Some pro-marriage Liberals waffling, claiming Tories are not keeping promises on issue

By Gudrun Schultz and Steve Jalsevac

OTTAWA, Canada, November 29, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Canada’s Conservative federal government has followed through on a promise to re-open the same-sex 'marriage' debate, announcing Tuesday that discussion on the issue will begin December 6.

There will be a vote in the House of Commons before the Christmas break, the government confirmed. The vote will not address the existing legislation, but will likely ask MPs if they would support repealing or amending the law, the Canadian Press reported earlier today.

During the election campaign one year ago, Prime Minister Stephen Harper promised that if elected he would hold a free vote in Parliament on re-opening the issue of same-sex 'marriage'.

It remains to be seen what the result will be from the intense lobbying by pro-marriage Canadians and organizations and pro-marriage MPs of their fellow MPs in recent months. While the general consensus is that the Conservative motion is unlikely to pass, some pundits predict it could still be a close vote.

Pro-marriage leaders are asking supporters to intensify their communications to uncommitted or opposed MPs in the remaining few days and to encourage every pro-marriage MP to follow through and vote for the motion.

Some Liberal MPs who have consistently voted for traditional marriage are waffling on their support for the upcoming motion and are claiming the Tories are playing politics with the issue. Constituents are being told by these Liberal MPs that the motion is a dishonest political strategy by the Tories to evade their election promises on marriage.

However, all Canadian pro-marriage groups are strongly urging Members of Parliament to vote for the motion. The groups consider the upcoming Conservative motion to in fact be no more or less than what the party has been promising all along. There is some suspicion that the waffling pro-marriage Liberal MPs are themselves playing politics with the issue and perhaps trying to curry favour with party leadership candidates who all favour same-sex ‘marriage’.

Christians are Facists and Bigots in Sanfransisco

This is an Interview with Bill O'reilly with Ron Luce founder of "Battlecry America" and Sunsara Taylor. Are our Judeo Christian foundations truly facist?

Glenn Beck - Is Christianity Offensive?

Glenn Beck has it right on here. Political correctness is going to crush our children.

Married People are Statistical Minorities

Vocations where Christians are persecuted

November 29, 2006
Excluding Christians

According to Canadian court rulings, if you are a Christian you cannot work in one of the following professions without compromising your beliefs.

You cannot be:

A Policeman: David Packer was fired from the Toronto police force because he respectfully asked another assignment, in place of guarding an abortion clinic.

A Teacher: British Columbia Chris Kempling lost his job for writing letters to the Editor, in his own time, explaining how homosexuals can be helped to change their orientation.

A University professor: David Mullan was fined by Cape Breton University, Nova Scotia, for expressing his views on homosexual behaviour.

A Pharmacist: British Columbia Premier Ujjal Dosanjh threatened "government action" to ensure pharmacists will dispense abortifacient morning-after pills without a doctors prescription.

A Nurse: Bill Whatcott was fired as a nurse in Saskatchewan and later fined by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission for his Christian activism while in his own time.

A Printer: In Toronto Scott Brokie was summoned by the OHRC and lost his court case in front of the Ontario Court of Appeals, for refusing to print propaganda material for a homosexual activist group.

A Landlord: The Knights of Columbus in British Columbia was forced to Pay Damages to Lesbians for Refusing to Rent Hall for “Wedding” Reception.

An Innkeeper: A Prince Edward Island Christian couple, Dagmar and Arnost Cepica, closed down their Bed & Breakfast business to keep from being forced to accept homosexual couples.
A Civic Official, Marriage Commissioner or Justice of the peace: Manitoba ordered Kevin Kisilowsky to conduct marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples or hand in his licence.
A Mayor: Fredericton mayor Brad Woodside was brought before the New Brunswick Human Rights Commission for refusing to proclaim Gay Pride Week. In two similar cases in Ontario, mayors Dianne Haskett of London and Bob Morrow of Hamilton were found guilty of "discrimination" and forced to pay large fines by the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC), in spite of their religious objections to making Gay Pride Week proclamations.
A Pastor: Reverend Stephen Boissoin was summoned by the Alberta HRT for writing letters on the issue of homosexuality. This case is still pending.

