Birth Control Busting Canada

Mass immigration, mainly from the Third World, threatens to irrevocably alter the culture of western nations. In his article, Steyn compares shrinking western populations with exploding birthrates in Muslim countries. “Islam has youth and will,” he writes, “Europe has age and welfare.”

Former Nixon advisor and three-time presidential candidate Pat Buchanan blames western countries for their own inevitable demise. In his politically incorrect book The Death of the West, Buchanan points to a decline in marriage, advances in birth control and rampant abortion as major contributing factors in declining white populations worldwide. “First World nations are dying,” writes Buchanan. “They face a mortal crisis. Not because of something happening in the Third World, but because of what is not happening at home and in the homes of the First World.”

The death of the family unit, warns Buchanan, is a prelude to the death of nations–from ancient Rome to modern-day Europe and America.

But what about Canada?

According to a 2006 Statistics Canada report, immigrants fuel two-thirds of our population growth. Between 2001 and 2006, Canada’s native-born population increased by a mere 400,000. However, during that same five-year period, 1.2 million immigrants–mainly from Asia, Africa, Central and South America and the Middle East–arrived on Canadian soil.

Laurent Martel, a Statistics Canada analyst, said by 2030 our refusal to reproduce will seal our nation’s fate. “You’re going to see an increase in the number of deaths [of baby-boomers] in Canada and the number of deaths will exceed the number of births–so natural increase will become negative,” she said. “The only factor of growth will then be immigration.”

So, if changing demographics sweep Canada’s dominant Euro-centric culture into history’s dustpan, why should we care?

Here’s why. European culture spawned the now-universal tenets of democratic rule, personal freedom and Christian-based virtue–not to mention many of civilization’s greatest scientific and technological achievements. Immigrants flock to Canada not because it resembles the land from which they flee, but because of our liberating Euro-centric society. (Source)

It continues to amaze me how so very short sighted people can be to assume our freedoms will be guaranteed with unstable immigration — as if importing cultures hostile to western democratic values will have no bearing on our laws and our freedoms.

It really does boggle the mind.  Remember what I’ve told you all about what the problem is.  When you think that sex is purely a private matter — that it has no impact on public ideals and beliefs of a democracy — then you need to wake up and understand that democratic values are passed on in the home and within the family unit. Transmitting the values of freedom to cultures which are ambivalent or even hostile to it does not work.

No kids? No freedom. No future.

Dump the condoms. And get rid of abortion.

Stop making war on Canada and its freedoms.

Propagate or Perish.

4 thoughts on “Birth Control Busting Canada

  1. The maternal instinct was the strongest intuition in the women of Christian Canada and the Western World.

    Now in pagan liberal-minded Canada and the pagan liberal-minded Western societies for many women it is sexual pleasure without the responsibility of nurturing their babies. Their CHOICE is murder and Dr. Bernard Nathanson proves this fact beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    Where have all the babies gone you ask ? They have been aborted by the millions. The numbers of this holocaust are heart-breaking. Western Culture has lost it’s Character and moral direction.

  2. Dump the condoms. And get rid of abortion. Propagate or Perish.

    .. seems the group of 17 teen girls at Gloucester, MA high school agree with you. Apparently they chose to deliberately get pregnant and have their babies so they could raise them together. Maybe this is the beginning of a trend away from abortion for teens? The school health workers resigned in protest..

    See: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=17+pregnant+pact+gloucester

  3. This sounds more like behavior inspired by the Alfred Kinsey liberal sex education and the evolving society and living tree interpretation of science and law taught in our education establishments.

    In 1948 Kinsey’s book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, was published. In 1953, Sexual Behavior in the Human Female.

    Kinsey declaired his thesis of “Outlet Sex” science and has since been used in our universities to teach teachers sex education. Liberal-minded Kinsey placed all sexual acts on the same moral, social and biological level whether in or out of marriage, between two people of the same sex or opposite sex, or sex with children, or sex with animals. The Kinsey Reports, as they came to be known, provided the Darwinian scientific foundation for the sexual revolution.

    In Kinsey’s liberal-minded view, children are sexual from birth, and are fully capable and deserving of sexual relations at any age as are adults, and society should reflect his scientifically validated view by radically altering its moral codes.

    Posthumously Dr.Kinsey has gotten his wish, as more and more school districts are teaching children about his sex education as early as kindergarten. Often this so-called sex education is promoted as AIDS education, this sex education systematically strips children of sexual modesty, and ridicule the idea os sexual restraint. The justification for this radical departure from traditional sexual morality begins with the Kinsey Reports cited often in primary and secondary sources used in sex education programs and in teacher’s manuals.

  4. “Progressives” are very big on sex. Almost to the point of obsession, really. For the biggest part of the last 40 years a very large portion of their ideology has hinged on it – feminism, abortion, gay “rights”, AIDS research, condom distribution, and most recently, redefining thousands of years of marriage tradition.

    Having a teenage daughter, I have a problem with so-called “reproductive rights” for minors. I have never understood the liberal logic that says my local school system needs my permission to put my daughter on a school bus for a field trip to a museum (if I don’t sign the paper she gets all-day study hall) but they can secretly have an invasive medical procedure performed on her without my knowledge.

    The standard answer to that always seems to be “Well, maybe you wouldn’t beat your daughter to within an inch of her life (or even shoot her to death) for being pregnant, but way too many parents would. That’s why a lot of us oppose ‘parental consent’ laws. And judicial workarounds simply don’t work; rarely is permission granted by the mostly conservative judges on the bench in a timely fashion.”

    Here’s my problem with that: If my rights as a parent are being taken away from me, aren’t I at least entitled to a little bit of due process? And doesn’t that assume that I’m guilty? How can I defend my parental rights if I don’t even know the school system is making an end run on them?

    Here in the States, the ACLU works hard to give non-citizen enemy combatants rights under the US Constitution and works equally as hard to take mine away. They’ll fight more for the Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s of the world than the Monty Patterson’s. Patterson found out his daughter Holly had a medically induced abortion at a Hayward (CA) Planned Parenthood office only hours before she hemorrhaged and died of septic shock.

    Now, when liberals tout gun control and gutting the our Second Amendment the argument is always, “If it saves ONE life…” Well, RU-486 (the “morning after pill) has caused at least 8 deaths and almost 10% of women suffer excessive bleeding and infections. Worse than that, a 2007 study in the U.K. showed that one in 30 fetuses were born alive, some struggling for as long as six hours. You would treat a puppy better than that.

    Lastly, the abortion crowd likes to label itself as “Pro-Choice.” But if politics had a strict truth-in-labeling law, they’d probably have to start calling themselves “Pro-Third-Choice.” Think about that for a second. To need an abortion a woman must 1) CHOOSE to have sex and then 2) CHOOSE to have unprotected sex. It’s only when they find out that they’ve hit the sperm lottery do they need yet another choice. (Spare me the rape argument – less than 1% of yearly abortions are post sexual assault cases)

    All of this “progressive” thought centers on one thing: Let’s have fun and let the taxpayer cover it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *