Belgium & The UN Convention on the Rights of a Child

A dystopian future is one where the social problems of today become greater in magnitude, producing a future that is filled with crime, war, and similar evils.

Today I read with horror a report about Belgian control of society.  In order to produce a society that is healthy and vibrant, medical doctors have committed murder, calling it assisted suicide.  Assisted suicide is bad enough when it is the suicide of a grown person who is somewhat rational and aware and able to make an informed decision.  Many advocates have clearly taught that suicide is not the answer, because the despair of dealing with illness or disability often passes, and afflicted people often live contented and fulfilled lives.  It ought to make you shudder with horror upon horror when you realize that the people the Belgians are supposedly assisting are less than a year old.  

Big Brother is watching, and making all of the decisions.  He has decided that hand-made clothing is dangerous, so it must be banned (see sidebar, at top left).  He has decided that life with disabilities is not worth living, so he kills and destroys.  He has decided that parents cannot choose curriculum with wisdom, so he has decreed.  And the people are so busy playing with their toys that they have not even noticed the curtailment of certain inalienable rights.

When I was a teenager, I read Animal Farm, 1984, and Brave New World.  The authors, George Orwell and Aldous Huxley, had contrasting views of the future:

Social critic Neil Postman contrasts the worlds of 1984 and Brave New World in the foreword of his 1985 book Amusing Ourselves to Death. He writes:

What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us.

My fear is that both men were right.  In our search for pleasure and our desire to control, we have allowed leaders to make laws to protect us.  We do not want to take responsibility for our own actions, preferring to blame the government if things go wrong.  Our fear that life might not be full of pleasure has ruined us.  We have lost the ability to think, to discern, to judge correctly.  Scary.

Woe unto those who call good evil, and evil good.

Don't miss this...

My daughter's blog is worth reading, but especially today. She has downloaded (or is it uploaded?) a speech by Gianna Jessen, an abortion survivor.

I don't care who you are, or what your opinion is regarding life in the womb, this woman is worth listening to.

So, click over to Creekside and take a few minutes to be enlightened.

Canada Day - Not such a great celebration.

Canada's Really Big - Doesn't that make you proud?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vxDDcTc64c

We celebrated Canada Day by attending fireworks last night. Goderich has always held their fireworks the night BEFORE Canada Day, and for many years we have made the trip to the Harbour and settled on the Main Beach in order to enjoy the sights and sounds.

My parents taught me to be proud of this land called Canada. Long before it was fashionable to celebrate "Dominion Day" with anything more than a subdued picnic with family at a local park, my parents instilled in me a sense of ownership. This was MY country. I was to defend it, as others had before me. My uncle died during the Second World War, and I believed that his sacrifice was a virtuous one, because it stopped the progression of evil in the form of Hitler's Nazis. Now, I wonder about that.

Canada Day 2008 is one I would rather not celebrate. In spite of a clear majority of Canadians who feel that abortion is not something we want to encourage, a committee decided that on this Canada Day, Dr. Henry Morgentaler was to be awarded the Order of Canada. Morgentaler crusaded and succeeded in changing Canada’s abortion law and is responsible for the death of countless thousands of unborn children.


March 1973: Morgentaler announces that he has successfully performed over 5,000 abortions. Doesn't this make you wonder how many babies have died because of this man in the past 35 years?

Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

July 2008: Morgentaler receives the Order of Canada. Doesn't this make you wonder if there's anything at all left to celebrate on Canada Day? Sadly, I guess the only thing left to be proud of is that Canada's really big.

Proverbs 28:4 Those who forsake the law, praise the wicked.

The Great Debaters

I'm not one to do movie reviews much, but we sat and watched this movie today, and it bears mentioning. You can see videos here: The Great Debaters

I checked Wikipedia, and learned that it is loosely based on a true story. Although the real debaters never actually debated Harvard, they did win a victory against another established school.

The film is a good one to watch to raise awareness in your teens of the racism that was rampant in the South in the beginning of the last century. The bus scene near the beginning of the film pans down the bus, clearly showing the whites in the front of the bus and the blacks in the back.

Another lesson is that being well-read is important. In order to be articulate in speech and writing, you must read a wide variety of literature, including poetry, plays, the classics, and of course the Bible. Commit great quotes to memory. They will come to mind when you need them.

"As Charles Spurgeon once said,
"The man who never reads will never be read;
he who never quotes will never be quoted.
He who will not use the thoughts of other men's brains,
proves that he has no brains of his own."

There is a clear depiction of the bullying that was experienced by Negroes at the hands of the poor white sharecroppers, when a Preacher was forced to pay an exorbitant amount to a farmer for a pig killed on the road accidentally. The preacher, played by Forrest Whittaker, was willing to be cheated and humiliated rather than to let his family be harmed. There was courage in the acceptance of the humiliation, in some ways, even though his son didn't see it.

After witnessing a lynching, the debate team suffered a great deal, emotionally. One of the men reacted by drinking and partying (caveat: there are a couple of scenes with women that should be avoided by using the fast-forward). However, in the end, they rallied and worked tirelessly to win the debate.

I haven't lived with racism as people in the South have experienced it. I do remember being in the minority, growing up in a small Quebec town where there were only 6 English-speaking families. I remember some strife and misunderstanding, especially around the time of the FLQ crisis. However, the prejudice I experienced was minimal. I spoke fluent French and often fooled my peers. I could hide my identity - whereas blacks cannot hide their skin colour.

The Bible predicts the enmity of the last days:

Matthew 24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

We fear what we do not know, and we don't like things that are different. We are most comfortable with people like ourselves. Yet God says in His word, He will redeem people from every nation.

Revelation 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying: "You are worthy to take the scroll, And to open its seals; For You were slain, And have redeemed us to God by Your blood Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,

There is no room for prejudice in God's economy. We are all from Adam, so we are all brothers and sisters. The genome project made that clear, too.

It's good to understand how racism flourished in the past, so we can avoid it in the future. And this movie, The Great Debaters, helped us understand it better.

When is a Joke Not a Joke?

The following anecdote made me ponder that question:

At a homeschool moms' fellowship last night a friend shared
what happened to her at church on Mother's Day. The pastor
said they had an award for the mother with the most children.
My friend has the most children in her congregation - five.
They called her to the front of the church and told her that
her award was a "Kentucky Birth-Control Kit," and then they
gave her a baseball bat. She was so humiliated.

