Relevant Links

Your Ad Here

The Canadian Government vs the Roman Catholic Church

Via a reader, this from LifeSite:

A Conservative MP has discovered through documents obtained under Access to Information that Status of Women Canada has been funding anti-Christian bigotry and pro-abortion activism. However, in a startling exchange of correspondence, the Minister responsible for the funding neither offered to pull the funding nor to apologize to Christian Canadians for funding groups which defame them.

Writing to Minister of Canadian Heritage and Minister responsible for Status of Women Liza Frulla last month, Conservative MP Maurice Vellacott pointed out that the documents obtained through access to information requests revealed the government granted $27,400 last year to the BC Pro-Choice Action network (pro-CAN).

Our government uses our tax money to fund these people:

The Catholic Church and the "religious right" are the backbone of the anti-abortion movement. Pro-choice religious people see anti-abortion laws as a violation of religious liberty. Abortion is a religious issue, because the stated basis of opposition to abortion is the theological question of when personhood begins. Also, religious doctrines that dictate female subservience and a childbearing role for women are the real hidden agenda of opposition to abortion.

The controversy is fueled by religious dogma, particularly that of the Catholic Church and fundamentalist religions, which claim that all life is sacred, and human life starts at conception. Even beyond religious doctrine, the social message is that choosing to continue a pregnancy is good; terminating it is bad, regardless of the circumstances. This attitude has a deep effect on women having abortions...This poisonous attitude about abortion also has a strong effect on those providing abortion services.

Besides the ideal of "no abortions, no exceptions, no compromises," this basically means women back in the kitchen (and pregnant), gays and lesbians back in the closet, children back under their parents' thumb, and everyone back in church on Sundays.

Almost all anti-choice adherents are fundamentalist Protestants or devout Catholics who follow the Pope...The few atheists, agnostics, or liberal theists who are anti-choice are invariably male and misogynistic. They tend to rely on abstract moral principles and are ignorant of the realities of women's lives.

Another likely reason the Catholic Church is against abortion is because they need to maximize their membership levels to maintain their worldly influence and wealth...Not only does abortion deprive them of an eternity in heaven, it also reduces the number of potential followers for Jesus.

Informed pro-choicers have always understood that the anti-abortion movement is not about saving babies—it's about putting women back in their place. And in fact, Biblical and religious attitudes towards women are the real key to anti-abortionism.

OK, at this point I just got tired of looking at this stuff. I actually cut this down by 50%, and I didn't go through half of the material on the web site. Much of it is this anti-Christian ranting.

Now it's one thing to be pro-abortion and take government money. You are providing a legal service, and the government in its wisdom has decided to help with the cost.

But to be pro-abortion and virulently anti-Christian? And publicly so?

And this goes beyond merely an opinion about Christianity. That opinion is probably quite widespread among pro-abortionists. These people are using the money the government gives them to try to destroy religion:

I’d like to be candid for a moment, and tell anti-choicers what we really think about you...We also see that virtually all of you are devout Christians. We’re not stupid....For one thing, we know that religious fundamentalism is one of the main forces behind the oppression of women today. It’s a force we need to fight, not debate with. [emphasis added]

This is the response from Minister Frulla:

In a curt reply dated October 18, Minister Frulla says, "I appreciate being made aware of your concerns." The Minister acknowledges that pro-CAN and the other pro-abortion activist groups mentioned in the letter by Vellacott, "did indeed receive funding under the women's Program of Status of Women Canada."

Frulla suggested she was well aware of the activities of pro-CAN, but found no objection to funding the anti-Christian group with public monies. "Each application is assessed according to a stringent set of objectives and criteria . . . Please be assured that the initiatives cited in your letter, which did indeed receive funding, met all of the above-mentioned objectives and eligibility criteria."

Frulla concluded her response, "Please accept my best wishes for the challenges ahead."

Criteria? I assume that as long as they are out to get the Catholic Church, and don't make any mention of Muslims or Wiccans, they get a pass.

Just to be clear -- this is not about public money being provided to support abortions and abortion counselling. With all due respect to MP Vellacott, this is not about being offensive to Christians in general, and to Catholics in particular.

This is about public money being used by a group to "get" another group that holds a differing opinion, and presumably must be targeted because of what level of success that group has had in keeping its point of view in the public eye. But specifically, about funding one group to go after another group because that first group supports a particular Liberal Party platform.

The government has taken sides on the issue, which is fine. But the Liberal government has also decided that a group that holds an opposing opnion can be fought using public money, even if the law currently supports the government and not this opposing group.

The money is not being used to change the law. The money is being used to fight any attempt to criticize it.

As it is, in this case it is about abortion, and pro-CAN is the proxy through which the Liberal government is dealing with those who don't agree with the party platform.

You might support the way abortion is available in Canada. Fine. But do you agree with everything the Liberal government stands for? Gun control? Military spending? Management of the First Nations? The approach to Quebec sovereignty? Taking control of provincial matters such as education or natural resources?

If you find yourself in disagreement with the Liberals on this or that, ask yourself how much of your tax money is being used to fund some group somewhere that is actively trying to silence your voice.

Your Ad Here
Relevant Links

Your Ad Here

Create Commons License 2.5
Angry in the Great White North by Steve Janke is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Canada License. Based on a work at
Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict
[Valid Atom 1.0]
Valid CSS!