was discovered by mother of two Karen Gallimore who was searching for Christmas gifts for her two daughters, Laura 10, and Sarah, 11. Mrs Gallimore, 33, of Ellesmere Port, Cheshire, said yesterday: “I’m no prude, but any children can go on there and see it. It’s just not on.” Dr Adrian Rogers, of family campaigning group Family Focus said yesterday that the kit would “destroy children’s lives”. He said: “Tesco is Britain’s number one chain, this is extremely dangerous. It is an open invitation to turn the youngest children on to sexual behaviour. “This will be sold to four, five and six-year olds. This is a most dangerous toy that will contribute towards destroying children’s innocence.”

Read the rest here.

I am really starting to think we are not very far from civil war.

Out with the Old Media and In with the New

A couple of Canada’s up and coming brightest and talented film producers…

Eric and Jerome Spoeth. They produced C38 The Movie: The search for marriage (see below).

Can’t wait until we replace the dinosaurs who dominate the media today. The future is looking bright folks, so chin up!

Check out their website here.

Music is way sexy and jiggy. Makes you want to bop along, no?

C-38 The Movie: For Goodness Sake


A great stocking stuffer for this Christmas, for sure! Never mind renting the sex and violence you are used to doping yourself up with this Christmas. Go for this one instead!

Imagine the stimulating and titilating conversation you and your family can have around this explosive, first-rate movie that the main stream media simply refuses to play.

Open old wounds, rattle some cages, increase the decible level, shoo the kids out of the room.

This Christmas, do your relatives a big favour: dispense with all the false notions of “love, peace, and joy” and give them a cold hit of truth.

Unlike all the Christmas’ past, this one will sure be one to remember. Click here and order today!