I am sure that the pastor meant that little display to be humorous. However, it is wrong on so many levels.

First of all, the mom was humiliated, on the very day of the year that is supposed to be a mom's special day. Secondly, it was done publicly, adding to the shame of the moment. The third, and worst thing about this little "joke", in my opinion, was that it failed to view children as the treasures they truly are - gifts from the Hand of God.

Our family likes to joke. We tease each other. We share stories about family foibles. We crack jokes about "half-wits" or Newfies or blondes (and I fit into two of those categories; some days my hubby would claim I fit all three!). We have no problem with self-deprecation.

However, there is a huge difference between cracking a joke or teasing someone and the kind of public humiliation this poor woman had to endure in front of her entire church.

Homeschooling is Safer, apparently

http://www.local6.com/news/topstory.rss

In the REALLY STRANGE category, I just heard that eleven 8 and 9 year olds plotted to kill their teacher. They had weapons: an old steak knife, a Crystal paperweight, duct tape, and so on. They even assigned jobs for each person in the conspiracy.

A bit of digging around brought me to a comment from a parent of one of these nasty children. 'My poor kid couldn't help doing that...it was a WHITE teacher, and these are BLACK kids.' Please.

Somehow I just can't feel too sorry for a bunch of children who plan to get rid of their teacher, who must be older, as she is about to retire. According to the parent, she screamed in the kids' faces, and was just all-around nasty. Could the kids have talked to the principal, perhaps? Their parents? Presumably they had homes to go to and parents who want to see them do well in school. If this teacher was so mean that she deserved to die, wouldn't one of the kids (at least) have said something?

I'm sure my children have been frustrated with me at times over the past 25 years that I have taught them. But, I know for certain that they have never plotted to kill me, nor have they amassed a bunch of weapons in order to carry out their evil plan.

Another reason to homeschool: it's safer.

Hostility to Homeschooling; Parents respond!

In the States there has been a controversy going on for a few weeks, because a Californian appeals court ruled that parents have "no constitutional right" to homeschool. Thousands of homeschooling parents and friends of homeschooling have written letters, blogged, phoned and in some cases harassed those who can do something to overturn this bad decision.

I have not experienced any overt hostility to homeschooling in my nearly 25 years of teaching my own children here in Canada. Most of the time, when people discover I homeschool, there is grudging admiration, with the typical questions. "Don't they have to be tested?" "Who checks up on you to make sure you're doing an adequate job?" "Is it legal?" - that one is not as popular as it once was, back in the day that I had to phone the Ministry of Education in Toronto to find out if indeed, homeschooling was legal.

I read an interesting short article today by Albert Mohler:

Overt Hostility to Homeschooling
—Albert Mohler

Parents in California have been on a rollercoaster of sorts in the wake of a state appeals court ruling that parents in that state have "no constitutional right" to homeschool their own children.

The decision is a direct threat to the rights of all California parents--and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state's school superintendent pledged to find ways to protect homeschooling families. At the same time, an overt hostility to homeschooling has been unleashed, starting with a pair of retired professors who, in an op-ed published in The Los Angeles Times, called homeschooling parents "elitist" and "illiberal."

They wrote with venom and condescension about evangelical Christian parents who do not want their children indoctrinated with evolutionary theory and support for abortion rights.

Well, at least now we know who the real elitists are--and what their real agenda is. The threat in California is not just to the rights of homeschoolers, but of all parents. This decision must be overturned or remedied--and fast.

Then I read the article in the Los Angeles Times:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oew-shaffer13mar13,0,5787994.story

Regulating home schoolers

A court ruling is right to examine the seemingly elitist and illiberal practice.

By Walter P. Coombs and Ralph E. Shaffer
March 13, 2008

A California appellate court has struck terror in the ranks of home schooling advocates by ruling that their children can't be taught at home without at least some oversight. Public education foes see this as an all-out attack on the concept of home schooling. That is not the case. And members of The Times editorial board didn't get it right either.

In the decision in question, the parents did not meet even the meager requirements for home schooling that California has established. While enrollment in a public school is required by state law, the Education Code permits an exception for those attending private schools or those taught at home by a credentialed teacher.

Though the parents had technically enrolled their eight children in an existing private school, the court found that the children were not attending it. In fact, they were schooled at home by parents not qualified to teach the kids in subjects appropriate to their age and grade level.

The decision has caused anguish among families who fear that they may now be required to demonstrate that home schooling is an adequate replacement for their children's attendance at a public institution. The court's decision means that home schoolers must be given some substantive instruction in social studies and not simply spend their time watching Fox with its strange assortment of oddballs pontificating on current events.

It's time Californians realized that there are few regulations regarding home schooling and virtually no safeguards to make certain that subjects appropriate to the age group are taught. On the other hand, there is a formidable cottage industry run by conservative evangelicals that provides "suitable" materials for home schoolers. For-profit charter schools specializing in "home schooling" -- and collecting your tax dollars while doing it -- have not only cast a cloud over the concept of home schooling but have rankled teachers who see the state's limited education dollars being diverted from traditional schools.

If home schooling forums on the Web are indicative of the views held by parents of learn-at-home kids, their offspring are getting an extremely warped lesson in civics. Typical of the shrill screed now running on the Internet are these comments: "This [ruling] is a good example of bureaucratic tyranny! Kiss liberty good-bye, people." Another wrote: "Perhaps the judge could be impeached for incompetence. Else Christian families need to flee California." And: "This is another example of how socialist mentality destroys our God-given rights as parents."

It's evident that the vast majority who teach their offspring in front of the television do so because they don't want their children to be subjected to such dangerous doctrines as evolution, abortion, global warming, equal rights and other ideas abhorrent to the evangelical mantra. Weighing in on the side of home schoolers and their fundamentalist spokesman, James Dobson of Focus on the Family, is Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, that self-proclaimed expert on education whose latest action has been to recommend steep cuts for K-12 schools. The governor denounced the ruling as outrageous and vowed to overturn it. He must believe that the state's policy of providing no control over home schooling is just fine.

The Times editorial board misunderstood the ruling too. To start, we find no place in the ruling where the court "noted that the state Education Code appears to express distaste for home schooling." Then, the editorial goes on to say, "Private school teachers do not need a credential to instruct a class of 20 or 30 students. Why should parents need one to teach a few children at home?" That's a good question. But the court offered an equally good answer: In an earlier case, the court held that it is "unreasonably difficult and expensive for a state to supervise parents who instruct children in their homes" but that oversight of teachers in organized private schools is less difficult and expensive. Furthermore, the court noted that teachers in private schools would be supervised by the people who run the schools, and those administrators would want to make sure that their instructors were competent so that their private schools would qualify under the state Education Code.

The board also claims that the courts "tossed out" the option of public and private school independent study programs to help home schoolers. Not so! What the court said was that the Education Code provides for independent study through a school district or a county office of education, but the purpose is to provide students with educational opportunities during travel or in subjects not offered in the school curriculum. The court said this clause clearly did not apply to a mother's home schooling of her kids.

The Times' editorial refers to the wonderful accomplishments of home schooling: "There are rare cases of parents who use home schooling to hide abuse or neglect. Far more common are the stories of responsible parents providing a good education." One anecdotal case of a home schooled teen writing a bestselling novel is cited, with the implication that such a remarkable achievement could not possibly have been attained because of the demanding homework assignments given by our public schools. Sounds like the board believes our traditional schools are overworking the kids -- which is not what most critics say. Isn't a major argument for home schooling based on the belief that the public schools aren't demanding enough?

Finally, in its call for the Legislature to enact laws providing for home schooling, apparently without credentialed teachers, the editorial wants "reasonable regulations," citing as examples required lesson plans or a student portfolio of work. Those regulations might be acceptable to some of the learn-at-home parents, but the Internet will be full of angry letters from home schoolers saying all that bureaucratic regulation is what they wanted to escape by teaching their children at home.

There has always been something decidedly elitist and anti-democratic in home schooling. It smacks of a belief that privileged children should not have to associate with the other kids in the neighborhood and that by staying home, they would not be subjected to the leavening effect of democracy.

Moreover, it is apparent from the cries of the far right that there has been a specific policy in home schooling -- to teach only the ideas acceptable to ideologues who fear the contaminating influence of what is commonly known as a liberal education.

Walter P. Coombs and Ralph E. Shaffer are professors emeriti at Cal Poly Pomona.

I was incensed when I finished reading the above, so I began to go through the TWENTY PAGES of comments. After only a few minutes it became apparent that homeschoolers are, for the most part, articulate and well-educated. They are able to soundly refute the arguments made by the "professors emeriti" and they make a good case for homeschooling children.

The comments will only be available for two weeks, so I will copy a few of my favourites here.

~Coombs and Shaffer have made it very clear that to them a good education is one in which students are indoctrinated with their liberal values.The authors' desire is a totalitarian state in which every child is force-fed liberal dogma and our freedom of speech is circumvented by labeling conservative ideas "hate speech." The fact that they consider abortion an inalienable right is proof that what they really want is not to educate our children but to euthanize them.


~As a teacher & mom, I teach my students to "check the facts" & "consider the source." Seems these professors need to either become one of my middle school students or my own child, because they did none of those things. I would suggest these professors educate themselves on both the history of public education, and the realities of homeschooling today. Every day I read about the horrors in the schools--molestation by administrators & coaches, school violence, low test scores, budget cuts, & more--perhaps we need to focus on fixing the educational system for those who cannot homeschool and leave those high performing self educators alone.

~Last time I checked, mandatory state funded public schooling could easily fit into the term, "anti-democratic." Just because the education that home schoolers receive is not "state-approved," does not make it elitist. Everyone is welcome to home school, so what's so elitist about that? The authors are clearly threatened by homeschooling and their arguments do not hold water and are extremely biased. Yikes...

~Many parents who home school have told me that they pulled their children from public schools because the children came home with stacks of papers and did not understand what they were to be doing. The parents wound up doing all the teaching and finally decided that if they were going to do the teaching anyway, they might as well have the time to do it right! They have also said that much of the work in public schools is busy work and does not help the children learn a thing.

~The internal logic of the ruling is this: 1. The protection of rights by a government-of-the-people requires that people to have knowledge. 2. The people are incapable of providing this knowlege to their children, without the oversight of a Nanny State. 3. Therefore, the Government must violate the rights of the people, forcing them to educate the State's children as the Nanny State pleases, in order to .... secure a protection of rights. Plato, Stalin, and Hitler would have been pleased. Hitler, too, outlawed homeschooling on the same basis in 1938. The law remains to this day.

~America began its first 200 years without public education. The Bill of Rights guarantees families the right to inculcate Christian religion -something that the "liberal educators" deplore. To say that "there has always been something decidedly elitist and anti-democratic in home schooling" betrays a totalatarian mindset akin the those within communist regimes which brainwash children into statist thinking. These "liberal educators" hate Christianity. Far from privileged, any parent can choose to homeschool. Most all of the "privleged" homeschool families I have known were middle income or less.

~I would recommend that they study Western traditions of liberalism and democracy before publishing an article on the subject. Liberalism in the western tradition generally infers that the individual has a right to abstain from social programs. Social good is second to insuring the rights of the individual, as Thomas Mann would say.

~How little the authors know about home schooling. We began home schooling when found our son wasn't being challenged. He is now in 5th grade, doing geometry, Latin, logic, and very advanced in reading. My 7 year old is reading at an 8th grade level. My 6 year old is in 2nd grade math. There is very little time for TV in our house. What a waste of time!!! Contrary to what the authors think, on average home schooled kids test above the 80th percentile in standardized tests. What I want to know is why we are so undersupported by educators and intellectuals when we are the ones having the highest rates of success.

~Weren't the two fine young men who went on a murderous rampage at Columbine High School a product of the public school system. Wasn't their defense that they were picked on in (public) school. I guess the "socialization" they received in school wasn't that great after all. I have to wonder how they would have turned out if they had been homeschooled.

~Last thought: is it any surprise that the people who feel most threatened by homeschooling are the unions and teachers who spent years getting degrees which may not be so necessary if homeschooling continues to grow in popularity? It couldn't be THAT. They must be concerned about the children.

~Nice op-ed. Can be summed up thus: "Free markets, bad. Statism, good." That these knuckleheads are professors is exhibit A in the "value" of 20th century formal education. When government education becomes better than what one can obtain for free via the internet or from your public library, then we can have the debate on the merits of government education.

~Homeschooling is neither elitist nor undemocratic. While it's easier to visit a few radical websites and draw hasty conclusions than to research an issue thoroughly and thoughtfully, I recommend that the authors read the U.S. Department of Education's study, "Homeschooling in the United States: 1999." Homeschooling parents are somewhat more likely to be white and to have a college or graduate degree than mainstream parents, but financially they are very similar to mainstream parents (some are poor, some are wealthy, most are middle-class). Less than half homeschool for religious reasons.

~The freedom for me to NOT be in a program or with oversight is very important to me. I don't want legislation, testing, or parental requirements. Before compulsory schooling, kids grew up to become statesmen, inventors, thinkers, discoverers, & leaders. How did they do that without compulsory schooling, testing, and oversight? Ever had your child bring out a book and have the neighbor "schooled" kid loudly complain, "Oh, no, not books!I It's the weekend"? My homeschooled child can be away from that attitude that permeates the schools. Please don't just meet a few homeschoolers and then form your opinion. Get a bigger sample size.

So, there you go. I feel better. NO need for me to post further...they said it all!

Response to Anonymous - Telling the Truth

Anonymous wrote, "How one woman blessed with such a large family can be such a hate monger is beyond me. Jesus never said a word about Gays. And the Bible is just words written by men who hated homosexuals just like you do. The blood of all children who come from gay families is on your hands. These children are bullied, harassed and are more likely to commit suicide than there straight counter parts. This is all your fault..read your bible..God is about love for all his children. Who the h*** do you think you are to say other wise."

Anonymous, I am confused about the accusation that I am hate-mongering. It's also amazing to me that you have jumped from my post that asks Christians to have courage and tell the truth to assuming I am guilty of causing children from homosexual families to commit suicide.

What I wrote was: "And that is why the following article is so timely. We must take courage and stand against this darkness. We must be bold enough to tell our children what the Word of God says about homosexuality and the beautiful plan God has for marriage between one man and one woman.

If we don't say something now, when we are still somewhat free to do so, our children won't be able to even teach these truths in the privacy of their own homes."

My point is that we Christians must be bold enough to stand for what we believe in. The Bible you decry by saying it is just words written by men who hated homosexuals (and then, surprisingly, you demand I should read) is very clear that homosexuality is against God's design. Read Romans, Chapter 1, verses 24 - 27. God speaks about men dishonouring their bodies among themselves, and He calls their acts "shameless". That implies that they ought to be ashamed.

I do not hate homosexuals. I have known some who have chosen this unfortunate path, and I have treated them with the same respect that I use in interactions with anyone. But I will continue to tell them that their choice to practice unseemly acts is sinful, and that they ought to repent.

Would you consider me a hate-monger if I were to tell my child that he ought not to lie about stealing a brownie? Telling the truth is important, and if my child were lying, I would correct him. I would not minimize it so he could feel better about his sinful act.

Homosexuality is sin, plain and simple. So is lying, stealing, murder, covetousness, dishonouring one's parents, and so on. People sin.

And that is why in a couple of weeks we will be remembering that God had to send His Son, His only son, the sinless Christ, to take our punishment upon Himself and die in our place. We who deserved to die were spared, and He who never sinned, not even once, was brutalized and hung, nailed to a cross, in order to redeem us.

This Christ offers salvation to all who will believe. And if you read the Bible, you will find that fornicators and liars and thieves and swindlers and yes, even homosexuals were redeemed from darkness and brought to light by the wonderful mercy and grace of God.

I do not hate. I love. I love God and my neighbour. And I love my neighbour enough to tell him the truth. Sometimes the truth hurts. But it is still the truth.

Imagine a person plunging a knife into the belly of a man. Blood pours out. Pain follows. Now imagine that the person with the knife is a surgeon, and the belly of the man who is bleeding has a cancerous tumour inside. The knife is meant to do the work of saving the man's life.

The truth of the darkness of homosexuality might hurt a person who is trapped in that lifestyle. But that truth is the only thing that gives life. With that truth, he can repent, turn to Christ, and be saved. I would be hateful if I didn't tell the truth.

The Time Has Come...

My friend Royal Hamel has been called of God to be a watchman, exhorting pastors and churches to be salt and light in this generation. His ministry, Light the Darkness, can be found here: http://lightthedarkness.org/about.shtml

Royal graciously gave me permission to reprint the following article. The time has come to speak up, people. We can't continue to say nothing when we hear or read that our culture sanctions gay marriage, and that there is no problem with books like "Heather has Two Mommies". The recent controversy in California is shocking. Governor Schwartzenegger has agreed to legislation that bans the use of "mom and dad" in books in their public school system. It's discriminatory, they claim.

Huh? What about the discrimination against those increasingly rare families made up of a mom, a dad, and their children? Don't they count?

Apparently not.

And that is why the following article is so timely. We must take courage and stand against this darkness. We must be bold enough to tell our children what the Word of God says about homosexuality and the beautiful plan God has for marriage between one man and one woman.

If we don't say something now, when we are still somewhat free to do so, our children won't be able to even teach these truths in the privacy of their own homes.

THE TIME HAS COME TO SPEAK UP

“For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place and you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not attained royalty for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:14)

Persecution of Christians by the state has arrived in Canada. I speak of the recent spate of attacks by the Human Rights Commissions against Pastor Stephen Boisson, Rev. Alphonse de Valk of Catholic Insight Magazine and Ron Gray, President of the Christian Heritage Party of Canada. Those attacks are directly linked to militant homosexual demands that Christians keep their mouths shut about scriptural teaching on homosexuality. Let no one be in doubt here; although three specific Christian leaders have been targeted, the real object of the attack is the entire Christian population of Canada.

But can we legitimately say that Christians are being persecuted? Well, nobody has been killed for being faithful to Christian teaching. But people have lost jobs, have been forced to spend thousands of dollars in defending themselves, have been fined large amounts of money, and some businesses have been closed. And all of this through a quasi law system instituted by our government. In this system there is no presumption of innocence, the accused must pay for their own defense while accusers are granted court paid lawyers, and even establishing the truth of one’s commentary is no acceptable defense to the accused. Bishop Fred Henry of Calgary recently stated, "I really feel that we are into a crisis situation here where we are experiencing a trumping of religious freedom."

So where does that leave us? Well it seems that we have now arrived at the moment when devout followers of Christ are called to walk the more difficult road. For Christians do not have a choice in this matter. 2000 years ago faithful believers were put to death for refusing to burn incense to Caesar while calling him “Lord.” Faithful Christians today, while loving those trapped in the practise of an ancient wrong, have no authorization from scripture to bless what God has not blessed regardless of the dictates of the state.