When will they strike at your profession?

What to do?

The solution is to support a political party that will defend our fundamental freedoms and will promote judicial reform (while political parties still enjoy freedom of speech in this country).

Giuseppe Gori - Family Action Coalition Party

The Dirty Lies of Politicians

See below a series of emails about the Dr McVety & Garth Turner incident. Garth doesn't care about his constituents, but rather getting the media spotlight. I'm getting rather tired of it all.

NEWS RELEASE
Nov27, 2006

Dr Charles McVety said Garth Turner "fabricated" the "quote" for CP story.Canada Family Action Coalition president and Senior Director of Defend Marriage Coalition, Dr. Charles McVety is calling a quote attributed to him by MP Garth Turner "a figment of his imagination." The alleged statement, reported in a Canadian Press story November 26, was supposed to have been made during a televised debate between McVety and Turner. ( Host of the TV show Michael Coren says he has no recollection of that statement being made either.) According to the CP story, Turner related that McVety looked at him and said "You know what? I can pick up the phone and call Harper and I can get him in two minutes. It's going to take you a month." http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061126.wgarth1126/BNStory/National/home "I never made this statement" said McVety. "It's a complete fabrication by Mr. Turner from start to finish. It's really quite sad."
McVety also expressed surprise that a respected journalist and news service would see fit to publish quotes attributed to him without verifying their authenticity. "I've been interviewed by John Ward before as well as many of his colleagues at Canadian Press so they must have my cell phone number somewhere," said McVety. "It is unprofessional for a journalist to not have interviewed me before reporting Mr. Turner's yarn as fact. It seems a bit incautious."
Dr Charles McVety
-30-
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Coren
To: Robert A. Jason
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: Garth Turner "fabricated" Quote for CP story
Dear Robert,

This alleged incident was supposed to have taken pace on my television show. I can assure you that I have no memory of it at all. The CP reporter called me today and told me that Garth is now claiming that it took place during a commercial break and is thus not on the tape of the actual show. Interesting. Again, I have no memory of this whatsoever and if it had been said I would have been all over it as soon as the show came back on air. In other words, as far as I am concerned it never happened.

Use this letter as you will and feel free to distribute it to whomever you like.

Michael.

PMO a fortress of solitude, maverick MP charges

JOHN WARD

Canadian Press

OTTAWA — Rank-and-file Conservative MPs have no say in fashioning the centrepiece policies of the Harper government, says a former Tory caucus member who was booted from party ranks last month.

Garth Turner also says that, while MPs are being muzzled, he believes there is a pipeline between Prime Minister Stephen Harper's office and some activists on the religious right — or as he calls them, “the righteous right.”

The maverick Toronto-area MP, who now sits as an independent, says the Conservative environmental plan, the budget, tax cuts, the income trust decision and military policy in Afghanistan were all presented to the caucus as done deals, not as subjects for debate.

“Caucus has not been involved in substantive policy issues at all,” Mr. Turner said in an interview. “That has been, I guess, one of my greatest surprises and greatest disappointments — that we have not, as members of the caucus, been allowed to discuss any substantive policy issues.”

Mr. Turner isn't a newcomer to politics. He was a Conservative MP under Brian Mulroney from 1988 to 1993 and was revenue minister in Kim Campbell's short-lived government in 1993.

He says he's never seen MPs treated this way.

“There has never been a policy debate where people have lined up at the microphone and been asked for input into a pending policy decision in the national caucus, and that has been a huge difference from my experience in the past, where that is the reason that caucus existed.”

There have been meetings where cabinet ministers presented policies and took questions about them, but there was no debate.

“Why the heck are we here?” Mr. Turner asks in frustration. “We're supposed to be here representing people. We're supposed to be bringing back what the grassroots and the voters are saying in the ridings, and bringing it back for a distillation here in Ottawa to help influence government policy.

“That's what an MP does.”

Last summer, with the war in Lebanon raging, a Tory MP tried to open that subject up for debate. “She was shut down,” Mr. Turner said, adding that Harper later came out with a policy that was strongly pro-Israeli without any discussion by his MPs.

Mr. Turner portrays the government as a rigid, top-down operation, which brooks no dissent and where the Prime Minister's Office holds a tight rein, to the point where Mr. Harper's staff sit in on caucus meetings.

“I've never been in a national caucus before where there are so many PMO staffers. It's quite extraordinary.”

He says Mr. Harper has no time for dissenters, unlike Mr. Mulroney, who stroked and cajoled cantankerous MPs and largely maintained caucus loyalty even while his public support was in fee fall.

Mr. Turner, a self-described “pain in the ass,” said there was no room for his outspoken views in this Conservative party.

While MPs may not get much say in policy, Mr. Turner suspects that some in the religious right have unusual influence in the government.

“I believe there is a pipeline from a certain constituency, whatever you want to call it, righteous right, I believe there is a pipeline into the Prime Minister's Office and into the party.”

Earlier this year, Mr. Turner took part in a TV debate with Charles McVety, an evangelical leader who has been a driving force in the fight against same-sex marriage.

The MP says there was a telling moment in that debate when Mr. McVety looked at him and said: “You know what? I can pick up the phone and call Mr. Harper and I can get him in two minutes. It's going to take you a month.”

Mr. Turner paused.

“I think he's right.”

Canadian University Set to Prohibit Club Status For Any Group Opposed to Abortion

By John-Henry Westen

OTTAWA, November 24, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A motion debated at the November 21 session of the Carleton University Students' Association (CUSA) council meeting would prohibit any group opposed to abortion from attaining club status at the University. While aimed at a pro-life group of students seeking club status on campus, the proposed policy may ban Catholic, Evangelical, Jewish and Muslim clubs as well.

On November 21, Katy McIntyre Vice President of CUSA Student Services, proposed a "Motion to Amend Discrimination on Campus Policy" which would bar from club status all groups opposed to abortion. The motion stated:

1) CUSA and CUSA Inc. respect and affirm a woman's right to choose.
2) No CUSA resources, space, recognition or funding be allocated for anti-choice purposes.

The summary of the motion argues that pro-life groups are "anti-choice", and "seek to remove choice by making abortion illegal and it would be impossible to make abortion illegal without violating the Canadian Constitution, by removing a woman's right to life, liberty, and security of the person".

It also states that pro-life groups "compromise the personal safety and threaten the self esteem of women who may contemplate abortion or have chosen to have an abortion".

The motion is to be voted on, on December 5th, at 6:30pm at the next CUSA Council Meeting.

Lifeline President Sarah Fletcher spoke with LifeSiteNews.com about the situation. "I think it pretty ridiculous that this governing body which is supposed to be representing all students would be declaring itself pro-choice because not all of the students are going to agree with them on that view."

As worded, the motion may also bar religious groups which are pro-life from campus. Fletcher said, "I don't know if they understand the implications, by passing this motion they are infringing on human rights . . . it will affect the Jewish and Muslim student groups, the Christian and Catholic groups."

Carleton University spokesman Lin Moody told LifeSiteNews.com "The Carleton University Student Association (CUSA) is an independent body and, as a matter of course, we do not interfere with their activities. It is University policy not to comment on matters of speculation. The University will be prepared to comment further subsequent to the December 5th CUSA meeting."

Blake Brooks Vice President of External Affairs at CUSA, told LifeSiteNews.com that he is not sure how the vote will turn out. "I've been getting a lot of feedback within the last 24-hours on both sides," he said.

CUSA president Shawn Menard supports the motion, as does the Ashley Hunkin, the Women's coordinator on the CUSA Council who seconded the motion. However, an editorial in the university student newspaper opposes the motion.

Rosie O'Donnel - Comments on Radical Christianity

Hear and see for yourself what Rosie O'Donnel actually said on Radical Christianity! Can you believe that she equates Radical Islam and Christianity?

Rosie O'Donnel and the church of Liberalism

Rush Limbaugh comments on Rosies comments. Have a listen.

Warning! Canada is Exporting Radical Secularism to USA

I highly recommend this radio interview with Tristan Emmanuel, founder and president of the ECP Centre on KKMS in St Paul Minnesota. An excellent overview of the war on faith family and freedom that is being fought in Canada and is coming to America!

http://www.kkmslive.com/MP3/1511172006KKMS.mp3

Elton John: Organized Religion Fuels homophobia and other discrimination

2006.11.13
Elton John: organized religion fuels homophobia, other discrimination

LONDON (AP) - Organized religion fuels anti-gay discrimination and other
forms of bias, pop star Elton John said. ``I think religion has always
tried to turn hatred toward gay people,'' John said in the Observer
newspaper's Music Monthly Magazine in an interview published Saturday.
``Religion promotes the hatred and spite against gays.''

``But there are so many people I know who are gay and love their
religion,'' said the singer, who exchanged vows in December in a civil
union ceremony with Canada's David Furnish. ``From my point of view, I
would ban religion completely. Organized religion doesn't seem to work.
It turns people into really hateful lemmings, and it's not really
compassionate.''

John also criticized religious leaders for failing to do anything about
conflicts around the world. ``Why aren't they having a conclave? Why
aren't they coming together?'' John said those in his own field have
been similarly lax. ``It's like the peace movement in the '60s.
Musicians got through to people by getting out there and doing peace
concerts, but we don't seem to do them any more,'' he said. ``If John
Lennon were alive today, he'd be leading it with a vengeance.''

---

Gay Marriage Galvanizes Canada’s Religious Right

The New York Times - November 19, 2006
Gay Marriage Galvanizes Canada’s Religious Right
By CHRISTOPHER MASON

OTTAWA — It was a lonely time here in the capital for the Evangelical
Fellowship of Canada in the early days of the gay marriage debate in 2003.
Of the scattered conservative Christian groups opposed to extending marriage
rights to same-sex couples, it was the only one with a full-time office in
Ottawa to lobby politicians. “We were the only ones here,” said Janet Epp
Buckingham, who was the group’s public policy director then. But that was
before the legislation passed in 2005 allowing gay marriage in Canada. And
before the election early this year of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a
Conservative and an evangelical Christian who frequently caps his speeches
with “God bless Canada.”

Today across the country, the gay marriage issue and Mr. Harper’s election
have galvanized conservative Christian groups to enter politics like never
before. Before now, the Christian right was not a political force in this
mostly secular, liberal country. But it is coalescing with new clout and
credibility, similar to the evangelical Christian movement in the United
States in the 1980s, though not nearly on the same scale.

Today, half a dozen organizations like the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada
work full time in Ottawa, four of which opened offices in the past year, all
seeking to reverse the law allowing gay marriage. They represent just some
of the dozens of well-organized conservative Christian groups around the
country and more than a hundred grass-roots campaigns focused on the issue.
In recent months, religious groups have held rallies, signed petitions,
drafted resolutions and stepped up their efforts to lobby politicians to
overturn the law. These Christian conservatives have been instilled with a
sense of urgency in the expectation that Mr. Harper will follow through on a
campaign promise, as early as the first week of December, to hold a vote in
Parliament on whether to revisit the gay marriage debate. “With the
legalization of gay marriage, faith has been violated and we’ve been forced
to respond,” said Charles McVety, a leader of several evangelical Christian
organizations that oppose gay marriage and president of the Canada Christian
College in Toronto. “Traditionally people of faith in Canada have not been
politically active,” he said. “But now we’re finally seeing organizations
that are professionalizing what was a very amateur political movement.”

Mr. McVety, who recites from memory the decision of an Ontario judge in 2003
that paved the way for gay marriages, has organized dozens of rallies
attracting altogether some 200,000 supporters. He asked the Rev. Jerry
Falwell and other American evangelical leaders for advice on building a
religious movement in Canada and traveled Ontario and Quebec in a
red-and-white “Defend Marriage” bus.

Though the expected vote in Parliament will not decide whether to rescind
the gay marriage legislation, but instead whether members wish to reopen the
issue for debate, it remains significant for the Christian right and the
government. For leaders of the Christian right, the vote is a chance to get
the marriage issue back on the government’s agenda and to get a better sense
of where individual politicians, especially newly elected ones, stand. They
have adopted that strategy in part because they say that the vote in
Parliament will be difficult to win. For Mr. Harper and his Conservative
Party, the vote is an attempt to appease the religious social conservatives
who form the core of the support for his minority government without losing
moderate voters who want to avoid the issue.

If Mr. Harper appears to be too aggressive in pushing to revisit gay
marriage he also risks losing votes in Quebec, where his pro-Israel stance
and an environmental plan that does not meet Canada’s Kyoto Protocol
commitments have already hurt his support in a province that is critical to
his chances of securing a majority in the next election. “Harper needs to
show he is not the right-wing evangelical’s rump if he wants to grow into a
majority government,” said Jonathan Malloy, a political science professor at
Carleton University in Ottawa who studies the politics of evangelical
Christians in Canada.

Mr. Harper’s government has not introduced an avalanche of socially
conservative measures, but has instead shifted subtly to the right, one
policy at a time. In addition to derailing Liberal measures to loosen
marijuana and prostitution laws, Mr. Harper has introduced tougher crime
legislation, bolstered the military with new money and equipment, lowered
the national sales tax and plans to raise the age of sexual consent to 16
from 14.

But the Christian right wants more and realizes a lot is at stake in the
marriage question. “Let’s say there’s a vote and the issue dissipates from
the agenda in the same way abortion has faded away,” Mr. Malloy said. “Then
they won’t have a clear-cut issue they can strongly organize on. They’re
developing a base here but they need something to organize and keep the
funds going.”

The Christian movement’s leaders are discussing how to sustain the momentum
and growth spurred in the campaign against gay marriage. They agree that one
issue is not enough to fuel a long-term movement. But they disagree on how
to carry the momentum of the marriage campaign into other socially
conservative issues like euthanasia and polygamy. Fueling their hopes for
sustaining the movement are polling figures from last winter’s election that
show an identifiable bloc of religious voters, mainly evangelicals and
Catholics, supporting the Conservative Party.

In a country where church attendance has dropped to about 20% of the
population from about 60% since the 1940s, the Christian right hopes the
polling numbers convince politicians there are still enough votes to be won
by championing socially conservative issues. But the experience of Canada’s
abortion debate in the 1980s and early 90s looms ominously over optimism
that the movement can be broadened beyond gay marriage. At the time,
evangelical leaders formed groups, raised money and drew significant support
in an effort to establish stiff laws against abortion. In 1989, Prime
Minister Brian Mulroney introduced legislation banning abortions in cases
where the health of the mother was not at risk but the bill failed in the
Senate and never became law. Soon after, the evangelical political movement
disbanded, remaining relatively dormant until the gay marriage issue arose.
“When the abortion legislation died everyone just went home and all the
momentum was lost,” said Joseph C. Ben-Ami, executive director of the
conservative Institute for Canadian Values, which opened an office in Ottawa
last year to team up with Mr. McVety’s organizations in Toronto. “I do worry
something like that could happen with what we’re seeing now.”

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company