Harper Risks the Support of Hundreds of Thousands

On Dec. 5, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper welcomed
Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson and Deputy Supreme Knight

Dennis A. Savoie to his office in Ottawa.

OTTAWA, October 7, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In light of the upcoming Canadian federal election, Natale Gallo, the President of the Canadian Association of Knights of Columbus, and Yvon Robert, the State Deputy for Ontario, have sent a letter to the 230,000 members of the KofC affirming the need to cast a vote that will “build a Culture of Life.”

After addressing the moral obligation of citizens to promote the common good by means of their right to vote, Gallo and Robert said that the most important piece of information to know about a political candidate is “where they stand on life.”

“Political leaders must be encouraged to serve the common good by crafting legislation that supports and defends life from conception to natural death,” said the two men.

Gallo and Roberts confirmed that the promotion of the Culture of Life has always been at the “core” of the KOC’s “mission” and noted how this was reaffirmed in August’s Supreme Convention in Quebec City, where resolutions were passed “supporting the traditional definition of marriage” and opposing “abortion, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, and euthanasia.”

The two knights also described the process of “building a Culture of Life” as “being concerned about the most vulnerable members of our society – the unborn, the disabled and the elderly … and defending the authentic nature of marriage and family.”

There was a sense of urgency in the letter regarding the importance of the October 14 election, when Canadians will have an opportunity to support pro-life political candidates.  “The political choices we make today will have a profound impact on the character of our nation and the future we will pass on to our children,” they said.

So, ya think Harper’s trashing of the social conservative voice in his government is going to help him or hurt him with the largest Catholic fraternal organization in Canada (and the world)?

I’d say so.

Harper told socons, “Our position in the future is that this government will not open the abortion debate and will not allow another opening of the abortion debate.” I’m letting the Grand Knight at my local parish know about Harper and ask him to transmit the message to my good friend, Denis Savoie, the Deputy Supreme Knight pictured above (the highest position in Canada).The thing about not-so little armies like this one is that they are very efficient at transmitting information and acting on it.

And of course, we don’t ask too many questions. We just do what we’re told. Like a good army.

Stephen Harper has a real problem on his hands. And I’m going to do everything in my keyboard’s power to hobble his political aspirations between now and election day.  He’s got to learn there is going to be a political price to pay for his treachery and his pimping for abortion.

2 thoughts on “Harper Risks the Support of Hundreds of Thousands

  1. Harper’s “Conservatives”

    By Stephen J. Gray

    “He [Harper] can be slippier [sic.] than a greased pig” (Paul Wells, Maclean’s Magazine, September 17, 2008).

    Conservative leadership is the buzz word of the election campaign. And Mr. Harper is being touted as a “leader.” So let us examine what Mr. Harper the leader says and does on a number of issues:

    Free Speech: “Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society,” says Stephen Harper, president of the National Citizens’ Coalition. “It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.” [1]

    Yet, the Harper government intervenes against free speech: “The Attorney General of Canada, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and B’nai Brith Canada will be intervening in the Lemire case in support of Section 13, arguing that it is a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech” (Canadian Constitution Foundation Letter of April 28).

    Bilingualism: “As a religion, bilingualism is the god that failed. It has led to no fairness, produced no unity, and cost Canadian taxpayers untold millions.” (Stephen Harper) [2]

    Now Mr. Harper says this: “My friends, for me a prime minister should speak French,” Harper said, calling French “the founding language of this country” (Source: The Gazette, Sept 8, 2008 [3]).

    Same-sex marriage: “I don’t see reopening this question [of same-sex marriage] in the future.” (Stephen Harper, CTV News Dec. 7, 2006 [4]).

    Sexual orientation and its illegitimate offspring “same-sex marriage” were never in the Charter, yet we had the silly spectacle of a supposedly “conservative government introducing a motion on this that they knew would be defeated. A government with principles would have used the not-withstanding clause to return sanity to this country. But unfortunately Mr. Harper is on record as saying, regarding this nonsense called same-sex marriage, “I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue” (Lifesite News December 16, 2005, [5]).

    The Status of Women: This group achieved increased funding under the Harper Conservatives as witness the following quote from a minister’s speech: “As a demonstration of our firm commitment to the success of Status of Women Canada, Budget 2007 provided $10 million in funding to the Agency, bringing the total budget to $29.9 million, a record for Status of Women [emphasis added] Canada” (Speech for The Honorable Josée Verner, P.C., M.P., Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages, on the occasion of an appearance before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, House of Commons, Ottawa, February 5, 2008, [6]).

    Abortion: “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…” (Stephen Harper, [7]).

    And we thought we lived in a democracy? Or is it a hypocrisy?

    And talking about hypocrisy, based on the evidence we have seen from Mr. Harper’s government, are they really a conservative government? Or is it back to the days of the Red Tories and the Mulroney government? A former Reform party member and MP had this to say about Mr. Harper: “he will be remembered as an opportunistic, masterful tactician who, in the course of only three years completely purged the Conservative party of its Reform ideals and restored the Mulroney model of government.” (Lee Morrison, former Reform M.P. in the Calgary Herald, September 14, 2008 [8]).

    Furthermore, a former Mulroney supporter is now in “charge of various files…” Read this:

    “[Senator] Ms. LeBreton is one of the women Mr. Harper put in Cabinet and trusts. She was a staunch Progressive Conservative, most closely tied to Brian Mulroney, and made it into Mr. Harper’s inner circle despite her vocal opposition to his vision to unite the right (the former Reformer Party/Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservatives). Mr. Harper appointed her Conservative leader in the Senate and put her in charge of various files,…” (National Post, September 22, 2008).

    This makes one wonder, is Ms. LeBreton now in charge of the abortion “file?” Ms. Breton has said this on abortion:

    “… there are certain issues, particularly those that concern women and children, and those of particular concern to women, and here I will use the abortion issue as an example, where even if 99.9 per cent of the members of my party were going one way, I would not support any policy that did not give women the right to choose” (http://www.parl.gc.ca/infoparl/english/issue.htm?param=147&art=983).

    And on the “right to choose,” Mr .Harper is on the record as saying this: “Let me be very clear on the positions I’ve have taken on that. I want there to be no misunderstanding. I’ve said repeatedly, that I will not, that my Conservative government will not be tabling any legislation impacting in any way a woman’s right to choose” (June 27, 2006, LifeSiteNews, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/060627a.html).

    Mr. Harper is heading for a majority government. But on moral issues is there really any difference between the “conservatives” and the other parties? Are we now immersed in “throw the dogs a bone politics” where we are being promised all kinds of goodies with our own tax dollars and moral issues are not even discussed? Are we back to what a former Reform M.P. called in his Calgary Herald article, “Liberal, Tory, same old story?” And will social conservative people buy the “story” that we have a “conservative” party to vote for and allow themselves to be fooled a second time by the Harper “conservatives?”

    For, as Andrew Coyne wrote in MacLean’s of September 10, 2008,

    “…Harper’s whole time in office has been spent reassuring the public he has no plans to lead them anywhere, that under a Conservative government nothing much would change — they would govern much like the Liberals,…” [9]

    Stephen J. Gray

    October 6, 2008.

    graysinfo@yahoo.ca website: http://www.geocities.com/graysinfo

  2. Pingback: SoCon Or Bust » Blog Archive » Photo Op Going to be Costly for Harper

Leave a Reply

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

Solve : *
17 × 7 =