Human Rights Commissions have recently been criticized by many editorialists and columnists because high profile journalists like Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn have been cited for hate by certain Islamic leaders in Canada. But there has been no media storm protesting the attack on free speech of Christians who have been hauled before these tribunals. It’s a pity. Shouldn’t the media be concerned for justice for all?

Is there any relief forthcoming by politicians who will courageously speak on behalf of believers? Don’t bet on it! A powerful lobby group has convinced the public, including politicians, that all opposition to homosexuality is due to hate. Governmental leaders, almost to a man, are thoroughly intimidated. And they will not speak a word in defense of Christians who have manifested far more courage than they have.

What then can be done in the present situation? Is it possible to slow down the course toward even more draconian forms of persecution? Yes!

But it calls for initiative from Christian leaders. Recently a key evangelical leader wrote a letter to the National Post protesting the abolition of the Lord’s Prayer in the Ontario legislature. If evangelicals can go public on prayer in the legislature, then surely they can go public on the much more serious matter of the growing persecution. To be fair, there has been some speaking by some leaders, but the defense must be pursued with much greater energy and vigor. The various heads of Christian denominations could issue press releases defending the right of individual believers to speak the whole truth found in scripture. Presidents of evangelical colleges and seminaries could speak up by assigning some professors to write articles in local newspapers. Since 40 percent plus of our population is Catholic it is also incumbent on courageous Catholic archbishops and bishops to speak on behalf of their constituency who are undergoing persecution as well. Some have certainly spoken; many more need to find their voice.

I suspect that most Christian leaders may be taking a cautious, low profile approach, praying that the situation may get better. They may think it wiser to try and woo those who oppose the gospel rather than graciously contending with them. Truth is, that hostile opponents of biblical truth have assumed much power; they are not going to go away quietly. Like Esther, God may have raised Canada’s Christian leaders to prominence for just such a time as this. Esther spoke up. She used her voice in defense of her people. Who knows what may happen if our Christian leaders do the same?

A version of this article was published in the March, 2008 edition of The Interim, Canada's pro-life, pro-family newspaper

Royal Hamel is a freelance journalist and director of Light the Darkness Ministries. He served for 22 years as pastor and cross-cultural worker with the Christian and Missionary Alliance of Canada.

OPP Report on our Bad Guy

OPP CATCH FLEEING SUSPECT

On March 4, 2008 at approximately 4:45 pm Huron OPP officers were advised that a 2007 Chevrolet pickup truck that had been left running in front of a business in Exeter had just been stolen. Officers were also advised that the vehicle was equipped with "OnStar". With assistance from OnStar, it was determined that the vehicle was in Mitchell and traveling south. Officers located the suspect in the stolen vehicle but the driver refused to stop for police and fled. Officers followed until called off due to concerns for public safety. While continuing to work with OnStar, it was determined that the vehicle was stopped in Huron East on a side road. Officers arrived on scene within minutes, but the suspect had fled on foot. At that time the suspect was able to evade officers including the canine unit.

At approximately 12:30 am on March 5, 2008 police were advised of a second stolen pickup truck from Huron East. The owner saw the vehicle being driven out of his driveway. The truck owner called OPP and followed the stolen truck in another vehicle. Police intercepted and once again, the suspect failed to stop for police when the emergency lights were activated. On London Road, south of Clinton, the spike belt was deployed on the stolen vehicle causing progressive tire deflation. The suspect stopped the truck and fled again on foot. Officers, including the OPP canine unit, contained and began searching the area. The suspect was located hiding in a farm vehicle at a nearby residence. It was confirmed that the male located hiding at the residence was the same male who had fled from police on the prior evening.

The male was arrested and taken to hospital for treatment of environmental exposure. A 22-year-old male from Oneida has been held in police custody pending a bail hearing on March 5. He is facing two counts of Drive Disqualified, two counts of Flight from Police Officer, two counts of Trespass by Night, one count of Theft Motor Vehicle Under $5000 and one count of Possession of Property Obtained by Crime over $5000.


Well, there you go...it really happened! I thank God that no one was injured in the event.

Order of Canada Considered for Top Abortionist

Today Rick and I popped in to see Joanna, who showed us a picture of her growing baby. At 14 weeks gestation, this wee baby had a cute little button nose, sweet little forehead, perfectly formed spine...already I can tell that this one will be just as adorable as his or her older siblings!

Joanna is naturally tired with the pregnancy, but she still has that beautiful glow of an expecting mom. She stood there, showing off her little belly, with a twinkle in her eyes, as she contemplated that in a few months, there would be another grandbaby for us to love.

It was a joy to see that picture.

And then, this evening, I read that Dr. Henry Morgentaler is being considered as a recipient of the Order of Canada.

I thought of that wee baby being formed in my daughter-in-law's womb, then imagined other babies, just as well formed, being ripped limb from limb so that their mothers can "have a life".

I wrote about Dr. Morgentaler a few years ago:

http://grannymom.blogspot.com/2005/01/strange-choice.html

My view on his life's work has not changed. He ought to be ashamed.

I have read every argument there is on both sides of the pro-life/abortion aka "pro-choice" question, but recently came across a slightly different take on it. My daughter sent me the following:

In the comments http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/1/31/ron-paul-explains-the-facts-to-a-foolish-reporter.aspx

I am against abortion because I am against slavery. I don't believe one human being can own the life of another- and that is what abortion is about. It's not about "choice" at all. I find it abhorrent that, having so recently torn off our own shackles to be recognized as full human beings, and not as men's property, we women turn around and claim our children as property, with full rights to dispose of them if we "choose" to. The hypocrisy is incredible. Who told us the lie that we had to be slave-owners in order not to be slaves?

Didn't men claim that their wives were "part of the household" and therefore their "private" property? Living in a house does not make you part of the house, whether it's made of wood or flesh. And saying it's ok to kill inside the womb but not outside it is like saying it's ok to kill in the kitchen but not the bedroom. What does location have to do with human rights? What does size have to do with human rights? And how does dependency or an immature level of mental development give people the right to poison or mangle you to death?

I am one month pregnant. I carry the child within me, but I do not own the child's life. There are hardships ahead for me, but you don't make your life better by taking someone else's.

People moan about young girls' lives "ruined" by having babies. By that short-sighted logic, the slaves should never have been freed in America, because of all the slave-owners' lives that were "ruined" by it. Many slave-owning families suffered hardship after the emancipation. Does that mean that freeing the slaves was wrong? Of course not.

Pro-life is anti-slavery.

(I can't seem to stop the quote, so it stops here!)

I was appalled when I read that Dr. Morgentaler, the abortionist, who is in my mind no better than a slave-owner (actually, much, much worse...although slave-owning is terrible, at least most of the slave-owners did not kill their slaves) is being considered for Canada's top honour.

My friend Debbie wrote,

I have just learned that "Dr." Henry Morgentaler, the man who pioneered the fight for legalized abortion here in Canada, the man whose trial basically saw all laws pertaining to it's illegality stricken from the books, is being considered for The Order of Canada, a very prestigious Canadian award.

The National Post, a Canadian newspaper, is polling its readership, to ascertain their feelings about this. Please take 15 seconds to click on the link I'm providing and vote "NO".

Bad enough the man has personally murdered countless pre-born children, and has encouraged likewise of countless more - but to see him given such an award is simply appalling.

By the way, it is still shocking to many of us that this man, a proponent of death, is a survivor of the Holocaust.


Vote here:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/v5/content/poll/static/nationalPoll.html

Abortion is murder. It takes the life of an innocent human being, whose only crime is being too small to stand up for his or her own rights. This holocaust must be stopped! Voting against this proposal is just the beginning. Call or write your MP tomorrow and let your opinion be known.

I know I will.

Ezra Levant and the non-human rights commission

All he wanted to do was to explain what all the hullabaloo was all about. When Ezra Levant decided to publish the controversial cartoons that were causing the big ruckus in Denmark, he was just letting his readers know that they weren't THAT BAD! After all, Christians get slammed in the media all of the time...in comedies, in police shows like Law and Order, and in print. So, a few harmless and somewhat humorous cartoons were NO BIG DEAL.

Apparently, a zealous Muslim in Alberta thought otherwise:

http://ezralevant.com/2008/01/whats-this-all-about.html

After the police decided not to arrest Ezra (go figure!) the human rights commission got involved. Ezra is left to fight this fight alone - except that now he's not alone. He has a blog! He has access to You-Tube. And finally, people are standing up and taking notice.

Read the above post, then explore through Ezra's website to get an idea of what is happening right here at home. This is not some third-world country with a list of human-rights violations. This, folks, is Canada, our home and native land. And in this land there's a price to pay for not being politically correct.

Here's what you can do about it: http://ezralevant.com/2008/01/what-can-be-done.html

The worst thing you can do is nothing. For that is what happened in Nazi Germany. Good people stood idly by as the Jews were arrested and sent to concentration camps.

God deliver us from complacency!

The Big Storm!

Ha!

It was SUPPOSED to be a horrendous mess, but what we experienced in Huron County was really just an ordinary winter day. Ice pellets made the roads very slippery, but there wasn't near as much snow as was forecast, and the wind wasn't howling (which always reminds us that this old house leaks!) so it was a great opportunity to stay put and get a lot done.

That we did. We started with a general clean-up through the house. Linda made waffles for breakfast, and accomplished that with no eggs or sugar, so we were able to eat them, even though we're still on that elimination diet. After that, we organized some big cupboards in the kitchen, moving food from one cupboard to another, and getting rid of all plastic containers that were missing lids. By the time we were finished the organizing, it was time for lunch. Jared made a stir-fry.

We cleaned the kitchen, put roast chicken and roast beef in the oven (diet - some of us can't have the beef - sob!) then headed to our Great Room for some serious studying.

I am determined to teach our children about Canada's government. We discussed the different forms of government, such as democracy, monarchy, pluralism, communism, totalitarianism, etc. It's always fun to hear how much the children understand about how governments work and about how our leaders were elected. Of course, the Sovereignty of God came into the picture, and our children made it clear that they understand that God is the One Who ordained government (Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed) so people would have order instead of anarchy.

We discussed elections, and which forms of government have elections. I needed a way to explain that people in communistic countries, even when allowed to vote, have no real choice. In one of those "Aha!" moments, I told Christopher this:

"Imagine voting is like choosing a piece of fruit to eat. In Canada, I can choose a banana, an apple, an orange, some grapes, a kiwi fruit, etc. In the same way, when I go to vote I can choose a New Democrat, a Conservative, a Liberal, a Communist, a Green Party member, a Christian Heritage Party member, etc. I have lots of choice, and each of those is different!"

"On the other hand, if I were in a communist party, I would be given a choice of a Red Delicious apple, a Jonagold, a MacIntosh, a Courtland, a Granny Smith ---> But I would really have only one choice: an apple! In the same way, the candidates in a truly communist country would all have the same ideas, the same values, and the same goals."

I think the kids have a better appreciation for the freedom of choice we have in this country. I certainly do!

Thoughts for this day...

It was a whirlwind of activity, as we can see the light at the end of the tunnel! We have spent months renovating (new windows and wall) and organizing the GREAT room we use as our learning centre and communications centre. I am down to one table's worth of papers to sort. I know I said that before, but Daniel cleaned the edges, behind the filing cabinets, and on top of desks. He piled my nearly clean table up with more stuff to sort. But this time, I truly am almost finished.

A couple of comments, then I am heading to bed.

What pleased me most today was Cindy Rushton's Brain in a Binder. I printed out the pages I will find useful, and I organized my binder. This is not new to me. For many years I kept a binder with all of my appointments, plans, ideas and goals in it. Somehow I fell out of the habit, and the whole family has suffered since. Mom has a better memory when I write things down. Life in general is better, easier, more peaceful, when Mom remembers all that needs to be done.

So I am back to a binder, and actually excited about it!

What infuriated me the most today was a website I stumbled upon (after following links for a bit) that had an article condemning John Piper for a sermon on interracial marriage. John was making the Biblical point that God created male and female, and that one man can marry one woman, no matter what the colour of eyes, skin, hair or teeth! This 'moran' (couldn't spell moron) tried to say that when God divided the nations at the Tower of Babel, He meant to separate the people into "races", and that it was going against the Bible if you don't marry within your race.

Poppycock!

I married a man with much darker skin than mine. What's that got to do with anything?

It infuriates me that this guy takes verses out of context and seems to think that white people are superior.

As a white-skinned blonde-haired blue-eyed woman, I can tell you that I WISH my skin was darker, and that I am GLAD I married a man with darker skin. Of our 12 children, we have 4 with darker skin and 8 with whiter skin. The ones that don't burn in the sun are the ones with the darker skin, like their dad's. Seems to me, that's the better skin.

Not that we can choose our skin tone, or our eye colour, or our height, or the number of hairs on our heads. God is the One who Provided us with those things. And He is the One who teaches that His family will be made up of people from every tribe and nation and tongue and continent!

Goodnight, all.

There'll always be critics...I am one ;)

I was watching "An Interview with the Prime Minister" today, in which Prime Minister Stephen Harper was interviewed by Lloyd Robertson and Robert Fife. There is a synopsis of the interview ">here.

The journalists seemed somewhat antagonistic at the beginning of the interview, pressing the prime minister on certain issues to the point of sounding obnoxious. However, Stephen Harper clearly was unflappable. Critics in the past have accused him of being boring. He doesn't fly off the handle like Pierre Trudeau, who enjoyed getting a reaction with his rude comments and behaviour. He is in no way as colourful or "proud" as Jean Chretien(his words). What I like about Stephen Harper is his integrity, and his quiet assurance that he has a job to do and is bound and determined to do it, come what may.

In one instance Mr. Harper was asked about charges of "excessive control."

"You know, I guess my some 20 years in this business convinces me there are only two kinds of prime ministers," he said. "There are prime ministers in control of their government and those that aren’t. And in either case you’re criticized, but I’d rather have the criticism of, you know, leading from strength than leading from weakness."

Mr. Roberston: "You prefer to run a tight ship."

Mr. Harper: "Well, we prefer to run a disciplined organization."

It is far better to have a leader who knows how to lead. I'd rather have a prime minister in control of his government than one like Lester Pearson, who just didn't know what was going on most of the time. He was a nice guy, well-liked by everyone, but because he was a mediator at heart (he won the Nobel Peace Prize) he didn't like to displease anyone. A person like that makes a fine ambassador, but a poor Prime Minister.

Stephen Harper is a leader. He is a man of integrity who strives to never do something that would cause him to lose sleep at night. He honours his parents, valuing his mother's opinion about current events in Canada, and speaking well of his now deceased father. He honours his marriage vows, and speaks highly of his wife. He honours his commitments to lower emissions, to continue in Afghanistan as was promised, to work with the people of Quebec within the country of Canada. He is an honourable man.

The Bible tells us to pray for those in authority over us, and to recognize that leaders of nations are raised up by God. I am thankful that God has blessed Canada with a man of integrity as its Prime Minister.

We would do well to pray for him daily, in 2008.

Schwarzenegger = Egypt's Pharaoh? Fire in California!

One of my internet friends mused this morning,

I started thinking about the fires burning in California. It is horrible, I admit. So many businesses shutting down. As of this email, around 120 Starbucks closed, 16 McDonald's, corporate headquarters of Qualcomm, Jack in the Box, Sony Online Entertainment, Petco, San Diego Zoo Wild Animal Park, and Sea World are all closed. Gateway Computers have urged their employees to not come in. Hundreds of millions in damage, and it keeps getting worse.

All this after Gov. Schwarzenegger "outlaws" mom and dad. I wonder if he is starting to feel like the Egyptian Pharaoh when God sent the 10 plagues? I see it as God is still on the throne and is taking notice.

I was thinking about that, too. However, we must be careful not to say "such and such a tragedy is a result of such and such a sin".... because remember what Jesus said about it?


Luke 13:1 Now 1 there were some present on that occasion who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. He answered them, "Do you think these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered these things? No, I tell you! But unless you repent, you will all perish as well! Or those eighteen who were killed when the tower in Siloam fell on them, do you think they were worse offenders than all the others who live in Jerusalem? No, I tell you! But unless you repent you will all perish as well!"

Jesus was teaching them that there was little time, and that "TODAY is the day of salvation". God is in utter control of all events, and has a purpose in this fire. We need to be praying that God will work in the hearts of many in Southern California, and that many would respond by turning to Him for salvation.


Healing a Man Born Blind

John 9:1-12 Now as Jesus was passing by, he saw a man who had been blind from birth. His disciples asked him, "Rabbi, who committed the sin that caused him to be born blind, this man or his parents?" Jesus answered, "Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but he was born blind so that the acts of God may be revealed through what happens to him. We must perform the deeds of the one who sent me as long as it is daytime. Night is coming when no one can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world."

Having said this, he spat on the ground and made some mud with the saliva. He smeared the mud on the blind man's eyes and said to him, "Go wash in the pool of Siloam" (which is translated "sent"). So the blind man went away and washed, and came back seeing.

In the OT it is God himself who is associated with the giving of sight to the blind (Exod 4:11, Ps 146:8). In a number of passages in Isa (29:18, 35:5, 42:7) it is considered to be a messianic activity. Jesus was proclaiming Who He is, and Who sent Him.

The disciples assumed that sin (regardless of who committed it) was the cause of the man's blindness. This was a common belief in Judaism; the rabbis used Ezek 18:20 to prove there was no death without sin, and Ps 89:33 to prove there was no punishment without guilt. Thus in this case the sin must have been on the part of the man's parents, or during his own prenatal existence. But Jesus answered clearly that the blindness was for God's good purpose, so the acts of God would be revealed through what happened to him!

So, we must not make the mistake of assuming that a tragedy or sickness is a result of a particular sin. Of course, we all sin. And God is not pleased with sinful leaders who make laws that go against His word. However, He has a plan, and it is being fulfilled. Our responsibility is not to pronounce judgments and speak as if we are God, but to pray that His plan will be fulfilled. We need to pray for the Christians in the devastated areas, that God's grace will be granted to them in abundance, and that they will be used as the hands of God to minister to those who are suffering. Pray for those who are hurting, that their response will be to turn to God, Who is the Judge...for they will face Him, if not today, then on the great and terrible day of the Lord.

In Christ,
Janet

Remembrance Day - we, too, remember...

All of the big kids and Daddy are out today, busy with various pursuits. So the three little kids and I are the only ones home. We have no vehicle available, so instead of going into our small town to witness the Remembrance Day activities, we watched it on CBC.

It really was an emotional experience, to sit on the couch with my three youngest children, watching the old soldiers with medals on their chests and tears in their eyes, as they remembered days long past and friends long gone.

I explained a bit about the World Wars to the kids. I reminded them that Adolf Hitler was the tyrant who wanted to kill the Jews and would not acknowledge the victory of Jesse Owens, the black Olympian runner (just read that story to the kids this week).

They asked lots of questions, and were interested in knowing that my uncle, Ray Matthews, was an air force pilot in the second World War, and that Rick's grandfather, Edward Stewart, was a Piper in the first World War. Both men lost their lives in service to this country. Both families were affected profoundly by this loss.

When I watched the woman representing Canadian Mothers place her wreath, I thought about my grandmother receiving the news that her eldest son had been shot down. So very sad.

In 2006, Canadian soldiers are serving in Afghanistan. Were it not for them, the Taliban would take over, oppressing the people for their own twisted ends. It disappoints me profoundly that the majority of Canadians want to see us pull out of Afghanistan and not keep our commitment to the Afghani people. Yes, men have lost their lives. Yes, more could die. But I believe that our soldiers are truly making a difference.

Time will tell...if they are given enough time.

Maybe 20 years from now my youngest children will be sitting on their couches, explaining to their children why Canadians have a day called "Remembrance Day". And maybe, just maybe, they will be able to proudly say that we Canadians DID make a difference.

Double-think regarding Terri Schiavo

"Michael Lee Swails of Immokalee, Fla., was charged recently with starving 120 cows. The 47-year-old rancher “was arrested Thursday in connection with the discovery of dead, dying or severely malnourished cows on his ranch last year.”

Meanwhile, Terri Schiavo continues to starve to death thanks to the court-ordered removal of her feeding tube. While the exact value of a human life hasn’t been determined, we now know that it’s less than the value of 120 cows."

~ http://backwaterreport.com/

Just today on Canada AM there was a news report about a man who is petitioning to have the government ban the use of bow-hunting to kill deer. He cited the cruel and unusual torture of a slow death that the deer must suffer if it is not killed quickly by a bullet. He wasn't objecting to the killing of deer for meat, but to the slowness of the death.

All I could think about was Terri Schindler-Schiavo. Her death has been excruciatingly slow in coming, since the courts ordered her feeding tube removed on March 18. I am sure that her husband thought she would quickly succumb; yet she obviously has a strong will to live.

The other day I was cleaning my bedroom and had my ancient, black-and-white TV on for a few minutes. I happened to catch a debate about Terri on "The View" - a show I do not normally watch. Joy Behar was vehemently defending the right of Michael Schiavo to have Terri's feeding tube removed, and her argument flabbergasted me: "The Sanctity of Marriage!" She kept proclaiming that because of the sanctity of marriage, this man had every right to decide what to do with his wife.

This man, who has fathered a couple of children in an ongoing adulterous relationship, has violated the sanctity of his marriage publically, by forsaking his wife and living openly with another woman. He could have walked away and left Terri in the hands of her parents, who were willing to sacrifice everything to care for her, to give her all the therapy that could be found in order to help her in her recovery, and to give all of their time and energy to this poor woman. But no! Michael wasn't going to give up being her husband: after all, there is a lot of money at stake, which he will inherit upon her demise.

This is another case of double-think. Sanctity of Marriage in today's society means that a man can decide to starve and dehydrate his wife to death. It no longer means that he ought to keep the vows he made at the altar on the day of their wedding.

Cruel death means that cows ought not to be starved to death, and that deer must not suffer longer than a couple of seconds. It no longer means that a human being should never have to endure thirst for weeks at a time with only one drop of wine for comfort.

The only thing we can rest upon is the Sovereignty of God. When judges violate God's law and set their own thinking above that of the Almighty, God is not dismayed.

Psalm 2 reminds us of that:

1 ¶ Why do the nations rage, And the people plot a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves, And the rulers take counsel together, Against the LORD and against His Anointed, saying,
3 "Let us break Their bonds in pieces And cast away Their cords from us."
4 He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; The Lord shall hold them in derision.
5 Then He shall speak to them in His wrath, And distress them in His deep displeasure:
6 "Yet I have set My King On My holy hill of Zion."
7 ¶ "I will declare the decree: The LORD has said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.
8 Ask of Me, and I will give You The nations for Your inheritance, And the ends of the earth for Your possession.
9 You shall break them with a rod of iron; You shall dash them to pieces like a potter’s vessel.’"
10 ¶ Now therefore, be wise, O kings; Be instructed, you judges of the earth.
11 Serve the LORD with fear, And rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, And you perish in the way, When His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him.

All Power and Authority has been given to the King, Jesus. He will set things right. Blessed are we who put our trust in HIM. Thank You, Lord!


Janet

Strange Choice

Dr. Henry Morgentaler was being interviewed on Canada AM this morning, regarding a movie, "Choice", that will be aired this evening, praising the virtue of this man who almost singlehandedly fought for abortion rights in Canada.

When he was asked what he thought of the movie, he tried defending his character by saying that he was disappointed that it didn’t show more of his personal life, because he believes that he is a good and gentle man. He mentioned that he is proud of his work, because he believes access to abortion is simply a matter of justice.

Then he said, "Crimes of violence have certainly decreased since the right to abortion in this country."

I stood, watching the television with my mouth open in disbelief. "Crimes of violence have DECREASED?" Pardon me?

It *may* be true (and I am not sure that it is) that a man is less likely to hit a woman if she is no longer carrying his unwanted baby, but (NEWS FLASH!!) crimes of violence happen every single time a baby is torn from his mother’s womb. I’d say that it is violent to cut off a limb, to crush a skull, to fill one’s environment with saline solution and burn one’s lungs out...these actions are violent beyond belief, and if done to an adult, or a child already fortunate enough to reside OUT of the womb rather than in it, then the so called "caregivers" would be prosecuted with the full extent of the law.

Morgentaler must be schizophrenic - he certainly thinks in a double-minded manner.
"I am a gentle man." Yet he has killed many thousands of babies. Our world is reeling at the devastation caused by the tsunami. People are saddened and moved to give generously, to pray, to even go to the stricken areas and serve -- yet far more babies have been destroyed through violently ripping them from their own mothers' wombs.

"I am proud of my work." What on earth is there to be proud of? He has enabled selfish women to live self-centredly rather than giving themselves selflessly to another person. Because of his work, there are abortion centres across our country, and hundreds of babies are killed every day. He ought to be ashamed of his work.

I do pray that the Lord will open the eyes of Canadian women to see that this man is not a gentle, kind, "saviour" who has enabled them to have "choice" to live their lives more easily. I pray that they will see that he is delusional, that he is no different from those who tortured prisoners during the holocaust, and that he should be filled with shame.

In Christ,
Janet